• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh Passed Away

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 21219

Guest
One of the characteristics of the Internet is that it allows one to appreciate at great length the capacity for some people to keep their mouths shut. Jim Taylor
 

Hipper

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jun 16, 2019
Messages
753
Likes
625
Location
Herts., England
Against my better judge and my promise:
1) The operative word is “essentially”.
2) Thus what is their (royalty) purpose?
3) Don’t you find it quite illogical to bestow such (privileges) to a few people who have “ essentially “ no power?
4) Don‘t they cost? A lot?
5) What have They done to be granted such honors and such privileges? Born from some “special” people?

I could ask many more questions but if their subjects think of this arrangement/device and its hereditary granting as a suitable and reasonable form of function ...

I object to the Royal Family because of their privilege. It is wrong and anachronistic in these days of supposed meritocracy and equal opportunities that one group of people - the royals - have such privilege. Yes, I know it comes with duties but that doesn't make it right.

How did the Royals get their wealth and privilege? Their ancestors directly or indirectly killed for, and stole it. It may be difficult to remove their wealth but we can remove their privileges. Would it be expedient for the UK to do that. It's a good question that should be debated (as should the place of religion in state matters when we are supposed to be a secular state).

Mention was made of a free press (and by extension, the media). The BBC, our state broadcaster for whom I have a lot of admiration, chose on Friday to offer wall to wall TV coverage of the death of Prince Phillip on some of its channels, and suspend the programmes on the one it claims to provide an alternative view, BBC Four. Perhaps Sky Arts channel would be more sensible? No, the programme I wanted to watch was replaced by one about Prince Phillip. Surely Sky Sports News would be free from this? Unbelievably no! Prince Phillip was here too. A look at the main papers on Saturday morning showed all had a full page picture of the good prince, plus supplements on the subject (of course these had been in preparation for months as concerns for the prince's health appeared). Only the Financial Times had a third of a page sized picture and the rest was devoted to financial news.

This is not an attack on the prince as a person. There was somewhere a nice picture of him and his wife which reminded us that he was also a family person like the rest of us.
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,780
Location
Oxfordshire
I object to the Royal Family because of their privilege. It is wrong and anachronistic in these days of supposed meritocracy and equal opportunities that one group of people - the royals - have such privilege. Yes, I know it comes with duties but that doesn't make it right.

How did the Royals get their wealth and privilege? Their ancestors directly or indirectly killed for, and stole it. It may be difficult to remove their wealth but we can remove their privileges. Would it be expedient for the UK to do that. It's a good question that should be debated (as should the place of religion in state matters when we are supposed to be a secular state).

Mention was made of a free press (and by extension, the media). The BBC, our state broadcaster for whom I have a lot of admiration, chose on Friday to offer wall to wall TV coverage of the death of Prince Phillip on some of its channels, and suspend the programmes on the one it claims to provide an alternative view, BBC Four. Perhaps Sky Arts channel would be more sensible? No, the programme I wanted to watch was replaced by one about Prince Phillip. Surely Sky Sports News would be free from this? Unbelievably no! Prince Phillip was here too. A look at the main papers on Saturday morning showed all had a full page picture of the good prince, plus supplements on the subject (of course these had been in preparation for months as concerns for the prince's health appeared). Only the Financial Times had a third of a page sized picture and the rest was devoted to financial news.

This is not an attack on the prince as a person. There was somewhere a nice picture of him and his wife which reminded us that he was also a family person like the rest of us.
Well inheritance isn't fair is it?
If you feel this way perhaps the way to go is 100% tax on death, on the basis you had more money, property, titles or whatever than you needed so now, on your death, everything you haven't used could go to the common good of the community since your children have done nothing to deserve any of it.

I don't see the privilege of royalty any differently than any other inheritance, and the origins of great wealth is almost always the result of exploitation of one sort or another.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,697
I object to the Royal Family because of their privilege. It is wrong and anachronistic in these days of supposed meritocracy and equal opportunities that one group of people - the royals - have such privilege. Yes, I know it comes with duties but that doesn't make it right.

How did the Royals get their wealth and privilege? Their ancestors directly or indirectly killed for, and stole it. It may be difficult to remove their wealth but we can remove their privileges. Would it be expedient for the UK to do that. It's a good question that should be debated (as should the place of religion in state matters when we are supposed to be a secular state).

Mention was made of a free press (and by extension, the media). The BBC, our state broadcaster for whom I have a lot of admiration, chose on Friday to offer wall to wall TV coverage of the death of Prince Phillip on some of its channels, and suspend the programmes on the one it claims to provide an alternative view, BBC Four. Perhaps Sky Arts channel would be more sensible? No, the programme I wanted to watch was replaced by one about Prince Phillip. Surely Sky Sports News would be free from this? Unbelievably no! Prince Phillip was here too. A look at the main papers on Saturday morning showed all had a full page picture of the good prince, plus supplements on the subject (of course these had been in preparation for months as concerns for the prince's health appeared). Only the Financial Times had a third of a page sized picture and the rest was devoted to financial news.

This is not an attack on the prince as a person. There was somewhere a nice picture of him and his wife which reminded us that he was also a family person like the rest of us.

The media have been prepping this coverage for at least 25 years. You're surprised that they have splurged on it? I'm fairly sure you can survive with on demand TV for a couple of days until its all done.

We will be back to Boris and Corona soon enough, don't worry.
 
D

Deleted member 21219

Guest
I don't see the privilege of royalty any differently than any other inheritance, and the origins of great wealth is almost always the result of exploitation of one sort or another.

Truer words were never spoken. I'm not sure I would have inserted the word "almost", but I totally agree. Jim
 

Pluto

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 2, 2018
Messages
990
Likes
1,631
Location
Harrow, UK
The BBC, our state broadcaster for whom I have a lot of admiration, chose on Friday to offer wall to wall TV coverage of the death of Prince Phillip on some of its channels, and suspend the programmes on the one it claims to provide an alternative view
I believe you will find that the BBC is obliged (by its charter, the legal instrument by which it exists) to behave in this way on the demise of certain key public figures.
 

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
2,060
Location
U.K
To hell with those royal maggots who concocted Iran's 1979 revolution in guadeloupe conference and ruined the life of a nation. Now we have to feel pity for this hundred years old turtle pass away? Not a chance!
That’s a strange reaction, I can understand if you don’t feel like gushing about him, but the future of the human race is hardly going to be based on revelling in the suffering of others and precisely how much personal credit do you think you should receive for not being born a British aristocrat?
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,697
Interesting thread topic for this site...has the late Duke been a big fan of “objective measurements” in HiFi kit? Does he have a position on Class D v Class A/B amps? Just curious.

As long as its British its OK. Richer Sounds and Linn seem to have royal warrants. Not sure about the state of the Greek hifi industry.....
 

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
2,060
Location
U.K
OP
HiFidFan

HiFidFan

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 22, 2021
Messages
723
Likes
906
Location
U.S.A
Interesting thread topic for this site...has the late Duke been a big fan of “objective measurements” in HiFi kit? Does he have a position on Class D v Class A/B amps? Just curious.

Is it?

There are other R.I.P. threads, threads about cars, Coronavirus, cooking, gliders, etc. Yes, right here on ASR!

:eek:
 

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
2,060
Location
U.K
no one has said it yet, so i'm just gonna put it out there. old school racist. the media calls it his "gaffes", his "sense of humor". a man's man?
Straight up racist that sucker was
Simple and plain
Mother f- him and John Wayne

I do recall the group you are citing taking a jolly long time to expel a key member for rabid anti semitism and affiliating with the Nation of Islam which is documented by the Southern Poverty Law Center of being a black supremacist hate group. Just sayin’.
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,697
I do recall the group you are citing taking a jolly long time to expel a key member for rabid anti semitism and affiliating with the Nation of Islam which is documented by the Southern Poverty Law Center of being a black supremacist hate group. Just sayin’.

OP must have been edited. What group was cited?
 

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
2,060
Location
U.K
The point was, Great Britain is a second class power and the population likes to remember the ‘old times’ of when they rules the waves. The Royal family, with all that pomp and circumstance helps put people in that frame of mind.

That’s fatuous remark. Name me a country that doesn’t have a contrived sense of it’s own history and national identity.
 

Hipper

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jun 16, 2019
Messages
753
Likes
625
Location
Herts., England
Well inheritance isn't fair is it?
If you feel this way perhaps the way to go is 100% tax on death, on the basis you had more money, property, titles or whatever than you needed so now, on your death, everything you haven't used could go to the common good of the community since your children have done nothing to deserve any of it.

I don't see the privilege of royalty any differently than any other inheritance, and the origins of great wealth is almost always the result of exploitation of one sort or another.

You neatly miss the point. There is property (wealth) and I have agreed that taking it would be morally difficult.

Privilege of royalty on the other hand, is something else. Surely you can see that? Royalty is not something anyone can aspire to (unless you try to marry it perhaps). It arose in the distant past, as I said before, through brute force and is still embedded in our political system for no other reason then it was there before. Why should certain individuals have these privileges?
 

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
2,060
Location
U.K
OP must have been edited. What group was cited?
The poster was quoting Public Enemy ‘Don’t being the hype’. A good tune released in the late 80’s. I could get into their previous album and its position on women but I won’t. I could point out that there’s a certain section of society to whom good moral conduct means paying attention to the perceived flaws of others whilst ignoring the only bit that they can influence which is within the 1m sq on which they stand.
 

Phorize

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1,533
Likes
2,060
Location
U.K
You neatly miss the point. There is property (wealth) and I have agreed that taking it would be morally difficult.

Privilege of royalty on the other hand, is something else. Surely you can see that? Royalty is not something anyone can aspire to (unless you try to marry it perhaps). It arose in the distant past, as I said before, through brute force and is still embedded in our political system for no other reason then it was there before. Why should certain individuals have these privileges?

I’m British citizen and would prefer not to have a monarchy. However, have you considered how much of your own situation you can truly attribute to anything other than blind luck?
 

Jimbob54

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
11,066
Likes
14,697
You neatly miss the point. There is property (wealth) and I have agreed that taking it would be morally difficult.

Privilege of royalty on the other hand, is something else. Surely you can see that? Royalty is not something anyone can aspire to (unless you try to marry it perhaps). It arose in the distant past, as I said before, through brute force and is still embedded in our political system for no other reason then it was there before. Why should certain individuals have these privileges?

I'd rather be in a position where we argue about the status of the monarchy and its privilege than in a state where a secondary level education is the exception and an indication of status. I think everyone has bigger fish to fry than the monarchy at the minute. In a couple of generations I doubt we will be having this discussion anyway.
 

Hipper

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Jun 16, 2019
Messages
753
Likes
625
Location
Herts., England
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom