the rum soaked fist: internal martial arts forum

I am getting thoroughly annoyed at the press coverage given to the upcoming royal wedding. Since the announcement there is nothing on either the local or national news but the friggin wedding plans. Do you British forum members care as much about it as we apparently do in the US? IMHO the British royalty are an anachronism, an embarrassment, and a parasite on the British taxpayers. Why do you still put up with them?

Well, you're American, so what do you know about the british monarchy really?

lol. I'm sure a lot of the import variety brits could give a shit, but the multi-generational brits do have an admiration for the royals and what they stand for and represent on behalf of the Nation.

parasite on the british taxpayers? lol where's that coming from?

As you don't seem to understand constitutional monarchy, why are you asking?

btw, I'm Canadian, and they are my monarchy as well.

Here in London most people don;t give a rats arse for all this royal wedding bollox. Our press are so reactionary that if the queen shits a stone the newswallahs give it two weeks of fucking coverage...

problem is we brits know the royals are just a tourist attraction, and like all successful showbiz, the press coverage is all... so we put up with it ...

Personally I care A LOT!!! but only cause we get an extra day off!

The Monarchy has evolved by consent of the people, conditions for the 'Mother of all Parliaments' to develop in the way that it has, has allowed democracy and freedom to flourish in modern times. The seeds for this were sown in the 9th century by King Alfred the Great and then the fundamentals were set out in the Magna Carta during the 13th century. The concept of a Constitutional Monarchy was then sealed in the 17th century by the English Civil War.

The monarchy is the living embodiment of the unity of the British peoples. particularly the English.
Don't believe it? Think Princess Diana. The Monarchy, the people, parliament. They are all one.

Like I said, many of the imports could likely give a shit, but anyone with a deeper and more meaningful understanding of what it is to be British and what it is to be of British descent have a little place for the Monarchy. Fwiw, my bloodlines go back to Cymru(Wales) and Alba(Scotland) with a healthy smattering of the English in there as well.

I tend to think that the majority of british people tend to view the royal family as a soap opera; it's kind of like 'big brother' due to all the press coverage, where (for years now) you can find out all the juicy gossip on whether Charles prefers jockeys or y-fronts, etc etc. And of course they are a great subject for that most noble of British hobbies: taking the piss.
I find it hard to imagine many folks 'doffing their cap' at the mention of the queen- most of us don't even know the words to our national anthem. People are more proud of and loyal to their football team than the queen these days.
However, I reckon there are more monarchists abroad than living in the UK e.g. Darth. It seems that sinewy historical connections to another country through ancestry can make people feel more 'proud' of the queen than the indigenous inhabitants.
And it might be worth doing a little more historical research if you think that the British monarchy have represented much more than the interests of the ruling elite: they still have priveliges that elevate them above us mere 'citizens' (or subjects, I should say)

I'd say that what you are saying probably is true of large cities like London where you have a huge population of people that aren't really in tune with it beyond how you describe.

Out in the country side, you'll find it's quite different. The press treats it like a soap opera and all, but is that the people?

When you are in a highly cosmopolitan city such as London, nobody really gives a shit about much other than themselves and their immediate interests friends and family anyway. It's such a hodge podge of people now anyway as well, you can't expect almost half the people there to have any cares or concerns or knowledge of the history and purpose of the monarchy. That's right, almost half the population of London is not of British origin. So it stands to reason there will be degraded attitudes about the monarchy there.

Also, I'm only first gen Canadian and in fact I am by that merit, still pretty much British when it comes down to the legal aspects of it.
As in, because I am first gen and my parents are both British, I am a British subject as well and am entitled to passport and full privileges of a British citizen.

So, it's not some sentimental garbage with me, it is about the history of it, the unity, the representation of unity and the model for a superior society which I feel British society and it's offspring are.

Thing is people just love stuff to gossip about, hence the tabloid press and all the shit that comes with it and guaranteed the ' Royal Wedding ' will take up a lot of headlines over the next few months even if people care or not its stuff to gossip about. There are those who do give a shit, mostly of an older generation and those that don't, which comes as no surprise as half the residents here would quite happily blow the country to bits.

Darth- just a few points. I come from the (remains of the) countryside in England- Worcestershire, to be exact. I'm pretty sure that since the eighties I have not met one true royalist (and that includes a couple of blokes of 'noble' birth). As for the concept of 'the countryside' being distinct from 'the city'; Englands a bad example. There are very few places that can really be classified as remote due to the size of the country, and urbanisation has swept into a lot of places (if not physically then mentally). Most people are all pretty much within spitting distance of at least one big city, and a lot of villages are commuter zones.
As for the monarchy and unification, I am surprised with your scottish and welsh heritage that you take such a view. Historically, these countries have suffered through the centuries from English kings coercing or simply attacking their native monarchs to the point of eradicating them. Even within England regionalism has been rife right up until the present day, with the south being traditionally wealthier. And even amongst the monarchy there has been constant division/wrestles with parliament (don't forget that Britian is only a constitutional manarchy due having the hand forced), coupled with complete changes of family (unless you count distant cousins)

I don't live in London, and I have no interest on the Royal Wedding.

By the way, Britains history is one of immigration (Alfred the Great-Saxon), and I for one (a part of my family emigrated from Germany in the 13th century) am thoroughly contented to have folks of different nationalities move to the UK- it's a continuity of old traditions.

funnily enough a lot of the first gen immigrants from the carribean and south asia are avid royal fans..

a part of my family emigrated from Germany in the 13th century

Sounds like the current royal family. "England" was a mixed bag of ethnic groups long before it became Britain. The royal family is a good example, those Saxe-Coburg and Gotha fellas.

And, it's true, many Bajans --for ex-- feel loyalty and kinship to the British royals without regard to genetics. Then again, that's true for some Canucks and Aussies, too.

GrahamB wrote:I don't live in London, and I have no interest on the Royal Wedding.

He does, however, live in bath, and is interested in Harry and Willy bathing.



S

Bath is nice.

I suppose it is older generation who still appreciate it.
I'm not saying it is anything more than a symbol and it is that symbol that I see as having value because it
created the construct through trial of rule of law in a real sense. Napoleons code that dominates much of the legal
codes of western liberal democracies was directly effectd by the construct.

They bring a sense of order and unity to that rule of law and give it weight in my opinion simply by having themselves be subject to it.
As far as the unification of the British Isles, I'm all for it and don't bear any grudges in that respect, just healthy rivalries when they arise.
There's less trouble and more trade when all the neighbours are united together. Since the unification of the British Isles for the first time against the vikings under Alfred the British monarchy has
led up to the government, rule of law and social constructs over centuries.

It's not as if they have power of prima nocta on you or something. lol