Amazon.com Widgets
  • They are reptilians

    The royal family are shape shifting reptilians, we don't need reptilians ruling over us even though they do. The Reptilian Humanoids came to earth thousands of years ago and genetically modified the humans that existed on earth. Humans were originally perfect but the reptilians genetically modified into what we are now, and then they cross bred with us and created the demigods or the illuminati bloodlines which rule the world, and the royal family are part of the illuminati bloodlines, Lizard People do rule the world!

  • Unearned power at it's worst

    What did Kate do to earn fortune and fame? What did William do? They did nothing. The royal family used to be the governing class, back when everything was about family ties. We do not live in a system like that anymore. We are beyond the fuedal system. The royal family are nothing but figureheads, yet millions of taxpayer dollars are wasted on them. The royal family should be stripped of it's title and thrown back into the real world. Nobody deserves fame simply because of blood ties. It's unethical and wrong.

  • All governments that still have Monarchs, Royal families, Lords, Princes should be destroyed.

    All the members of all royal families should have all their wealth redistributed to the masses. They should be forced to live in apartments and get real jobs.

    America kicked the King and royalty out of American during the American Revolution; but, millions of Americans love this royalty nonsense.

    England's new prince, the new royal baby is no better than any other baby born into the world.

    Just like the royalty in the UK, the top 1% of the wealthy, the Plutocracy in America/world needs to be taken down and their wealthy redistributed.

    The world will not be great until socialism/ communism replace capitalism.

    Marx and Engels got it right in "The Communist Manifesto."

    And, remember what Albert Einstein said about the evils of Capitalism:

    Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of the smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.



    Einstein goes on to note where this would ultimately lead:

    Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those able and willing to work will always be in a position to find employment; an “army of unemployed” almost always exists. The worker is constantly in fear of losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid workers do not provide a profitable market, the production of consumers’ goods is restricted, and great hardship is the consequence. Technological progress frequently results in more unemployment rather than in an easing of the burden of work for all. The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before.

    This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.
    Http://blogcritics.Org/einstein-the-dangers-of-pure-capitalism/

  • Too much importance over real news

    If people care more about the royal wedding in 2011 instead of the strife around the world around that time and royal baby instead of millions of starving children or children dying in poverty and wars around the world, we have a problem everyone! Furthermore, what purpose do they actually serve in British society anyways other than pose for the cameras?

  • They are detrimental to the Commonwealth nations, and should be summarily executed

    The royal family are merely a tool to brainwash the unwashed masses with no brain to think for themselves. As a member of the fascist party, I believe that the only solution is for them to be executed in public. In conclusion, they should be eviscerated.

  • Their original purpose, yes. Now, it's about money.

    Their original purpose was to rule over the country ("...Long to reign over us...") and represent us abroad. In the world we live today, they are an outdated, morally wrong and outright dodgy institution. But there purpose has changed. Like it or not, the royals are part of the fabric of the UK. But that alone isn't a good enough reason to keep them. Far more importantly, they bring in tons of cash. We pay them £40 million a year, and they bring in £160 million in tourism. Getting rid of them would be stupid. The moment they start making a loss, i say give 'em the chop. But until then, we may as well keep them. Besides, without them, we wouldn't get to see Pippa's lovely bum half as much ;)

  • It is outrageous and contrary to democracy values

    In a democracy everyone should be treated equal and I assume this is also written down in The British Constitution. I don't judge people who go nuts about a royal wedding or a royal baby but I think it is contradictory to the values of a democracy and outright impudent to live off of the hard-working tax payers' money.

  • With some thought, arguments in defence of the monarchy usually go back to: "It's traditional." I would argue this isn't enough justification, when you consider:

    Monarchy contradicts democracy
    Monarchy denies the people a basic right
    Monarchy devalues a parliamentary system
    Monarchy is gender-discriminative
    A monarchy demands deference
    It is the enemy of merit and aspiration
    It devalues intellect and achievement
    It harms the monarchs themselves
    Monarchs are not impartial, and lack accountability
    The monarchy is expensive
    The monarchy makes the UK appear 'backward'

  • They should be moved out of Buckingham and into the history books.

    The very fact that the modernized UK still has a royal family (whatever the heck that means) is bizarre. They have no power anymore, not for a two hundred and fifty years have they held power. They have NO purpose nor any reason to be labeled "royal" other than outdated tradition.

  • Astronomical waste of money for powerless figureheads.

    If Britain had any self-respect they would stop all this nonsense. Millions and millions of dollars are wasted on royal guards, palaces, feasts, and real estate. They have no place in the modern world, especially a democratic country such as England. They do nothing to benefit the world. If only the money spent on these clowns could be used to help those who actually need it.

  • Great history and a tourist attraction

    Simple as the title, I see no need to get rid of them as they are crucial to England. They bring millions of tourists and are a good flag to rally around for the people of the UK. Still though I do think they need to not have quite as much of the taxpayers money.

  • They bring millions into the British economy and are living history and heritage

    You could complain that the royal family cost 52p per person per year in the UK. But for that they have stimulated millions in tourism, completed tours and networked in order to boost the economy. They do an enormous amount of charitable work and have preserved our unique identity, history and culture.

  • Of course it hasnt!

    The Royal family is meant to serve as a pleasant distraction form all the usual death and destruction in the world for people once in a while..... I think everyone would rather watch reruns of Kate Middleton and her new family exit the hospital instead of pictures of all of those dying in somalia from ANOTHER famine they are having..... Besides, Britain is going through hard times right now (their Prime Minister has worse approval ratings then Bush I think), they need these pleasant distractions more then ever

  • It has a new purpose.

    The royal family used to be around to rule the country and make the decisions and be the representation of our beliefs and nation.
    Don't get me wrong, i'm not a royalist, i am very agaisnt the idea of a man being allowed to think he's better than other people because he was born in a specific family.
    I am against it in other cases, but not in this one, the queen actually brings in more money than we pay her, around five times more!
    This is the only reason i am against disolving the royal family.
    I am not royalist am i simply against disolving the royal family.

  • They Aid the Economy

    The Royal family actually helps the United Kingdom economy. Having a royal family and its landmarks brings millions of tourists, thus aiding millions of dollars to the economy. If you don't belive me, check out this video by C. G. P. Grey. Http://www.Youtube.Com/watch?V=bhyYgnhhKFw

    Filling word count. Filling word count. Filling word count.

  • Now New Purpsoses

    Many people I know love the royal family. So many people look up to them, and they are so down to earth. They bring in many tourists and boost up the economic growth. Even though they are just figureheads, chaos would arise if they left. They bring in so much money for the economy, it would be awful for them to just disappear. They too have a strong diplomatic value to the UK.

  • To entertain or not to entertain...

    Could any given purpose be to entertain? Do not make the argument of cost, as the entertainment industry is costly, and from what I have learned subsidized in certain circumstances to " keep the peace." An idle population on a hot Summer's day might conjure ideas when sitting in the movie theater for hours keeps people calm and off the streets. The question tied to this is what we except as purposeful. Is it enough to keep history alive, teach etiquette within a culture, marvel at the odd luck of one family maintaining such long genealogical records. I would never hope to have their fame. In fact, what a curse. But to marvel at the mere possibility within the course of History, well, it is entertaining at least...Unless to merely entertain has no purpose?

  • A key part of British identity that should be respected

    The Royal Family not only generate a large amount of money per annum but they should also be respected for their place as a token of British identity. When you think of other countries you are reminded by key facts about that country. For example, France would bring thoughts of the Eiffel Tower. It's this that keeps us Britain and differentiates us from other countries giving us our own unique place in terms of global recognition.

  • Of course they haven't!!!!!!!!

    How can anyone say that? Britain has had a monarchy longer than we can remember. We introduced the monarchy for a reason, and that reason still applies to the royal family today. We are proud to have them, and I'm sure they're proud to be a part of Britain. So there!

  • They still hold purpose.

    The British monarchy gives massive tourist and Crown Estate revenue to Parliament. Eliminating the monarchy would lead to rise in taxes and less economic growth. They are, after all, cost effective. It only costs the tax payers there 51 pence per person. That is quite cheap. It's important to remember that the monarch is a neutral head of state and does not threaten democracy as so many people seem to think. The monarchy is just a figure head. Finally, they are apolitical and have strong diplomatic value to the United Kingdom which stands as one of the most liked nations in the world.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.