Queen Elizabeth II | 1926-2022 | Rest in Peace

Mr Pigeon said:
If you make a statement and treat it as fact then it needs facts to back it up. There's no doublespeak available to refute this. Saying it can't be proven wrong because there's no evidence that it's true in the first place isn't a discussion that I'm - oh feck it, I'm doing it again aren't I? This is all @esmufc07's fault anyway, the cnut that he is.
Click to expand...
But hold on - when did I make any statement as a fact? In fact I said it wouldn’t surprise me. It couldn’t be any clearer that it was an opinion rather than fact. I could go into why I hold that opinion, but would it make any difference? At the end of the day I can’t point to a number, which is the bar you set.
 
Abizzz said:
Pretty sure it's an established fact that that took place. (At least I've heard it so often that I thought it was).
Click to expand...
Yeah I was of the illusion this took place a lot, certainly did with my grandmother.
 
JPRouve said:
A quick look gives weight to @Mr Pigeon point. Versailles is supposed to have 10m visitors per year while Buckingham is supposed to have 550k. French royal buildings brings way more visitors despite a lack of royals. I'm almost tempted to think that there would be more visitors and more money created without the royals.
Click to expand...
Yeah maybe I’m wrong. I could well be. Not sure about this statistic though. What does visiting mean? Taking a picture outside or actually buying a ticket to go in? How many tickets do that have to sell?
 
rpitroda said:
Yeah maybe I’m wrong. I could well be. Not sure about this statistic though. What does visiting mean? Taking a picture outside or actually buying a ticket to go in? How many tickets do that have to sell?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure but here you have an example of an article about palaces and castles visits.
 
2 man midfield said:
Woah what?
Click to expand...


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave...issioners,amount of 3.5% government annuities.

The Slave Compensation Act 1837 (1 & 2 Vict. c. 3) was the world's first major act of compensated emancipation and an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom, signed into law on 23 December 1837. It authorised the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt to compensate slave owners in the British colonies of the Caribbean, Mauritius, and the Cape of Good Hope in the amount of approximately £20 million for freed slaves. Based on a government census of 1 August 1834, over 40,000 awards to slave owners were issued. Since some of the payments were converted into 3.5% government annuities, they lasted until 2015.
Click to expand...
 
Red the Bear said:
That's just not true , even if you ascribe everything that has happened under the royal family to her it'll still be untrue, they just haven't had any effective power to justify such feelings and to compare them to a politician like say pol pot is extreme.
Click to expand...

The fact that you think a person needs political power in order for people to find actions they may take rephrensible is strange.
 
rpitroda said:
But hold on - when did I make any statement as a fact? In fact I said it wouldn’t surprise me. It couldn’t be any clearer that it was an opinion rather than fact. I could go into why I hold that opinion, but would it make any difference? At the end of the day I can’t point to a number, which is the bar you set.
Click to expand...

Argh I'm being a right cnut I'm going to shut up now.
 
Last edited:
JPRouve said:
I'm not sure but here you have an example of an article about palaces and castles visits.
Click to expand...
Either way, it’s not just about actual visits to places.

But anyway the general debate is pointless since Pigeon is right that I can not really ever prove my theory, which I know myself has a good chance of being false.
 
rpitroda said:
Either way, it’s not just about actual visits to places.

But anyway the general debate is pointless since Pigeon is right that I can not really ever prove my theory, which I know myself has a good chance of being false.
Click to expand...

Surely tourism is about actual visits to places?
 
2 man midfield said:
Holy shit. I could maybe see why it was a thing back then, but the fact it lasted until 2015 is genuinely shocking.

Yet reparations are seen as some offensive suggestion. While the whole time...
Click to expand...

Meaning the descendants of slaves paying tax were in effect paying the descendants of slave owners. Plus in 1834 we made the 'freed' slaves work for free for their former masters for another four years. We called it apprenticeship as we didn't trust them to behave responsibly after they were no longer slaves. What a history.
 
Red the Bear said:
That's just not true , even if you ascribe everything that has happened under the royal family to her it'll still be untrue, they just haven't had any effective power to justify such feelings and to compare them to a politician like say pol pot is extreme.

I understand what you're saying but they've lost any effective political power they might have had in 1910 and beforehand any meddling in politics would have caused the outright end of the system.

Most of Britain's imperial adventures had decent public support so they'd have directly acted against their subjects interest, to hold those grudges against say the British parliament makes more sense to me.


Anyway I have no horse in this race just find the public reaction on here befuddling that's all.
Click to expand...

This is where I am with it.

If anything, the monarchy have been a wonderful lightning rod, attracting flack for stuff that elected representatives, soldiers, civil servants and a large amount of the populace supported and were complicit to, and immensely profited from.
 
Red the Bear said:
That's just not true , even if you ascribe everything that has happened under the royal family to her it'll still be untrue, they just haven't had any effective power to justify such feelings and to compare them to a politician like say pol pot is extreme.

I understand what you're saying but they've lost any effective political power they might have had in 1910 and beforehand any meddling in politics would have caused the outright end of the system.

Most of Britain's imperial adventures had decent public support so they'd have directly acted against their subjects interest, to hold those grudges against say the British parliament makes more sense to me.


Anyway I have no horse in this race just find the public reaction on here befuddling that's all.
Click to expand...

Hold on, many people all over the world are mourning the Queen's death. I find it bizzare that my cousin who has never gone more than 100 miles her entire life is mourning the Queen's death, all the way from India. Since she's a close relative, I know that she gained nothing from England. You can't expect everyone to mourn the Queen, which is fairly a simple truth to digest.
 
Frosty said:
Meaning the descendants of slaves paying tax were in effect paying the descendants of slave owners. Plus in 1834 we made the 'freed' slaves work for free for their former masters for another four years. We called it apprenticeship as we didn't trust them to behave responsibly after they were no longer slaves. What a history.
Click to expand...
feck me, yeah that’s true. What a shitshow. This part was telling as well.

Since 2018, numerous Freedom of Information Act requests have been sent to the British government and Bank of England for the names of those who were paid with the bonds, of which all were denied.
Click to expand...
 
Klopper76 said:
RIP Queen Elizabeth II.

Kind of surreal. She's the only monarch most of us Brits have ever known. Is Charles going to be on pound notes eventually?
Click to expand...

The fundamental question is, will he be as effective as a monarch like his mother was? And he will be, even more so. But until he is, it's going to be hard to verify that he thinks he’ll be more effective.
 
Denis79 said:
No I wasn't actually, I don't believe in monarchies either. Was genuinely asking if the British people will support the monarchy without her ruling.
Click to expand...

The right wing tend to be fairly supportive of the monarchy. The left wing is mixed.

I'm not pro monarchy myself but at the same time it's not an issue which I particularly care much for either and there are more pressing issues affecting the country which need to be tackled first.

Charles will still have enough support for the monarchy to carry on I imagine. Maybe though we'll see a bit more modernisation and I'm sure some changes will be invoked too, of some sort.

But whether I agree with the monarchy or not. Universally she's always been recognised by her peers as being a warm and kind lady. No doubt there probably are bad things she's done too.

My opinions and views aside though, I know she was held dearly by many of my neighbours and thus feel her death should be respected, for those who loved her, if not for ourselves.


Side note - I had an argument with my gf over it because I said I wasn't particularly bothered by the death and don't agree with monarchies. And most importantly I was worried football would be cancelled and that an upcoming trip to London may also end up clashing with some royalty shite which I cba with it.
She holds the Queen a bit more dearly than me though and don't think she likes that it's like water of a ducks back for me.
So again I respect that she's dead and send my condolences as she was quite endearing. But as someone who's not invested in the monarchy, I'm not particularly bothered.
 
Rip.

Please don't cancel the football over this.
 
Red the Bear said:
I'm just stating the facts, holding colonial rule against them when they had minimal political impact for most of it is bizarre to me, if anything most of the empire building happened after their diminished role with overwhelming public support , hell some of the more egregiously acts happened under governments which by today's standards will be considered relatively liberal.

Anyway them being apolitical has probably led to them lasting so long, making enemies out of half your population without any effective executive powers is daft, still I think if any criticism was to be leveled against them it has to be about them benefiting from public funds and such.
Click to expand...

Both ends of the spectrum have completely lost their minds and their collective heads need a good fecking wobble. The world isn't black and white -- it never has been and never will be.
 
Zarlak said:
The fact that you think a person needs political power in order for people to find actions they may take rephrensible is strange.
Click to expand...
That's the whole point, they haven't taken any major ones for several centuries now.
 
Ayoba said:
@Niall @Damien

Please, this cannot be allowed here. For gods sake someone has passed away, this is not right mods. I know this poster has a longstanding history here, but this is not right. I can't be the only one that thinks this?
Click to expand...
:lol:
 
Ayoba said:
@Niall @Damien

Please, this cannot be allowed here. For gods sake someone has passed away, this is not right mods. I know this poster has a longstanding history here, but this is not right. I can't be the only one that thinks this?
Click to expand...

I completely disagree that it is time to get rid of the monarchy. We should never have let them back after Charles I. As parasites they make the Glazers look like Willy Wonka.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.