Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Prince Harry

And when the legislative route is blocked? What then do you propose?
By whom? If Parliament was hell bent on abolishing the monarchy they could do it (constitutional crisis or not) However there are only a few anti-monarchist MP's and currently its not a major political issue with the populace. If/when (and I believe it is when even if not soon) it does become so then the politicians of the day will adopt the idea and run with that as part of their manifesto. If it never becomes an issue then they will survive.
 
I went once. On finding that the trousers on the rail weren't is size order, I left. (OCD. I'm a stamp collector, what do you expect? :) )
Yes, I can see how annoying that would be. I like going in to browse the soaps, creams, make up, and candles. For clothing, it’s way too stressful an experience.
 
The thing about the army experience/kills is that surely this is bigger than him? This is about the military in general, and how they’re trained, and global power and nu colonialism, and quite probably toxic masculinity, and the wrongness but sadly seeming humanness :mad: of going to war and killing other people. You’re right, it’s a vicious cycle that needs to be stopped and never seems it will be :(

Of course he did choose that life for himself knowing where it could lead…

There was an HBO show based on the articles written by a Rolling Stone journalist who joined US marines on a tour of Iraq. It’s a difficult watch in places but I remember it being good at showing the soldiers as people and helping you form empathy with at least some of them, but then showing awful jarring bits of them dehumanising (and sometimes killing) the enemy, including real life quotes at the end which were outright chilling.

Generation Kill.

One of the main characters was actually part of the invasion force and was then later interviewed in the stomach churning and deeply horrifying BBC series on Iraq that went out last year.

 
By whom? If Parliament was hell bent on abolishing the monarchy they could do it (constitutional crisis or not) However there are only a few anti-monarchist MP's and currently its not a major political issue with the populace. If/when (and I believe it is when even if not soon) it does become so then the politicians of the day will adopt the idea and run with that as part of their manifesto. If it never becomes an issue then they will survive.
if parliament was, he said, ignoring the tripartite nature of parliament - the supreme authority of the nation being the monarch in parliament. if you think that a) the commons, b) the lords, and c) the monarch are ever going to allow the passage of a bill to remove the monarchy you're dafter than i thought. at the moment even the most minor discussion of the monarchy in the commons cannot, we're told, occur without the consent of the monarchy. and the heirs of mps like cromwell, michael livesey, and john okey cravenly abide by this restriction. things would have to change massively before shammer and his ilk would go against this convention let alone start to think of proposing a future without a monarchy. republican mp sir charles dilke was a minister in one of gladstone's administrations: it's an indictment of modern british politics that it is inconceivable now for a republican mp to other than on the backbenches.

if we look abroad for examples of the end of monarchy, it has either been after a referendum (italy, greece), by revolution (france, russia, china), and only very rarely by parliamentary means (first spanish republic, for example). and even then there have been several returns of the spanish monarchy, while the british monarchy famously returned after the republic and commonwealth - and then not only executed as many living regicides as they could, they also dug up and mutilated the corpses of those who had died. it'd be nice to suggest that this memory of what happened to their forebears was the only thing stopping the likes of shammer and davey proposing an end to the monarchy. but while they're too cowardly to bring forward the meekest motion on the monarchy nothing of any great extent can be expected of them.

the only way the monarchy has ever really become an issue has been through activities outside parliament, be it the tentative movements of republic or the bolder activities of the movement against the monarchy. but at the moment imo the wrong question's being asked, as in this statista survey
1673619865118.png
but even with this tepid question, more than a fifth of the population want to get rid of the monarchy. for my money getting rid of the monarchy is more likely to lead to, or result from, a more general systemic change in the uk than a simple transference of their role to some elected individual - something seismic would have to change for the lily-livered layabouts in parliament to face up to this greatest of constitutional questions.
 
wait no more, the Weekly Worker review is in
That’s surprisingly sympathetic and psychological in its focus, and has some good turns of phrase! I liked this one in particular about Meghan…

one could not imagine a more effective solvent for this psycho-social structure than the love of a liberal Californian actor
 
That’s a strange thing for you, having joined in 2022, to say.
I don’t understand?

Someone literally said it to me a page or two ago, and I took it to be a reference to Che Guevara. Why wouid that be a strange thing for me in particular to write? And what does the date have to do with it?
 
That’s surprisingly sympathetic and psychological in its focus, and has some good turns of phrase! I liked this one in particular about Meghan…
It’s very good, in fact. I wouldn’t have bothered reading it but that you quoted that sentence. I’m glad I did: it’s a good summary.
 
What is going on here? Why are you all so weird? What’s Colombo got to do with anything that’s happened in the last few pages?
 
Danny, if you’re going to make a cunt out of someone, don’t do it in riddles. What are you talking about?
You have quoted a banned former poster, serial returner, and, it transpired, unhinged and vindictive twat. It’s a strange thing for a newbie to do. I missed the previous reference you say you picked up. But even so, it strikes me as a weird thing.
 
Ok so I've learned something. :) Ernesto Guevara Lynch was Ernesto 'Che' Guevara's dad, and Che is sometimes given that name as well, although it's not really consistent with Spanish naming conventions. Really he should be Ernesto Guevara de la Serna if you want to include his Mum's Dad's name, which is the usual convention.

I never made that connection.
 
You have quoted a banned former poster, serial returner, and, it transpired, unhinged and vindictive twat. It’s a strange thing for a newbie to do. I missed the previous reference you say you picked up. But even so, it strikes me as a weird thing.
FFS. It was said to me a page ago, and I was taking the piss out of revolutionary sentiment, with a fake quote from Che Guevara.
 
Ok so I've learned something. :) Ernesto Guevara Lynch was Ernesto 'Che' Guevara's dad, and Che is sometimes given that name as well, although it's not really consistent with Spanish naming conventions. Really he should be Ernesto Guevara de la Serna if you want to include his Mum's Dad's name, which is the usual convention.

I never made that connection.
Exactly!

Who the fuck is this other person and what have they got to do with me, or with what I said about revolution in fake quotation marks?
 
Back
Top Bottom