Protesting parasites

31 comments on “Protesting parasites ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Colonial Viper 1

   3 July 2011 at 7:23 pm

   Some journos really need to study the history of the French Revolution.
2. Lewis Holden 2

   3 July 2011 at 7:53 pm

   No explanation was given as to why the Quebecois don’t like the British monarchy.
   • Ianupnorth 2.1

     3 July 2011 at 7:59 pm

     🙂
      
     Nearly as sycophantic as having the lovely Bronagh Key in the women’s mags talking about the challenges of raising a family!
   • johnm 2.2

     4 July 2011 at 10:53 am

     Hi Lewis Holden

     “The protesters chanted “RRQ,” the initials of the anti-monarchist, separatist group, Reseau de Resistance du Quebecois, or Quebecker Resistance Network, which organized the protests in Montreal and Quebec City.

     “We do not recognize the authority, the legitimacy of the Crown, of the monarchy here in Quebec and it’s not a national symbol for us,” said Maxime Laporte of the RRQ.

     “It’s rather a symbol of imperialism, of war crimes against humanity, against our people.”

     The group claimed responsibility for a banner carrying the slogan “Vive le Quebec libre” that flew from an airplane over Quebec City for an hour.”

     French Canada fell to the English General Wolf whose soldiers scaled the heights of abraham and took the French general Montcalm by surprise capturing Quebec. Since then the Quebecois have felt overshadowed by the English culture.
     • Ari 2.2.1

       4 July 2011 at 10:53 pm

       Given that Quebecois is pronounced “keb-eh-kwah”, “Quebecker” is a terrible translation of the word. 🙂
3. Anthony 3

   3 July 2011 at 8:03 pm

   From what I understand the current batch of royalty actually earn their keep as they traded the rents of their lands for a living allowance a few centuries ago. These rents supposedly earn the British taxpayer more than it costs to keep them – not to mention the tourist dollars they attract.
   • Ianupnorth 3.1

     3 July 2011 at 8:14 pm

     Yes, they get in to the top universities without meeting the entry criteria, they get trained as pilots, despite many others not getting the opportunity. They also have 24/7 security supplied at the tax payers expense and enjoyed the smell of fresh paint! They don’t contribute very much.
      
     Don’t want to alarm you, but France attracts more tourists and they don’t have a royalty.
     • Kiwiiano 3.1.1

       3 July 2011 at 11:30 pm

       Duhh, it’s not the actual Royals, live or beheaded that attract the tourists, it’s the whole infrastructure surrounding them, or the remains thereof. Take the Royal heritage out of both London and Paris and they’d both be big congested blah! Personally I was just as happy wandering about either Hampton Court or Les Invalides.
       The Americans don’t have Royals either but they do their damnedest to recreate them. Somehow Brad & Angelina just don’t have what Will & Kate have, never will.
   • Zetetic 3.2

     3 July 2011 at 9:04 pm

     “their lands”

     How did they get those lands?
     • Anthony 3.2.1

       3 July 2011 at 9:13 pm

       Probably the same way as Ngapuhi, Ngai Tahu, Tainui or anyone with hereditary possessions – conquest, wealth, blood and favorable laws.

       Not saying it’s right, but it’s the same mechanism that justifies everyone else’s ownership of land.
       • Zetetic 3.2.1.1

         3 July 2011 at 9:39 pm

         their ancestors were the most successful bullies.

         I’m not sure why you think we should bend over for them just because they gave up some of the rents to their lands in a pathetic effort to keep some of their power and their wealth.
       • Draco T Bastard 3.2.1.2

         3 July 2011 at 10:06 pm

         Not saying it’s right, but it’s the same mechanism that justifies everyone else’s ownership of land.

         So, what you’re saying here is that the present ownership of land isn’t actually justified?
4. Lewis Holden 4

   3 July 2011 at 8:16 pm

   Ever heard of the Hermitage? Versailles? Major tourist attractions in countries that have long been republics.

   Also, the Crown Estates are no different from state lands. They’re not the property of the Royal family and they aren’t entitled automatically from them.
   • Anthony 4.1

     3 July 2011 at 9:06 pm

     They aren’t different because they were traded for their living expenses.

     Anyway don’t see Louis XIV selling many woman’s mags, whereas the royals sell millions of them, from that alone they probably generate enough economic activity to keep them.
     • Lewis Holden 4.1.1

       3 July 2011 at 9:10 pm

       Now there’s a great argument for the monarchy: it keeps women’s mags in business. The silliness of that assertion aside, is that what thousands of years of constitutional development has led us to – a head of state who does little more than provide gossip?

       I for one would prefer a head of state actually able to keep politicians in check. You don’t get that with the celebrity monarchy. By your own admission you get pointless, superficial gossip.
       • RedLogix 4.1.1.1

         3 July 2011 at 9:26 pm

         I for one would prefer a head of state actually able to keep politicians in check.

         Yes. While I can understand that the old traditional monarchies were dreadful tryrants and parasites… and an anathema to any hard-core leftie… I’m inclined to think there is life still in this idea if it was recast in a more modern form.

         The problem with pollies is that they are so focussed on getting re-elected that the long-term interests of the people and the nation are easily lost. It’s something we see all the time.

         By contrast a heriditary head of state owes his/her role to no-one.. and this could be a great freedom to consider the long-term direction of a nation. And to the role of figurehead, albeit one with limited, or even no executive powers, still has some merit.

         OK so it’s a balancing act. But there are examples of it around the world, quite low-key ones often, where is sort of works.
         • Lewis Holden 4.1.1.1.1

           3 July 2011 at 9:38 pm

           Well I’m not a “hardcore leftie” by any measure…

           Your cynicism about politicians is understandable, but remember we’re not talking about legislative elections here. The Irish do pretty well electing their president, who has all the same powers as our governor-general, plus two more (the ability to send bills to referendum or the Irish supreme court).

           The problem is that while the Royals swan around opening things, smiling and waving, the actual work of the head of state is done by the Governor-General, who is appointed by (and can be dismissed by) the Prime Minister of the day.

           So the reality is the constitutional office that could otherwise keep the PM and their cabinet in check is reduced to something worse than a puppet.
           • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.1.1.1

             3 July 2011 at 9:44 pm

             So the reality is the constitutional office that could otherwise keep the PM and their cabinet in check is reduced to something worse than a puppet.

             If you look back a couple of hundred years, it was clear that Parliament was gaining the lions share of the power in Britain, with the influence of the Crown gradually and consistently eroding.

             And since the Crown has no standing armies or other ability to enforce its decrees nowadays, the PM and his Cabinet are definitely in charge.

             The Irish do pretty well electing their president

             Over the last 3-4 years both Irish and Greek elected governments have seriously let down their people.
             • Lewis Holden …

               3 July 2011 at 9:52 pm

               Both are parliamentary republics – the governing in Ireland and Greece, much like New Zealand, is done by the executive responsible to parliament. Considering the UK’s debt levels (and ours) are almost as bad as the PIG countries, there’s no link between being a republic and debt levels.
             • Dr. X …

               4 July 2011 at 12:55 am

               Long time listener, first time caller.

               I’m Irish, but I spent a time in Auckland three years ago, and am typing this in Germany, where I currently reside.

               With regards to the performance of the Irish government – we have indeed been badly let down by them, but our President doesn’t have her fingerprints on that one. The presidency in the Irish system is a non-executive position, with executive power residing in the office of the Taoiseach, or prime minister, and the wider cabinet.

               It’s the standard Westminster model, except with an elected head of state rather than some hereditary chinless wonder. In fact,we Irish haven’t had a king of our own since Brian Boru died at the battle of Clontarf in 1014, and we haven’t done too badly. . . if you don’t count the millions who died in the famine of course.

               Big shout out to Aotearoa and all who sail in her (except the ones who vote NACT, natch).
               • Lewis Holden …

                 4 July 2011 at 7:28 am

                 Well said Dr X.

                 Are you following the Irish presidential election this year?
                 • ianmac …

                   4 July 2011 at 9:54 am

                   Is Dr X standing for election as president this year? Sounds like a good bet. 🙂
           • Policy Parrot 4.1.1.1.1.2

             3 July 2011 at 10:52 pm

             I agree – even one “Smiler and Waver” is too many.

             CV – one point though – Papandreou/ESOK got a hospital pass from the previous New Democracy government, to the extent they called a snap election so they hoped would avoid blame.
5. Colonial Viper 5

   3 July 2011 at 8:20 pm

   I should say that the Royals do give the UK quite a bit of a sense of national identity…and perhaps memories of grander times for Britain.
   • Lewis Holden 5.1

     3 July 2011 at 8:31 pm

     Sure… but what do they have to do with us? or Canada?
     • Jim Nald 5.1.1

       4 July 2011 at 10:23 am

       These touring royal relics
       from foreign shores
       on foreign soil
       are rather fascinating
       and quite quaint to watch.

       TV cameras are focused on
       fashion houses now put on show
       by the royal house of relics
       thanks to a new recruit –
       a garbed and fresh commoner.
6. Dion 6

   3 July 2011 at 10:23 pm

   I don’t like how discussions on the merits of the royal family so often end up focussed on their economic value/drain. Personally I think the principle of no one being born better than anyone else is more important. Forget how much money they take or contribute, is it right that the head of the commonwealth is decided by genetic lottery.
7. Alice 7

   3 July 2011 at 10:35 pm

   Actually I do have a right to be on a benefit, what I have had to endure from government persecution – I deserve the right to recuperate!
   I honestly feel I am deserving receiving a benefit, as I am unable to work. I am in a position like no other, and I know my mind and body and given the circumstances I deserve a fucking break.
8. Clare, Beijing, China 8

   3 July 2011 at 11:05 pm

   What does royalty have to do with us? My father was born in the UK and emigrated to NZ. Royalty is part of England for now. I feel attached to the land of my father’s birth and our relatives living there. My family history and part of my identity is there.
   • Lewis Holden 8.1

     4 July 2011 at 7:50 am

     That’s a great explanation of the relevance of Royalty to the UK – but not New Zealand or Canada. Those of us of German or Irish extraction don’t demand we have the presidents of either country as our head of state.
9. ianmac 9

   4 July 2011 at 10:05 am

   Having read the intriguing book “The Utterly Impartial History of Britain” by John O’Farrell, I have a jaundiced view of the history of Royalty. The existence of the current royal crowd is built on extremely despotic ruthless ignorant activity, and their wealth was stolen from the bare bones of the people.. Bad enough that England must suffer them but leave us out of it. Let Key get his knighthood as celebrity then we can sort out our coming Republic. Long Live New Zealand!

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS