|
Deketh posted:There is definitely a performative element to both sides. Since we're governed and informed by the royalists though, they get to set the tempo of the compulsory grief explosion so I assume alot of the loud celebration is a way of compensating and letting the world know that they don't speak for everyone and we aren't all crying into our gruel at the loss of our beloved nonce defending monarch Yeah pretty much. Also if you think the monarchy is bad then the replacement of the widely beloved queen with her son whom the public are currently at best ambivalent about is a great time to make noise about that. Their goal is obviously to use the mourning period to get him firmly in place with minimal fuss, so that by the time the country is allowed to be "normal" again King Charles is as well established and part of the furniture as his mother was. If you want to have people think at all about why we have a monarchy and what it means now is when you have to say they're poo poo.
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
feedmegin posted:And be abolished two minutes later. That just isn't how our monarchy works. This is one of those things that's drummed into you as absolutely fundamental to the British state but it's just not true. Can you actually imagine, for instance, Boris Johnson tearfully informing the country that he was severing all ties to the Royals? quote:First the newspaper reported that her private lawyer pushed the British government into an amendment that helped hide her wealth in 1973, on a law relating to transparency in companies. https://www.newsweek.com/queen-elizabeth-accused-lobbying-uk-government-royal-consent-1567864
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:18
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:I mean, she was a very old woman who died, as very old people tend to. Now her son gets to be king. I think a lot of people just like having fun on social media, & the fact that we're living in pretty dark times means people's sense of humour can get quite dark. Some of it is inevitably a reaction to the reaction from public spheres which doesn't really jive with their personal feelings & the feelings of the majority of normal people (there were no ads on ITV apparently, when it went to commercial it was just a black screen. This is loving demented. The football is cancelled tomorrow. There will be no comedy on the BBC which means I don't get to watch the Stewart Lee show I was looking forward to, the whole thing is grotesquely out of proportion) but I don't think it's really part of the culture wars, it's just the establishment trying to insist we are all deeply impacted by this & we're not except in ways they have decided to make it impact us. It's shite & making edgy jokes about it might not be all that pleasant but it feels nice when I'm hearing some oval office on the BBC tell me that the looming energy crisis pales in significance to the death of someone I don't know. It's not. She had a good long life, was pretty healthy well into her 90s, good for her but gently caress me sideways, thousands may die this winter. Anyway, attention seeking? On social media? Well I never. Isn't that the entire loving point of social media? forkboy84 fucked around with this message at 12:22 on Sep 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:20
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Wasn't the only William pretty successful? We've had 4 of them already. Current william will probably become William V when his dad dies, if we haven't rid ourselves of this millstone yet.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:20
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:I mean, she was a very old woman who died, as very old people tend to. Now her son gets to be king. Yeah, like - I feel a vague sense of melancholy while at the same time being completely in favour of the dissolution of the monarchy and I think it's okay to feel things, so long as you don't get caught up in the griefwank that's starting now. My dad died a couple of years ago and events like this bring it back to me, and it's weird to see people actively cackling. It's not as if her dying will have any *good* effect. It doesn't help anyone. And she didn't die in a hilarious way, like she tried to slap a servant and fell over or something, you know? She just died peacefully at home at a great age and some people are celebrating like we won something. Also apparently we're not even getting any loving time off, or at least not much. I always assumed things would close down for a bit. gently caress sake.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:20
|
|
|
The longer this mourning goes on the less time the government have to pass poo poo laws before the election has to happen. A parting gift from her maj.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:21
|
|
|
If the reaction was more on the level of a minute's silence and black armbands at sporting events, some special programming about her life and just generally a respectful tone to public events personally I think that'd be fine and I'd probably actually feel a bit sad about it all! But the massive overreaction has pissed me off and made me more annoyed than I would have been otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:23
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Wasn't the only William pretty successful? Wait I mixed the names, there were a bunch of Williams...
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:26
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:We've had 4 of them already. Current william will probably become William V when his dad dies, if we haven't rid ourselves of this millstone yet. Or is that...... Wilhelm Einz *puts on pickelhaub*
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:26
|
|
|
Saying that the Queen was not responsible for the atrocities committed in her name is ridiculous. She was the head of state, her Royal Assent passed every lovely act. Even if her role were fully as symbolic as claimed and she was entirely without power, influence, or the ability to speak out, she could have quit at any time and taken her vast personal fortune to go raise corgis on one of her many farms. The monarch doesn't get to avoid responsibility for their nation's actions, by long tradition they are the nation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:27
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:Also apparently we're not even getting any loving time off, or at least not much. I always assumed things would close down for a bit. gently caress sake. We've been hearing that there's a chance my kid's school will close if the funeral is held on the Monday, however both my wife and I are still expected to be at work. Not only do we not get a day off, one of us will probably need to lose a holiday to cover childcare. It's another one of those magical events that's simultaneously serious enough to only negatively affect workers but not capital.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:31
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:Saying that the Queen was not responsible for the atrocities committed in her name is ridiculous. She was the head of state, her Royal Assent passed every lovely act. Even if her role were fully as symbolic as claimed and she was entirely without power, influence, or the ability to speak out, she could have quit at any time and taken her vast personal fortune to go raise corgis on one of her many farms. The monarch doesn't get to avoid responsibility for their nation's actions, by long tradition they are the nation. Sure but I worry, as I've seen some other posters do, that laying it on her will have the effect of absolving the people who actually took the decisions that she rubberstamped, and performed the atrocities. You know?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:32
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Especially as William Rufus was already a thing, yes. Too many people clearly haven't learned their kings and queens from Horrible Histories.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:33
|
|
|
Reveilled posted:We've had 4 of them already. Current william will probably become William V when his dad dies, if we haven't rid ourselves of this millstone yet. All the Williams seemed pretty successful though, the last one seemed like a fun guy as well. Bad precedent with a younger brother Henry though for one of them if I remember my Rex Factor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:35
|
|
|
sebzilla posted:Too many people clearly haven't learned their kings and queens from Horrible Histories. I watched some of that recently and it's really good, and I'm glad that I'm over the phase of life that gets embarrassed to watch kids' TV.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:36
|
|
|
josh04 posted:This is one of those things that's drummed into you as absolutely fundamental to the British state but it's just not true. Can you actually imagine, for instance, Boris Johnson tearfully informing the country that he was severing all ties to the Royals? But, well, it is true, which is why they don't do it. If Her Maj stood up on her throne in 1960 and was all like 'colonialism is bad and we should immediately retreat from all our colonies' the reaction would have been to replace her sharpish with someone more pliable and probably check her into the funny farm. Not like we haven't chucked out monarchs before for doing something embarrassing, even in the 20th century, yeah? Edit: quote:All the Williams seemed pretty successful though,
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:37
|
|
|
I find it pretty hard to see why the queen not saying a word against the wrongs done in her name is excusable because she wouldn't have been the queen any more if she did. That seems rather more like naked self interest than public service.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:37
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I find it pretty hard to see why the queen not saying a word against the wrongs done in her name is excusable because she wouldn't have been the queen any more if she did. That seems rather more like naked self interest than public service. I'm not praising her for it. I'm just saying I can see why she didn't do it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:39
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I find it pretty hard to see why the queen not saying a word against the wrongs done in her name is excusable because she wouldn't have been the queen any more if she did. That seems rather more like naked self interest than public service. Plus she would have still been the Queen anyway. I mean the past kings and queens said bunch of stuff, I think the quiet ones are the exception.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:39
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I'm not praising her for it. I'm just saying I can see why she didn't do it. RIP to the queen, wealthiest coward in the country, doesn't have the same ring to it I suppose.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:41
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:Sure but I worry, as I've seen some other posters do, that laying it on her will have the effect of absolving the people who actually took the decisions that she rubberstamped, and performed the atrocities. You know? I don't think there's any danger of that, have you ever seen the Queen blamed at all for the actions of her governments? I'm not even saying that she is primarily responsible, just that the monarch can't both be in charge, however nominally, and completely absolved of guilt for what they're in charge of.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:43
|
|
|
The Queen, now Chuck, is head of the CoE. The CoE opposes abortion in 98% of cases. Is Liz/Chuck to blame for this?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:45
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/StefGotBooted/status/1568161693494042625#m
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:45
|
|
|
HopperUK posted:Sure but I worry, as I've seen some other posters do, that laying it on her will have the effect of absolving the people who actually took the decisions that she rubberstamped, and performed the atrocities. You know? Do you have any actual basis for that worry? Who is going to listen to an argument from someone here about the monarchy's culpability in imperialism and from that take that Queen Elizabeth is solely to blame? There's nobody on this earth who is going to be open to an argument that Elizabeth bears some moral culpability for those decisions who doesn't already lay blame for imperialism at the feet of british politicians. I dunno, maybe if someone's an actual lizardfolk conspiracy theorist who things Elizabeth was secretly an absolute dictator ruling over her mind-controlled political thralls I could see that, but I don't see how any rational individual gets to the conclusion "Elizabeth bears some responsibility for this" without first accepting the conclusion "Britain's elected officials carried out horrendous atrocities throughout the colonial era and beyond", and it's not like this additional inclusion of the monarch in the "people who are to blame" list is going to suddenly occlude all the others you've added previously. The default position on this among the british public, remember, is "The British Empire was cool actually"; there's no way to get from there to here without a whole bunch of intermediate steps that necessarily involve talking about the people who performed the atrocities.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:56
|
|
|
I did actually have the thought "what are the people who think the queen is secretly behind the illuminati going to say about her dying" and I hope I get an answer soon and I hope it's real weird.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 12:58
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I did actually have the thought "what are the people who think the queen is secretly behind the illuminati going to say about her dying" and I hope I get an answer soon and I hope it's real weird. You saw that lady with the chip shop right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:01
|
|
|
 The Queen the
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:02
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I did actually have the thought "what are the people who think the queen is secretly behind the illuminati going to say about her dying" and I hope I get an answer soon and I hope it's real weird. She's simply transported her spiritual essence to a new host in kate Middleton. Diana found out the truth, that's why they killed her.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:03
|
|
|
Rarity posted:You saw that lady with the chip shop right? Lady with the chip shop?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:13
|
|
|
lady with the chip shop!
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:15
|
|
|
The queen was a bad person for many many reasons and while I'm sure this is a very sad time for her family, some of the jokes (especially the unintentional ones like Funko and Playmobil being performatively sad) have been quite funny so overall her death has probably brought more joy to people than her life ever has on average.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:17
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I'm not praising her for it. I'm just saying I can see why she didn't do it. I can see why Tony Blair didn't contradict Bush's justification for invading Iraq, I can see why Rees-Mogg doesn't divest from Somerset Capital, I can see why the Grenfell building management didn't address the cladding concerns. In all cases it's naked self-interest and profit motive, and it leads inevitably to the immiseration and death of the proles, those worthless two-bits whose lives don't even factor into the equation. I'm just not sure why that's suddenly worth posting about when it's the literal ruler of the British Empire
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:20
|
|
|
If all the royals popped off in succession, how many mourning days could the UK have in a row? Correct answers get as many swans and corgis as they want.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:23
|
|
|
a pipe smoking dog posted:I got an email from a KC this morning and it was a bit odd. did they want to you do a little dance?
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:26
|
|
|
I apparently missed a page and have now seen the lady with the chip shop.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:30
|
|
|
Twitter has been on top form for Queen related comedy but I don’t know if there’s seventeen days of material there
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:33
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mollyesbian/status/1567982887882063873
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:35
|
|
|
Okay let's put aside the motion that Queen Elizabeth had any responsibility for the real big wrongs of the British Empire. Let's accept that she was just one small Queen and couldn't fight the system. Fine. What about the smaller scale wrongs that she could have done something about. Like say, the media's harassment of Diana or Meghan. Surely she could have pushed back at what was happening to those two women? Or would that have resulted in the Tabloids having to go to the Palace and imprison the Royales? But hey, maybe she just adopted some Watcher like strict neutrality policy. So she was just keeping to that policy by letting the press go after Diana and Meghan. And it's not like she personally provided resources and legal assistance to normal bloke Andy Windsor when he had legal troubles. Or had to sell off one of her many properties to finance a legal settlement for a woman that Andy Windsor did nothing to. Nope, Queen Lizzie. Powerless to effect big changes. Had to maintain decorum and not go after any of the smaller wrongs.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:38
|
|
|
Sometimes it's easy to forget this thread is in D&D but not today
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 03:58 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2022 13:42
|
|
