Morrissey and The Royals: Where Do You Stand?

[Uncleskinny]

He really gets up the noses of Daily Mail reading gimps and really, no one can do enough of that, especially nowadays with the Tories' consolidating their war on the poor, disabled etc.

The woman was made to feel guilty and that's down to the disgusting class / caste? system in this country. You don't even have to particularly dislike the monarchy to recognise this.

The monarchy only exists due to popular support so by implication he is criticising the British public, that could be a divisive thing to do but it's a democracy and hardly anyone else has the balls to do what he does. The rich and powerful bombard us with their propaganda 24/7 so if they're getting upset over this, an outburst by a pop star, they should jolly well grow a pair.

So you agree with him that Kate Middleton faked her illness and the royals were responsible for the death of that poor woman? Surely you're not defending that?

P.

 

[Anonymous]

He really gets up the noses of Daily Mail reading gimps and really, no one can do enough of that, especially nowadays with the Tories' consolidating their war on the poor, disabled etc.

You're talking about hardship imposed on disabled people and using the word "gimp"? In the same post? Irony?

The woman was made to feel guilty and that's down to the disgusting class / caste? system in this country. You don't even have to particularly dislike the monarchy to recognise this.

That was the coroner's conclusion, was it?

The monarchy only exists due to popular support so by implication he is criticising the British public, that could be a divisive thing to do but it's a democracy and hardly anyone else has the balls to do what he does. The rich and powerful bombard us with their propaganda 24/7 so if they're getting upset over this, an outburst by a pop star, they should jolly well grow a pair.

You are aware that Morrissey is a multi-millionaire and that, as such, he's among the richest 1% of the UK's population? He stopped being working class an awfully long time ago. He's a very wealthy man and he's got f*** all in common with you.

 

[Bluebirds]

When Diana died I got mourning sickness.

Ha ha ha x10000!

 

[Bluebirds]

He seems to think his being edgy by criticising royalty, but he isn't; it isn't the 1700s anymore. Being critical of monarchy in 21st Western society is actually more embarrassing than being critical of organised religion. The queen has no meaningful political power and the royal family costs us just £0.69 per person per annum.

He's an unjustifiably rich man criticising some other unjustifiably rich people. Nobody with a brain could take his criticisms seriously. If his objection to unearned wealth and income were in any way sincere, he'd move back to the UK and pay some tax into the society that made him.

The Windsors have no meaningful political power? How come that on a number of occasions they have vetoed Parliamentary Bills then? Look it up Freedom of Information and court challenges.

69pence? They cost us 69p per annum? How much land/ property does the monarchy own? And how many people in Britain live under the poverty line? And how many folks are losing their homes per annum? (ironically lots of these people don't contribute to the taxation system so the 69p per person is a fallacy in itself) who paid tor that wedding? And the jubilee?

The deference to royalty and the belief in the class system has held Britain back. We live in the 21st Century, in an alleged democracy, yet we still see nothing absurd about a hereditary unelected bloodline being Head of State. The French had the right idea. But I'm sure people will say that's why they're a bunch of cheese-surrendering monkeys.

 

[Bluebirds]

So you agree with him that Kate Middleton faked her illness and the royals were responsible for the death of that poor woman? Surely you're not defending that?

P.

No on the former, yes on the latter.

Now what about Pippa's arse? Nice or a bit young boyish?

 

[Bluebirds]

Most people would restrict their comments to facts on the subject of a person's death. The fact the Morrissey thinks he knows who did what, why, and how they were influenced, suggests to me that this is a comment too far. It's just daft.

P.

Sorry Peter if you think I am unduly criticising your posts but since the advent of the wonders of social media I respectfully disagree. Many people are keyboard warriors and are experts on a variety of topics. And believe you me, the irony of my postings here are not lost on me!

 

[Bluebirds]

Even if they decided to get rid of royalty, I really don't suppose that our right-wing Liberal/Conservative coalition government are about to resile from their intention to roll back the frontiers of the state. The money that would be saved by abolishing the monarchy wouldn't find its way into frontline public services, so your argument's a bit of a non-sequitur. Republicanism, generally, has nothing to do with equitable distribution of wealth.



Royal Assent is needed forde laws to be passed and the government consults with the Windsors about its policies. So what? None of this is news and it certainly isn't evidence that the royal family rule the country. When did the queen last refuse to approve a piece of legislation passed by parliament?

What I do find shocking, though, is that anybody claiming to be bothered about inequality would waste their time on this trivia instead of focussing their attention on the cabal of big business men and women, many of whom are millionaires, who actually do govern the country, and do so in the interests of their own class.

And pray do tell who is the wealthiest woman in the United Kingdom?

 

[cornelius blaze]

Ha ha ha x10000!

 

[Bluebirds]

Must dash I'm off for a late Sunday lunch in the Duchess of Cambridge! I shit you not. The view out of the window is of Windsor Castle.50m away on t'other side of the road! I hope I return, but that's what Dodi probably said.

 

[cornelius blaze]

Must dash I'm off for a late Sunday lunch in the Duchess of Cambridge! I shit you not. The view out of the window is of Windsor Castle.50m away on t'other side of the road! I hope I return, but that's what Dodi probably said.

 

[Anonymous]

The Windsors have no meaningful political power? How come that on a number of occasions they have vetoed Parliamentary Bills then? Look it up Freedom of Information and court challenges.

How about you look it up and then come back and fill us in? Tell us what percentage of bills are vetoed annually by the queen. Then tell us why said bills were vetoed and the extent to which they had to be altered before they were given Royal Assent.

69pence? They cost us 69p per annum? How much land/ property does the monarchy own? And how many people in Britain live under the poverty line? And how many folks are losing their homes per annum? (ironically lots of these people don't contribute to the taxation system so the 69p per person is a fallacy in itself) who paid tor that wedding? And the jubilee?

The deference to royalty and the belief in the class system has held Britain back. We live in the 21st Century, in an alleged democracy, yet we still see nothing absurd about a hereditary unelected bloodline being Head of State. The French had the right idea. But I'm sure people will say that's why they're a bunch of cheese-surrendering monkeys.

In France, 19.3% of the population are at risk of poverty or social exclusion, only 3.4% fewer than in the UK (22.7%). In France, 5.2% of the population are "severely materially deprived", compared with 5.1% of the British population. Abolishing the monarchy would not end social or economic hardship and certainly has nothing to do with collapsing social class hierarchy or even equalising life chances.

 

[kellytakeabow]

I really enjoy history, so I guess it doesn't bother me as much as most of you. HOWEVER, the fact that the "royal" family does absolutely nothing nowadays, I don't see why they continue to be such a huge deal. I don't have anything against William or Kate, because honestly I think they seem like okay people, but the family as a whole really doesn't matter anymore. There is really no need for all the hoopla.

 

[Bluebirds]

B

How about you look it up and then come back and fill us in? Tell us what percentage of bills are vetoed annually by the queen. Then tell us why said bills were vetoed and the extent to which they had to be altered before they were given Royal Assent.



In France, 19.3% of the population are at risk of poverty or social exclusion, only 3.4% fewer than in the UK (22.7%). In France, 5.2% of the population are "severely materially deprived", compared with 5.1% of the British population. Abolishing the monarchy would not end social or economic hardship and certainly has nothing to do with collapsing social class hierarchy or even equalising life chances.

'Are at risk?' Stop getting your facts from jimmy Wales. Regardless the flippant tone of my comment referred to Bastille Day etcetera.

As for the % of bills vetoed by the queen every year, I may be incorrect but I'm pretty certain that 100% of Acts of Parliament receive Royal Assent. Pedantics? Semantics? Our blessed unwritten constitution?

I may also be incorrect but I believe 100% of prosecutions in the legal system are brought in th name of Rex/ Regina?

And, again, please correct me if I'm wrong, who do 100% of the armed services pledge allegiance to?

Completely ceremonial of course

 

[Bluebirds]

Didnt Kate look resplendent this evening by the way? I thought she was completely the right person to celebrate Britain's sporting achievements this year. so did Wiggins and Jess Ennis judging by their due deference to someone whose only achievement in life is opening her legs to Willy's willy. Ahem, good on them

Mind you she managed to get tickets for every event at the Olympics she wanted to see. Let's hope they call the sprog Hercules.

 

[Bluebirds]

It seems like Katie deigned to turn up for the SPOTY 45 mins before the end. To present Sebastian with a lifetime achievement award. The establishment celebrating the establishment? I was always more of an Ovett fan anyway. Arguably the greatest year for British sport since (insert random date here) and none of those c***s who are/ will be King or Queen one day could be bothered to make an appearance. And thus dear old batty Morrissey is completely nuts in his assessment that the Royal Family didn't hijack the Olympics for their own 'empirical' (sic) needs?

Perhaps they were all too busy watching England win their first Test match series in India for 28 years? It's always pleasurable to put those coloured chaps from the colonies back in their subservient place. What what!

 

[Anonymous]

B

'Are at risk?' Stop getting your facts from jimmy Wales. Regardless the flippant tone of my comment referred to Bastille Day etcetera.

Regardless of your flippant tone, you obviously thought France was a much more equal society than the UK because of its 1789 bourgeois revolution. Capitalism and equality go together, obviously.

As for the % of bills vetoed by the queen every year, I may be incorrect but I'm pretty certain that 100% of Acts of Parliament receive Royal Assent. Pedantics? Semantics? Our blessed unwritten constitution?

Yes, Royal Assent has to be give to new pieces of legislation that have been approved by parliament, but your claim was that such assent is routinely withheld. How often does this happen? Even facts from Wikipedia might help you at this stage.

I may also be incorrect but I believe 100% of prosecutions in the legal system are brought in th name of Rex/ Regina?

And, again, please correct me if I'm wrong, who do 100% of the armed services pledge allegiance to?

Completely ceremonial of course

Well, you've already answered these questions yourself.

 

[BrummieBoy]

B

'Are at risk?' Stop getting your facts from jimmy Wales. Regardless the flippant tone of my comment referred to Bastille Day etcetera.

As for the % of bills vetoed by the queen every year, I may be incorrect but I'm pretty certain that 100% of Acts of Parliament receive Royal Assent. Pedantics? Semantics? Our blessed unwritten constitution?

I may also be incorrect but I believe 100% of prosecutions in the legal system are brought in th name of Rex/ Regina?

And, again, please correct me if I'm wrong, who do 100% of the armed services pledge allegiance to?

Completely ceremonial of course

It's called a 'constitutional monarchy' you dick-head. There's a reason Charles will never be King because he'd trigger an immediate constitutional crisis with his weirdy-beardy ideas. His 'letters' would certainly raise some eyebrows:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...e-Charles-sent-to-Tony-Blairs-government.html

So, let's raise our tankards to Morrissey, the fearless tireless Republican activist, who's 30 years of benefit gigs and on-the-ground activism moved the agenda centre-stage...WAIT!!! We could emulate the French and end up with President Blair the Popist closet-case war-mongering liar who single-handedly trashed the Saxon tribe's greatest ever achievement: The Labour Party. This year it's Hillsboro and Saville. Next up Orgreave. The Queen watches it all and undertands her role in times of strife. She will not let her son trash the lineage of the Realm.

Kate was beautiful and restrained on telly last night. She didn't intrude or do any face time attention whore stuff, but I did have the sound down as I can't stand all that 'the Olympics was mine!" stuff from Coe and co. Bradley woz worthy. Would Moz ever manage a decorous public appearance without spouting some 'notice me' nonsense? Give him a 30 years service gold watch, a retirement party with all the trimmings, then let him devote his singular talents to bringing about a Republican Britain. He's surely sophisticated enough to realise that being a dilettante ingeunue is attractive from a comprehensive lad at 23, it's pathetic from a 54 year old washed-up has-been almost was pop star.

We're going to hit stormy weather. We need a Churchill, we've got a proper Queen who totally destroyed Moz when she jumped from that copter. Danny Boyle won't accept a royal gong, he's too clever, too smart, sees the bigger picture and managed to turn one of the biggest mass-media events of all time into an homage to his Irish dad. It doesn't get any cooler than that. Morrissey is not cool. He was, now he's an absolute embarassment, other than belly-laugh comedy novelty value. Danny Boyle is the Celtic Soul Brit Brother. Morrissey has revealed himself as a clown, a court jester, but definitely not The Fool he thinks himself to be:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/editorial-arise-plain-danny-boyle-8421145.html

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereve...ening-ceremony-on-birthday-of-his-late-father

Morrissey's take on Iron John Robert Bly stuff, the 'lads without dads role model' grief was good when he was young, it had meaning and purpose, but he's totally failed to live up to the challenge his subconcious triggered. He's not an alpha-male, that's why he worships them. He's just an endless teenager and he's left it too late to change. If he'd have done something other than the puff and hard man stuff he might have been a contender, not a bitter also ran who dropped the baton. Still, Nick Drake eclipsed him, didn't even register on the radar at the time. People will listen to The Smiths and to Vauxhall. The rest of it's already in the skip.

 

[King Leer]

Erm, the last option went from being almost in last place to shooting up to 68 votes a few days ago?
I smell someone with too much time on their hands.

 

[Anonymous]

Erm, the last option went from being almost in last place to shooting up to 68 votes a few days ago?
I smell someone with too much time on their hands.

You could well be right, but it hardly matters. (I voted twice: the first time I picked the last option, but when I went back and checked all the possible options after reading your post, I voted that he usually has his facts wrong. That more accurately reflects what I think.) As I say, though, the poll was always gonna be pretty meaningless.

I think the comments in the actual thread are telling, tho. Nobody who's agreed with Morrissey's stance vis-à-vis royalty seems to have anything persuasive or even substantive to say. The Royals aren't a "dictatorship" and any claim to the contrary is ridiculous. Any Royal involvement in the political/legislative process is mere window-dressing; Royal Assent hasn't been refused in over three-hundred years.

Yeah, the Royals' inherited wealth and status is undeserved. Of course it is! On the other hand, the UK's class structure is pervaded not just with material inequality, but with inequality of opportunity and inherited advantage/disadvantage. That's down to the nature of the economy and society, though. It's nothing to do with whether the UK has a monarchy or not. In principle, there's no reason at all why a republic should be any more equal or equitable than a society with a Royal figurehead. You can't denounce the monarchy without, by implication, denouncing British capitalism in its entirety and Morrissey certainly can't do that since he's profited so handsomely from it.

 

[Anonymous]

And pray do tell who is the wealthiest woman in the United Kingdom?