I hate 'culture war' enthusiasts. For example, Charles getting cancer. I mean I'm a republican and I'm angry that I have pay his wages and have to wait for a month for my breast cancer referral (bloke) and he gets it free, and he's consistently failed to say anything about the state of the NHS. But the people saying it's karma, when he's not even responsible for wrecking the NHS like our politicians... that's rather reprehensible. It's not like it's Andrew.
I find the conversation to be particularly toxic among the Americans who will say he deserves it because 'rich man bad' but will call you naive even when you've explained you have a deep personal anger at having to pay their taxes (among other things). All because, in my case, that same anger is what leads you to ask them to read the room instead of making jibes about cancer being karma. The same individual who also loves Harry and Meghan, but that's irrelevant somehow.
Do yourselves a favour, don't just pick up your perspectives from someone else on twitter. Be skeptical and weigh up the likelihood of what people say, but read up on a subject for yourself, or you get contradictory absolutist beliefs that ruin your critical thinking.
> I mean I'm a republican and I'm angry that I have pay his wages
The Sovereign Grant was £86.3 million for the 2022-23 financial year. Broken down to the total population of the UK, every single Brit pays £1.28 into it a year.
I think I've read somewhere that adding all other expenses that aren't covered by the Sovereign Grant, the Royal Family costs every single person about £5 a year. You can't even get a pint for that in many pubs. And even if it's 20 quid for a family of four, that's not even enough for a theme park family discount.
Our royal lot may be a bit of an anachronism, but it's not the most senseless way of pissing money up the wall.
Yeah but the think is if you can afford to give old sausage fingers a quid per year, how come you can't afford to give me a quid a year? I could do with it. Hell I'll take 50p. Fuck it I'll take 20p, and I'll go on celebrity game shows all the time. I'd be loads better value. Why can't I be a millionaire for no reason but he can?
Of course I'm just playing devil's advocate because I think much like middle east religio-tardism, whinging about the royal family is a giant flytrap that lefties always blunder into, and should really just shut up about. But it's the fundamental principle that's hard to really disagree with.
Now right wing republicans (over here, not the Yank ones, I mean), they're another breed of mental.
>Yeah but the think is if you can afford to give old sausage fingers a quid per year, how come you can't afford to give me a quid a year? I could do with it. Hell I'll take 50p. Fuck it I'll take 20p
It's not a bidding contest.
If you're desperate to get 20p from a random person, go sit in front of a Tesco Express with a hat in your hand. I dare you.
>Why can't I be a millionaire for no reason but he can?
With regards to ARE Charles, a terse way of putting it would be that you're of lower birth. Class is still inherited in this country, unless you come from nothing but are willing to work your arse off to escape your birth poverty. You can bemoan it all you want, but there are plenty of (UK) Republicans who seem to have no problem with that either. Concepts of class are still rooted deeply in this country. Of course you could then say that what we need is a classless society. But there are two major caveats. One is that classless societies the way they were attempted under Eastern European socialism didn't take kindly to too much personal wealth of an individual, which means you couldn't have been a millionaire in them either, and although the U.S. as the motherland of capitalism likes to think of itself as a classless society, anybody who has ever travelled there has seen that there are even greater contrasts between rich and poor than here in Britain. Rags to riches doesn't quite work out in reality in Septicland. If you're born poor white trash, you'll either need an incredible amount of perseverance to work your way up, or you and your family will always be poor white trash with no hope of ever escaping your poverty. And even if you're American middle class, these days you'll tend to live paycheck to paycheck,with little social mobility. Your consolation then being that at least you're stuck in middle class and not in white trash, but with the lingering fear that a few missed paychecks can make you lose everything.
>>98312 >Why can't I be a millionaire for no reason but he can?
Because your family didn't fight for the position and you're not going to start it for your decendants, are you?
I fucking hate it when people say this shit. Royalty haven't been given their thrones - they've achieved it. Whether by political savvy, violence or nepotism; they're bred, trained and moulded into the fucking roles.
If you want that 20p a year go busk on the street you clown.
>whinging about the royal family is a giant flytrap that lefties always blunder into
The existence of the royal family is a constant reminder that British society is built around a rigid class hierarchy. Getting rid of that symbol without actually changing anything about society would be very convenient for a lot of people - often, the sort of people who write opinion pieces in The Guardian.
>Royalty haven't been given their thrones - they've achieved it
True. The same way you're not just given a knighthood for nothing.
Hereditary royalty or nobility is a bit tricky though. You could be the descendant of formidable kings and queens or other nobles, but you yourself are absolutely useless at statecraft. Nowadays, where kings and queens of different countries no longer go to war with each other over territory and power, in this part of the world anyway, even a shit king can maintain an empire. They'll still be good for tabloid stories. But in the old days, centuries ago, being an inept monarch meant you would eventually be overrun by rivalling neighbouring monarchies and lose all your power.
Honestly I'm not in a massive mood to question this right now, but I'm sure Republic have figures that would dispute that. For me, ant any rate, it's the idea that they have this unelected power that could be quite easily abused and leave the life of riley while we nevertheless subsidise it, plus all of Charles' meddling before and after being kingificated using his prestige in order to cheat on taxes, corruption measures, and racial and environmental protection laws. Plus he can't challenge the government as he's unelected.
But I'm buggered if I'm going to see some armchair activist YANK make fun of a doddery old fart whose main crime is... well, quite a lot of greed... for getting cancer, and dismissing my request to stop because of my extensive family history with sarcasm, while ignoring that I know more about 'rich man bad' here than he ever would. Even dismissing my rant about the politicians destroying the NHS being the guilty party as irrelevant lol.
Imagine getting so angry about cancer care inequality that you mock a cancer patient who said 'please don't mock a rich cancer patient.'
>>98319 The best part is these people don't care about the rest of the Royals and their nogoodery. Harry and Meghan are lovely, I love them, but I hope their dad dies of lymphoma! I hate the right wing press, but I'll join in the harrassment they're giving him! I'll lecture someone and call them naive simply because they asked me not to mock a cancer patient in front of them as their mother's dying! While they're manning a stand at an anti-monarcy protest!
LOL fuck me, I remember there was some kid who protested a fascist confederate memorial in the US by spraypainting a SWASTIKA on it. It's a similar approach. Don't worry about being on message. Just point out a vague moral point and lord it over people.
>>98316 >your family didn't fight for the position and you're not going to start
>If you want that 20p a year
What if - just hear me out here - there was some way to mug King Charles?
>I am VERY ANGRY that people object to the king for different reasons to mine. My lack of unity with them despite us having the same interest is because they're obviously doing culture war
>The man who tied me to a chair to use as a fuckdoll achieved the right to use my pasty body by violently abducting me, so I have no grounds to complain about it.
>THoSE WOkE SNoWFLAKES keep saYING HURTFUL jokes ABOUT OLD SAUSAGE FINGERS
>challenging the status quo would be BAD because thoseBOUGIE GRUNIAD WRITERS might approve and they're worse than actual capitalists and monarchs somehow. I guess it's because they're annoying? I'm pretty sure it's that. they're annoying so it's important to WORK against OUR OWN INTERESTS rather than towards SOMETHING they might ALSO TANGENTIALLY BENEFIT FROM or potentially NOT benefit from AS STRUCTURAL CHANGE would AFFECT THEM TOO because IT DOESNT HAPPEN IN A VACUUM and THIS DOESNT HAVE TO MAKE SENSE I'M JUST SO ANNOYED BY THEir irritating smugness I CAN'T SEE BEYOND IT
It's not really 'rich man bad' so much as everyone just loves a good sneer. If Prince Charles was homeless (the bad kind of homeless that is) they'd be sneering for much the same reason as when people sneer at some Love Island contestant until they kill themselves at which point we're all obviously horrified by this media tragedy until the next harvest.
People are bullies is what I'm saying.
>>98314 >If you're born poor white trash, you'll either need an incredible amount of perseverance to work your way up, or you and your family will always be poor white trash with no hope of ever escaping your poverty.
I believe the translation into British English of 'pulling oneself up by their bootstraps' would be luck.
>>98324 I'm terribly sorry that I take umbridge when someone whose connection with the monarchy stopped in 1776 acts as if they are personally oppressed by the cancer inequality in this country, but harrasses someone who lost three of their relatives to cancer for... asking them not to make fun of a cancer death.
I will now do the decent thing and hang myself so you don't feel threatened by my opinion. With your intenstines. Perhaps you will be able to take the time as you die to read my post properly and note that I am a republican and pretty woke myself.
If you get offended by people cherry picking and pulling things you say out of context in whatever way it suits them, then maybe .gs is not the right place for you.
>>98328 This is exactly the sort of thing I'm getting at. There is so much in the way of people sneering and then dressing it up as morality that you have to remind yourself there are genuine souls actively working to improve the lot of their fellow man.
