Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 693 posts

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#611

Post by bogomipz »

fennecfoxy wrote: post #589
bogomipz wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"To be fair, when you consider that the Queen lived for 96 years and there hasn't been an event like this since 1953" Did you miss the whole Platinum Jubilee celebration two months ago for the Queen? [1] The scope of that was also over the top and costs 10's of millions of pounds. There was also the Saphire Jubilee 5 years ago, the Diamond Jubilee in 2012, the Golden Jubilee in 2002, there's at least a few others as…

Based on revenue from the crown holdings, since the sovereign grant only represents a small percentage of overall revenues, much of the "public paid" money is paid back by that surplus being made available for public spending. See: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sovereign-grant-a... "In exchange for this public support, The Queen surrenders the revenue from The Crown Estate to the government. Over the las…

The Sovereign Grant is itself is a taxpayer-funded payment. The money comes from the treasury and is funded by taxpayers.

See: https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-57559653

and

Here are some of the key figures from the royal accounts for 2020-2021:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-29/how-much-...

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#612

Post by bee_rider »

javajosh wrote: post #572
morelisp wrote: post #497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Monarchy is a human default government. There is literally no evidence for this.

Quoted post unavailable.

Most of humanity's time on earth was spend in small pre-historic tribes, I don't see any reason to assume those societies were monarchies. They probably didn't have the resources to support deeply entrenched power structures.

Humans come with built-in abilities to establish small ad-hoc social structures. You'd probably have some members of the community that were generally charismatic or bright (or particularly good at violence) who'd generally tend to get their way, but it is a complex web of social pressures.

I mean, just think of your friends -- you've probably got somebody who is broadly the "ideas guy" or kind of a natural leader, but they don't just automatically over-rule everybody.

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#613

Post by CyberDildonics »

chrisseaton wrote: post #472
haltingproblem wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no constitution. How can it be a constitutional monarchy? Before anyone points out that it is an unwritten constitution, please exchange my invisible benjies for some gold.

Why do you think a constitution has to be written? Why extra power do you think something gets from being written down? North Korea has a written constitution. Does does that make it better in practice than the UK’s?

Why did you write this comment instead of yelling it out of your window?

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#615

Post by morelisp »

javajosh wrote: post #600
morelisp wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bluntly, actual anthropology does not agree with this at all. It's some Enlightenment technocratic fantasy, so it's fitting you invoke Civ and not, like, a real survey.

If I am wrong, then you are being cruel to me simply for being ignorant. I personally do not find cruelty appealing, do you? Instead of cruel taunts that I'm on the wrong end of an information asymmetry, how about a link? If I am right, and you know it, then you are arguing in bad faith attempting to derail the convo or just troll. If I am right and you don't know it, and arguing in good faith, then I think the exerc…

For a guy who flippantly dismissed my reply to your bullshit by saying it's like denying the earth is round, you also have a bad definition of "cruelty".

Nobody owes you a refutation of your vibes-based nonsense historical theories.

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#616

Post by morelisp »

brutusborn wrote: post #610
morelisp wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consistently this Schroedinger's Monarchy defense. "The queen has no real power." OK, then why have her? "Monarchy provides stability in case of... something." Ah, so she does have power! The real pageantry/cosplay is how we're supposed to pretend a hereditary leader, ceremonial or otherwise but also given that we're discussing people being arrested definitely actually otherwise , isn't totally fucked up.

The UK Monarch has real power, but not absolute power. From wikipedia: "The royal prerogative includes the powers to appoint and dismiss ministers, regulate the civil service, issue passports, declare war, make peace, direct the actions of the military, and negotiate and ratify treaties, alliances, and international agreements." This isn't as black and white as you are proposing, there is nuance.

I didn't say absolute power. But for example, in the comment immediately below this one, I currently read

> it's not like the king of england has any real power

This is a widely-held belief.

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#617

Post by morelisp »

nly wrote: post #484
chasil wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Au contraire. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/09/queens-conse... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/08/queen-... "Queen’s consent is a procedural rule, internal to the workings of parliament and of unclear origins, which requires the monarch’s consent to be obtained for certain types of legislation – before they can be presented for final approval by either house of parliament." Also note…

The Wikipedia page mentions that Kings Consent is a matter of parliamentary procedure and can be abolished with the stroke of a pen. It's just a courtesy to save face for the Monarchy.

The monarchy never tried to help me save face, why build entire government processes which do nothing but that for them?

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#618

Post by throwoutway »

austinjp wrote: post #327

The UK media (not just the BBC) continue to profess "amazement" at the speed and efficiency of the transitioning from a dead monarch to a living one. There's been much speaking in awed tones at the pace of the various proclamations, committee meetings, document signings, etc, as if this pace tells us why we should be impressed. Personally I've found it borderline sickening. If there was a curtain that could have slip…

It’s really not that bizarre, not conspiratorial, and not “public passivity and capitulation”.

The government has been a constitutional monarchy for centuries, this has happened dozens of times before (with more & less bloodshed), and is well known, expected, it is completely legal, and the operation was well publicized.

You’re welcome to not like it, but acting incredulous shows how little you know about the UK.

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#619

Post by bee_rider »

javajosh wrote: post #600
morelisp wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bluntly, actual anthropology does not agree with this at all. It's some Enlightenment technocratic fantasy, so it's fitting you invoke Civ and not, like, a real survey.

If I am wrong, then you are being cruel to me simply for being ignorant. I personally do not find cruelty appealing, do you? Instead of cruel taunts that I'm on the wrong end of an information asymmetry, how about a link? If I am right, and you know it, then you are arguing in bad faith attempting to derail the convo or just troll. If I am right and you don't know it, and arguing in good faith, then I think the exerc…

This is not an academic survey, but wikipedia is probably a better source than Civilization at least (good games, though). You can look at their sources if you really want to get rigorous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer#Social_and_eco...

> Hunter-gatherers tend to have an egalitarian social ethos,[17] although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the Northwest Coast of North America) are an exception to this rule.[18][19] For example, the San people or "Bushmen" of southern Africa have social customs that strongly discourage hoarding and displays of authority, and encourage economic equality via sharing of food and material goods.

> Most anthropologists believe that hunter-gatherers do not have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed.

Anyway, IMO the null hypothesis should be that small humans tribes in nature act like large extended families or groups of friends and acquaintances -- generally friendly, collaborative, and driven by a consensus of stakeholders interested in a given problem. With less ability to horde wealth, you'll get shallower power structures -- more need to keep everyone broadly happy (or at least convinced that they are better off working with you).

Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows

#620

Post by some_random »

nautilius wrote: post #356
some_random wrote: post #224

Awful lot of Brits learning the crucial difference between the right to free speech, and the privilege of being allowed to speak freely.

Americans too. https://www.npr.org/2022/09/06/1121322520/a-black-protester-...

Americans are constantly learning that unfortunately you have to fight for your rights. The First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Ninth have been eroded to various degrees in direct violation to the Constitution, but that doesn't mean that they aren't still rights.
Post reply on HN