60th anniversary of the coronation

[brogdale]

they do, but the French still pay for Versailles, and a President and a Prime Minister - quite how they are better off because of it is something of a mystery...

because they are citizens, not subjects.

 

[pissflaps]

...and elected. and replaceable.

 

[kebabking]

because they are citizens, not subjects.

as are we, and have been for some time.

 

[Streathamite]

they do, but the French still pay for Versailles, and a President and a Prime Minister - quite how they are better off because of it is something of a mystery...

I'm pretty sure le bon M Hollande and their PM work out a damn sight cheaper than our equivalent!
Plus, Versailles is in fact massively profitable.

 

[Streathamite]

as are we, and have been for some time.

no, we're not. not with a Monarchy - you can't be, not even if the monarchy is as relatively innocuous as the scandinavian ones.

 

[brogdale]

as are we, and have been for some time.

Interesting.

I'm aware that the UK state considers (most of) it's population as citizens, but the head of that state considers themselves to be monarchical. Under a monarchy the populace can nothing other than subject, whatever story we are told.

 

[pissflaps]

subject yourself all you like mate, she's not my queen.

 

[kebabking]

...Under a monarchy the populace can nothing other than subject, whatever story we are told.

except that the populace can end the monarchy through the political structures currently in place - so we can't really be subject when we have the ability to change the relationship. if we choose not to, thats our affair, but we can't really be subject where we can choose not to be.

 

[Streathamite]

He has more than one?


/obvious joke

keep 'em coming stavros!

 

[UhOhSeven]

It's at that point that I start to worry about your 'analysis'.

Worry away. Lots of things to do with power are there by custom or precedent: The whole State Opening of Parliament, for example.

 

[DotCommunist]

except that the populace can end the monarchy through the political structures currently in place - so we can't really be subject when we have the ability to change the relationship. if we choose not to, thats our affair, but we can't really be subject where we can choose not to be.

thats sophistry though, surely. I can loudly proclaim my status as a free man but if reality works otherwise then its just me windbagging. Again

 

[kebabking]

thats sophistry though, surely. I can loudly proclaim my status as a free man but if reality works otherwise then its just me windbagging. Again

no, because we actually can get rid of old Bessy through parliamentary action if we choose - but you can't become a freeman of the land just by yelling at traffic wardens.

by being married i give my wife certain rights over my possessions - and the ability to pull the plug when her cooking finally yeilds results - but i can stop being married if i wish, at which point her rights over my possesions, and life, will end. because i have the right to walk out of an arrangement, its not really i'm subject to, rather party to.