Live data from Hacker News

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

text.npr.org

641–650 of 693 posts

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

#641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another thing I don't understand. This time online: People who read comments and make-up shit the post didn't actually say. At all. I was expressing a general idea; one that was not at all addressed at the OP. Just a thought, inspired by reading a comment. I even went out of my way to clarify this much with: "I am not saying this in a spirit of confrontation or even criticism at all."

If the point of your comment wasn't about people who criticize their own country, then what was it about? It's not very clear.

> If the point of your comment wasn't about people who criticize their own country, then what was it about?

It was about that and a lot more if anyone bothered to engage with me rather than the opposite. There's much depth in the concept. I'll discuss this at the end of this comment.

To address @opportune's post specifically:

> people who argue with others preferences on the internet

I was not arguing with anyone. That was made abundantly clear.

It was not an attack aimed at the OP.

It was not critical of the OP.

In fact, the example I give is:

"I don't understand people who live in the US, hate the US and don't move elsewhere."

The OP is in the UK. I don't even suggest the OP should move out of the UK, at all. Why this need to fabricate a story where one does not exist?

> I don’t understand people who read and reply to posts they hate.

Show me where I said I hated any post on this entire thread.

You can't. Because that's a fantasy.

> By your logic why do we even vote or have opinions on things when we could physically remove ourselves from them?

Another fantasy.

In fact, I very much said that: "The alternative is to seek to change it by engaging in politics".

The fact that politics is revolting (is anyone going to argue with that?) does not mean one cannot seek change through voting, at all.

> By your logic why do we even vote or have opinions on things when we could physically remove ourselves from them?

These things are completely unrelated.

I'll show you just how unrelated they are: A good friend of mine is a UK citizen who lived in the US for many decades, became a US citizen, didn't like the direction the country was on and moved his entire family to New Zealand.

He votes on every single US election, because he is a US citizen.

You can move elsewhere and still engage in voting to affect change. You can do that while enjoying a different environment.

Over the decades I have met lots of people who, for a variety of reasons, are miserable where they live. Not just in the US. Without fail, those who go-on to have a happy life are those who make the decision to change their circumstances.

For example, the aforementioned UK citizen ending-up in New Zealand after decades of living in the US. I know US citizens who did the same and moved to Costa Rica. Another family left Australia for Singapore. Ecuador for Los Angeles. Argentina for Spain. Peru for Miami. Various spots in the Middle East for the US, Europe and Latin America. I know loads of people who left California for Arizona (sometimes you don't have to go another country). Etc.

It is false to say people can't move due to financial or family links. Sure, it's hard, yet the history of immigrants tells a very different story. My parents left everything behind --parents, siblings, friends, profession, etc.-- to move to the US. They came with nothing and barely spoke the language. And yet, they managed, lived a happy life and made something of themselves. Yes, it's hard. No, it is not impossible.

Philosophically speaking, this is about an expression of freedom like not other.

This applies to jobs as well. How many people do you know who are miserable at work and never do a thing about it? I have known more than a few over the decades. They have nothing good to say about their company, and yet, endure misery for years.

Denying your contribution to a society or business is probably the most powerful expression of freedom one can possibly exercise.

If a society or company isn't serving you, why continue to contribute in any way? Go become a part of one whos values you share. The first entity loses one of the most valuable assets anyone can have; people interested in being a part of it in various ways.

My post was about freedom and the most powerful way to express it.

Not to go too far, just a couple of weeks ago I fired one of our clients. This account was worth hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to us. And yet, I had to vote with my feet. This client was miserable to work with. Nobody at the office enjoyed working with them. So, we walked. Was it hard? Of course. Impossible? Nope. Done deal. We feel 100% better about our work and will soon have a better client who will likely appreciate our contribution to their mission. And, in turn, we are going to feel great about working with them.

You (plural, not addressing anyone in particular) might want to consider the idea that a better life could exist elsewhere. There is no need to suffer through decades of grief. You are free. And, yes, this means you are free to vote with your feet. Their loss, not yours.

Don't put-up with shit you don't want to live with, at work or where you happen to live.

You don't have to.

You are free.

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

#642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What actually matters is that those breaking the constitution, be it written or not, can be held criminally liable. Can you be held criminally liable for breaking "a set of customs and principles" in the UK?

> What actually matters is that those breaking the constitution, be it written or not, can be held criminally liable. Can you be held criminally liable for breaking "a set of customs and principles" in the UK? Not exactly. If there's enforcement, it will be done by other actors in the system will cooperate to enforce those "customs and principles." There's no appealing to some higher authority for enforcement (and es…

Which other actor can stop the Crown from breaking the customs and principles if its actions are entirely lawful?

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

#643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am entertained that your complaint is about the media instead of the ridiculousness of the UK having a royal family in 2022. Personally, I like it as a humiliating reminder of the contradictions of liberalism and the ruling class.

Because you do not understand it does not mean you can call it “ridiculous”. It’s insulting to brits who have been very attached to their queen for decades (and maybe before that as well). Lots of people do not understand it, that’s ok, and you can say as much.

Calling patriotism ridiculous is insulting to Trump supporters. Doesn't mean we don't have the right to express that opinion.

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

#644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing about having a monarch as the head of state that requires so much ceremony and attention. We could stop putting the king on currency, not have official periods of mourning, relegate news about the royal to the tabloids etc. without making any changes to how the government is structured.

Realistically speaking, if it weren't the monarchs wasting tabeloid inches it would be the equally inane antics of Hollywood celebrities. It's good for the UK to have homegrown entertainment, and nice that it has a historical foundation, rather than the vapidness that is lowbrow entertainment elsewhere. Note that for the royal family, the ceremony and waste of resources is the point. The UK monarchs have generational…

> In return, they maintain the history and legacy of the UK: palaces, museums, and castles are maintained on the royal purse, but often open for tours to the public.

This perpetrates the idea that UK would stop having history & landmarks without the royal blessing. Other countries, with rich histories & tourist landmarks, survived the transition away from monarchy just fine.

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

#645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am entertained that your complaint is about the media instead of the ridiculousness of the UK having a royal family in 2022. Personally, I like it as a humiliating reminder of the contradictions of liberalism and the ruling class.

Because you do not understand it does not mean you can call it “ridiculous”. It’s insulting to brits who have been very attached to their queen for decades (and maybe before that as well). Lots of people do not understand it, that’s ok, and you can say as much.

So, Stockholm syndrome?

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

#646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a complicated question with regards to some of their property. It's not at all complicated with the Crown Estates. That is clearly public property. Otherwise Edward VIII would have kept it when he abdicated.

Edward VIII was pressured into giving up a lot of stuff he legally should have been able to keep. He wasn’t good at making decisions.

"Legally", based on laws made law by kings of previous generations. The whole point is people asking to change the laws, democratically.

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

#647

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…

Recent survey 62% of Brits support having a monarchy, 22% think we should ditch it for a republic.

Not sure what the problem is with a decidedly popular multi century tradition? I'm okay with this even if you don't like it. The British people could always vote the them out if they actually wanted to.

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

#648
post #470

I've been a bit disconcerted at the level of unmitigated adulation that's been showered on the late queen by the media. I have nothing bad to say about Elizabeth II but I too do my job every day -- without a staff of hundreds to prepare my breakfast -- and I don't think I will be sanctified the day I keel over. It's all so serious and deeply conservative you'd think we are back in the 1950. In the 1970s Monty Python…

As an American I find it a little weird that Biden ordered flags at half staff until the queen's funeral is over -- 11 days in total I think. I mean she is the queen, and she has been the queen since before most of us, and some of our parents, were born, but she isn't /our/ queen. I guess it's not that unusual though to lower the flag for a few days on the death of a foreign leader. Apparently we went 3 days for Shin…

She's still a kind of English speaking world figurehead even if there was a spot of bother with that independence kerfuffle over in the American colonies.

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

#649
post #640

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> doesn't have freedom of speech, it has freedom of expression Can you help me understand that distinction? With a pretty limited understanding of UK law, my assumption would be that freedom of speech would cover any words but maybe not the specific way they're presented, while freedom of expression would cover even if those words were expressed in less polite way.

Worth checking this out: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part... Notably: > The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the preve…

Wow, that's an awful lot of stipulations. It almost makes the preceding "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression" seem laughable.

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

#650

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say it's not okay. I say it is. Unless you have something more this is basically just a random opinion stated as if it wasn't an opinion.

Are entirely sure you think it's okay to "march a bunch of military-state personnel into multiple public spaces across the country [edit: multiple countries], under the protection of the police and with the consent of multiple international media outlets"? To be frank, it seems the onus is on you to explain your position. My explanation here and in other comments seems fairly clear: I find bald-faced elitism supporte…

You didn't explain at all why it isn't okay.
Post reply on HN