Would keep or get rid of your country’s royal family (if you dont have one, would you want one)
Help fund the Lego
The works on this blog are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. @trina. and itsgoodtobecrazysometimes, 2017 and following years. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited and violates copyright laws in the country you are reading this work in as well as in the country you are trying to re-publish this work in. Re-blogs are accepted if they are clearly linked to this blog and its respective post. Trina, 2017
Recent Comments
Its good to be crazy Sometimes 
The Royal family is part of your history. Keep it. You can’t get rid of history. Sadly, that is part of the problem in today’s world. Too many people are trying to get rid of their history.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I dont think, we should ignore the fact that we have (had) a royal family, but in this day and age, do we still want to believe someone has been chosen because they have been ordained by god?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Despite their faults, they’re a huge tourist attraction.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I have to wonder whether its them, or the buildings, we get rid of them, we can still see Buckingham Palace (not sure what would happen to the guards though) still have the crown jewels, I am not sure anyone comes to the Uk with the specific view to maybe seeing the King, but then again maybe they do
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’d be amazed at how obsessed certain countries are with royalty. Just look at the Americans and the French aren’t much better.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I might try and google it, to see if there are some figures about it, it could be interesting
LikeLiked by 1 person
If there are Mr Google will know
LikeLiked by 1 person
that is my thinking
LikeLiked by 1 person
The royal family is part of your heritage, not mine. It’s a beautiful and elegant reminder of the history of your country, my country cannot say the same. Perhaps it is a misconceived notion that they are ordained to be heads of state, but here “royalty” is based on how many TikTok followers you have or whether or not someone related to you was killed. Honestly, I don’t want royalty, but if we had to have royalty, I’d pick the kind you have over the kind we glamorize and raise to that level of importance for having no discernible talent. Or even worse, accepting those your people have cast aside (rightfully) and letting them try to convince us that they are still worthy of the title, the security, the wealth, but none of the responsibility. Crying on cue doesn’t make you royalty, it makes you a two-bit hollywood sideliner. But since they have no true justification for thinking they are worthy of any royal titles, they come here where it’s an instant hit: they have social media accounts for the masses to follow, no discernible talent, and one of them is related to someone who is dead and may or may not have been killed. Oooo! Trifecta of American royalty.
Keep your history, your grandeur, your head of state and your national anthem. I guess we’ll keep the his and hers wrecking balls although I’d just as soon vote them off the island.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I wouldnt exactly say it was part of mine either, but it does bring up an interesting point about other country’s having the British Royal family has their royal family
LikeLike
Perhaps. I can’t speak for countries that actually accept the BRF as the RF for their countries. My country only accepts the BRF’s castoffs as important. Lucky me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If you think about it, there are very few English speaking countries without the RF has heads of state
LikeLiked by 1 person
Actually, I don’t think this is accurate. I have traveled extensively in the Before Times, and several of the Countries I visited spoke of this when they were explaining why they were not under British Rule. I am not getting into specific countries, I am more trying to remember the math(s) associated with it. I believe there are over sixty countries that have English as their official language – they might have more than one though (like S. Africa does with a whopping ELEVEN official languages, English among them). I think it’s only about one quarter of those English speaking countries that have the RF as their heads of state. Unless the BRF managed to acquire new countries during my lifetime, although I know of countries have left the monarchy, I know of none that joined recently. Assuming there were an equal number of countries that joined as had left, it would still hover around 1/4 of the countries; if none of joined, it’d be slightly lower than 1/4. I assume that it would be easy to confirm this via google, but it is 7:10 am here, and that’s a lot of work right now lol
LikeLiked by 1 person
I know that no one has been added, but I am fairly sure some countries have joined the commonwealth for trade reasons and I dont know the rules around having the royal family involved in those situations. I would assume not, but again google should be able to answer, I will have a google. I did do a quick google 67 countries have English as their head of state and weirdly 15 of those have the King as the head of state (exactly as you said) which is so strange as I thought it was more. My only thing is I might be thinking of the commonwealth which has 54 countries in it, I know countries have gotten rid of the King as head of state and stayed within the commonwealth, well one country recently
LikeLiked by 1 person
Right! That was one of the things I learned about during my travels. You can be a part of the commonwealth for all sorts of reasons and not accept the BRF as anything other than “fancy people who live over that way somewhere” and they point vaguely toward “not right here”. I am not 100% sure, but I think being a member of the commonwealth has nothing to do with the BRF being the head of state, even if you join now. It just means that you accept that in your history the BRF did kinda matter to your people until you gained your independence. Now, I think the King (I know the Queen was) the head of it all. It’s a symbolic thing – he’s the head of the commonwealth, not of the member countries. I think…
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am sure there is one country which was french owned that joined, for trade reasons, probably because it was surrounded by a bunch of country’s the British owned
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, for sure, their joining doesn’t mean that their entire government would change to accept the BRF, right?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am agreeing with you. I just wish I could think of that country I am thinking of.
LikeLike
My brain does that all of the time.
Also, I was actually legit asking, not arguing. I don’t know – I just don’t think that the BRF becomes everyone’s RF just because. I don’t know…Sorry, I’ve confused myself
LikeLiked by 1 person
They dont, if they join the commonwealth, I have done a little bit more research on it, but still cant find this damn country I was thinking of, maybe I imaged it
LikeLike
hahahaha! OMG – that’s so something I would do. Totally imagine an entire historical scenario and none of it is even close to real. Oh the human mind!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I shall keep looking for it, you never know it might turn up, or what I prefer is, I have seen in the future and it will happen soon
LikeLiked by 1 person
The second one is clearly the more likely one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am so glad we agree
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely. Sometimes, you just know, ya know?
LikeLiked by 1 person
IMHO (and I speak as a Brit) I think the current UK monarchy borders on child abuse. Why should a child be trapped into a predetermined public role for life by an accident of birth? I would be interested to know how the treatment of Prince George for example rates against the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. My preference would be to bring it to a controlled stop as a piece of history and replace it with something like the Irish model: a non-executive president as head of state democratically elected from a shortlist of consenting adults.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You do know one of those consenting adults would be Andrew?
I have always been curious whether they have been told at an early age as to whether they have a choice, or if duty has been drilled into them from an early age. I think with Charles, it was duty, but with William and George I am not sure,
LikeLike
Haha. I would be very surprised if Andrew made it anywhere near the shortlist!
By mistake I found myself watching the Platinum Jubilee concert and now and again the camera picked out Prince George who looked thoroughly miserable. It suddenly struck me that that this child had just been through 2 years of Covid restrictions (like everyone else) which would presumably have meant fewer than usual royal engagements. So this could have been his first major public exposure since he was quite a bit younger, and therefore a lot less aware. Maybe I read too much into what I saw on his face but to me it looked like the realisation that this was what his life was going to be like for ever and there was very little he could do about it.
In the UK we’ve been so used to having the monarchy that it seems to be part of completely normal life. But there’s nothing normal about it. I’m afraid I see it as a monstrous institution which has to perpetuate its monstrosity in order to survive. In this day and age there is no need to single out one family like this just so everyone else can share a weird emotional tingle. IMHO 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think Andrew thinks he should be top of the list.
I get what you mean about George, but its the youngest child I find more interesting. I have had a few people say to me, they think he might have something that falls under the austism umbrella and it will be interesting to see how the Royal family deal with that if its true
LikeLike
I wouldnt want one!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Queen Carol Anne has a nice ring to it though 😉
LikeLike