I too support the Dalai Lama but having worked in China realise that when any level of diplomacy is necessary, that the performance of any individual reflects badly on where they come from and in a case such as royal represent. His sickie when confronted with meeting the Chinese was perhaps contrived but his other faux pas have been generally politically sensitive which for somebody who is supposed constitutionally always be impartial is not at all acceptable.
The difference between having Hollande glaring down on a wedding and the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha dynasty's queen at present and possibly Charlie in the future is that in the former case there is electoral choice but in the latter it is imposed and thus tolerated. Choice or no choice whereby in the case of choice and not liking who has been chosen does present the possibility of their displacement without a progenitor lineage assuming their position. One is, for all its faults, far more democratic than the other and actually carried far greater responsibility. That Hollande falls short is perhaps fair to say, but then he could be gone in the foreseeable future and worse fall upon us. With royalty what starts looking potentially promising, as the whole rhetoric about William the modern future king, remembering he is coming up to 32 and much the same view was held of his father 30 or so years ago, it could be a long wait for a lengthy no change. Royalty has outlived any rational purpose and needs to be put in its place, ideally consigned to history.
I fell out if love with the Royal family some time ago, but having been to a wedding here in France and seen Francois Hollande’s smiling face looking down on us, I have reversed my decision.
@Brian, we cannot be blamed for the mistakes our families have made, but don’t forget that he was diplomatically sick when he was supposed to have had a meeting with a Chinese delegation and his support for Tibet and the Dalai Lama.
Hope you are out to waste cast your vote folk. I shall be off to do mine after walking the dogs when I shall be looking for 'signs' in the forest such as twigs that have fallen in a particular way to guide me to choose. If it comes up with FN I shall go home and eat my 'carte électorale' in the hope that all they get out of me is the vomit when I regurgitate the card ;-)
Having looked at the candidates I see I have a choice between a whole row of nutcases, fanatics, idiots and unconvincing idealists. I am not what one might call inspired but have decided it is a tactical gesture to contribute to making sure some of them do not get in.
vive la république !!! Only way to go in the 21st century and, for all those flag wavers, how "English" is Saxe-Coboug Gotha...?!
Bon dimanche à tous !
I tend to agree on the historic proposition. I furthermore feel that the difference between royalties when they had a symbolically important role in the nations they ruled and more so when they were absolute monarchies and the present is that they gave a nation an identity. Today people are generally indifferent to their existence unless a bit of public flag waving and cheering is called for. They are a very costly burden on their subjects and when they allow themselves diplomatic faux pas of the kind Charles Windsor has committed by comparing Putin with Hitler, given the proximity of his family to and support of the German dictator only two generations earlier, they only show themselves up for how far removed they are from real life. Even if he was right, the fact that he was representing 'his' nation transfers the embarrassment to the whole nation. A supposedly modern monarchy should be fully aware of such detail.
From my point of view they are long past 'sell by date' and whilst I am not suggesting a Romanov solution, they should be deposed, their vast wealth and properties no longer free of taxation and the state funding and allowances ceased. They are already rich beyond the need for public support. Only within republics is there the possibility of democracy ever being achieved albeit the contemporary world offers no single example of that being the case.
Irrespective of the personalities surely the worst thing the British parliament ever did was to allow Charles the second back on to the throne and then to compound the error by the so called Glorious Revolution. Republic is the only true wat to democracy