I’m a little bit sad that so many on this forum seem not to have the neighbourhood integration that is such a feature of my life. In our village we love getting together to celebrate birthdays, festivals, whatever.
That's a reflection of the type of community you live in, but there are others that are no less integrated, just operate differently. I'm living within a farming community here, although I'm not a farmer. The way that job works means that opportunities for getting together and having a jolly are different, more constrained by the relentless time pressure of the job and we all live a long way apart - more than a mile between houses typically. I've lived in a small village where everyone was on top of each other and that had an entirely different 'feel' - much more what you would recognise. But there is at least as strong a community here. We all know each other's names, families (including the members who don't live locally), dogs, sheep, cattle, horses, cars, tractors and back story - who gets on with who, who doesn't. Who to call when a truck gets stuck in a ditch, or a trailer bursts a tyre, or a dog gets lost, or a horse is injured.
We do socialise, but in the winter mainly and after dark. Bank holidays are meaningless so no one could find the time to organise a get together when everyone is busy - lambing time would have been worse but haying isn't much less frantic.
Gardening on the edge of Exmoor, in Devon
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
For those who would prefer a Republic, look at what we might have had as Presidents! President Boris or President Blair. The thought of either makes me shudder.
For those who would prefer a Republic, look at what we might have had as Presidents! President Boris or President Blair. The thought of either makes me shudder.
but at least we could get rid of a President. The Royal Family are NOT removable
I think the word for me is ambivalent rather than indifferent. As chair of the local trade association I have to be part of the organising committee (totally fraught - so much bad feeling between various group representatives) but I would rather not have anything to do with any of it and simply spend time in the garden. I admire the Queen and will be terribly sad when she dies. She has been there for all of our lives and that will leave a hole. But I can't see anyone getting rid of the monarchy any time soon - it feels as if the country is just waiting for William to become king - the perfect little royal family. I won't be here to see it I'm sure. Can't think of how a presidency would work here. Who? The royal family serves as a focal point for the country without having any power (although they may have influence) whilst the actual business of running the country is done by our elected representatives. That's as it should be I think. A president would certainly want to have power over parliament and that would be wrong. (This is assuming we can be trusted to elect people who can actually govern properly in the future).
I said I wouldn't give this too much thought but you've got me going now.
The Queen has no government function other than decorative. If she wasn't there, we wouldn't have to replace her with something else. I suspect Charles would have been a much happier person as a wealthy land owner without the prospect of having to be king hanging over him for his whole life. I am sure the Queen would have lived a much more contented life as a horsewoman with a big house instead of having to keep turning up even on her worst days - all of us expecting to share in her misery - can you imagine? It's a horrible existence that we impose on that family and for what purpose? So we can have a street party every few years and so the community centre gets a coat of paint now and then. Can we not think of a way to do this that doesn't require us to imprison perfectly ordinary people in a gilded cage? How cruel we are.
They are walking anachronisms - the only purpose to their lives is to produce children - it's medieval. And they are so conditioned to it that they cannot see any possibility of another way to be. Even Harry seems unable to actually go away and live the normal life of a multi-millionaire. So much he could do with his life and yet he's apparently unable to see it so he keeps hanging about and issuing press statements, as if his personal relations with his brother were some sort of national competition. It's like pointing at race horses and saying 'they must love it because they keep running even without a jockey'. They have been trained from birth to run, so they run. Stopping and eating the hedge doesn't occur to them. It's terribly sad and basically pointless.
I wish the Queen well, as I do any lady of her age. I just don't see her as 'special' - many people of her generation did incredible things. Harry Billinge, Captain Sir Tom to name two very recently notable examples. I wish she was allowed to just go and be with her horses and stop, but it's not in the Rules so she is still as trapped as she was when her father died, or her uncle abdicated - and there's a case in point. What a mess we have made of their lives.
Gardening on the edge of Exmoor, in Devon
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
If I may I would like to offer a counter perspective to raisingirl. I agree that the Queen has no government function (other than offering wisdom based on eight decades of experience in her weekly consultations with the PM) but she does have a broader state function as figurehead of the nation. The monarch is the identifiable representative of us and I do not accept “if she wasn’t there, we wouldn’t have to replace her.”
At times of national grief or celebration we look to the head of state to vocalise our mourning or our joy. As Bagehot said, “the nation is divided into parties, but the Crown is of no party.” (The English Constitution, 1867). At times of crisis she speaks for all of us; opinion polls over the past several decades have consistently shown support for the Monarchy at around 70 - 80%. No politician, and an elected president is highly likely to come from such stock, is ever likely to garner such support.
Additionally, and the Queen herself is the personification of service, the monarchy recognises those who give public service. A visit from a member of the royal family to a charity, church, temple, school, hospital … whatever leaves personnel feeling a little bit more satisfied with what they have done. As patrons of hundreds of charities and voluntary organisations the monarchy nurture voluntary action and civil society.
If I had the privilege of being awarded an honour I would have great pride if it was given to me by the Queen or Prince Charles. Getting it from the head of Rutland County Council at the Oakham council offices would seem like small beer. In fact both my wife and I have had recognition of contributions to public life in the form of invitations to Buckingham Palace garden parties. There were two memorable days; it was so heartening to have tangible recognition.
I am totally in favour of a slimmed down monarchy; less fawning deference, fewer privileges, greater openness … I am sure it is heading in this direction to reflect modern times. I do not accept that we can function without a head of state and, on balance, I prefer a monarchy with hundreds of years of tradition and, through that, a sense of continuity and stability rather than having an elected head of state whose past (political?) life might create a baggage of inherited distrust.
Separately, and controversially, I do not see Sir Tom as doing something “incredible”. Hats off to him for the very extended walk around his garden at the age of 99 but, in itself, it was not that exceptional. Had it have happened 30 years ago he would probably have raised £300. The credit for “incredible” goes not to Sir Tom but to Facebook because it was the power of social media that raised £300 to £30,000,000. Harry Billinge I’ll accept was incredible as were the 160,000 others who landed on the Normandy beaches alongside him.
Posts
We do socialise, but in the winter mainly and after dark. Bank holidays are meaningless so no one could find the time to organise a get together when everyone is busy - lambing time would have been worse but haying isn't much less frantic.
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
The Royal Family are NOT removable
Can't think of how a presidency would work here. Who? The royal family serves as a focal point for the country without having any power (although they may have influence) whilst the actual business of running the country is done by our elected representatives. That's as it should be I think. A president would certainly want to have power over parliament and that would be wrong. (This is assuming we can be trusted to elect people who can actually govern properly in the future).
The Queen has no government function other than decorative. If she wasn't there, we wouldn't have to replace her with something else. I suspect Charles would have been a much happier person as a wealthy land owner without the prospect of having to be king hanging over him for his whole life. I am sure the Queen would have lived a much more contented life as a horsewoman with a big house instead of having to keep turning up even on her worst days - all of us expecting to share in her misery - can you imagine? It's a horrible existence that we impose on that family and for what purpose? So we can have a street party every few years and so the community centre gets a coat of paint now and then. Can we not think of a way to do this that doesn't require us to imprison perfectly ordinary people in a gilded cage? How cruel we are.
They are walking anachronisms - the only purpose to their lives is to produce children - it's medieval. And they are so conditioned to it that they cannot see any possibility of another way to be. Even Harry seems unable to actually go away and live the normal life of a multi-millionaire. So much he could do with his life and yet he's apparently unable to see it so he keeps hanging about and issuing press statements, as if his personal relations with his brother were some sort of national competition. It's like pointing at race horses and saying 'they must love it because they keep running even without a jockey'. They have been trained from birth to run, so they run. Stopping and eating the hedge doesn't occur to them. It's terribly sad and basically pointless.
I wish the Queen well, as I do any lady of her age. I just don't see her as 'special' - many people of her generation did incredible things. Harry Billinge, Captain Sir Tom to name two very recently notable examples. I wish she was allowed to just go and be with her horses and stop, but it's not in the Rules so she is still as trapped as she was when her father died, or her uncle abdicated - and there's a case in point. What a mess we have made of their lives.
“It's still magic even if you know how it's done.”
If I may I would like to offer a counter perspective to raisingirl. I agree that the Queen has no government function (other than offering wisdom based on eight decades of experience in her weekly consultations with the PM) but she does have a broader state function as figurehead of the nation. The monarch is the identifiable representative of us and I do not accept “if she wasn’t there, we wouldn’t have to replace her.”
At times of national grief or celebration we look to the head of state to vocalise our mourning or our joy. As Bagehot said, “the nation is divided into parties, but the Crown is of no party.” (The English Constitution, 1867). At times of crisis she speaks for all of us; opinion polls over the past several decades have consistently shown support for the Monarchy at around 70 - 80%. No politician, and an elected president is highly likely to come from such stock, is ever likely to garner such support.
Additionally, and the Queen herself is the personification of service, the monarchy recognises those who give public service. A visit from a member of the royal family to a charity, church, temple, school, hospital … whatever leaves personnel feeling a little bit more satisfied with what they have done. As patrons of hundreds of charities and voluntary organisations the monarchy nurture voluntary action and civil society.
If I had the privilege of being awarded an honour I would have great pride if it was given to me by the Queen or Prince Charles. Getting it from the head of Rutland County Council at the Oakham council offices would seem like small beer. In fact both my wife and I have had recognition of contributions to public life in the form of invitations to Buckingham Palace garden parties. There were two memorable days; it was so heartening to have tangible recognition.
I am totally in favour of a slimmed down monarchy; less fawning deference, fewer privileges, greater openness … I am sure it is heading in this direction to reflect modern times. I do not accept that we can function without a head of state and, on balance, I prefer a monarchy with hundreds of years of tradition and, through that, a sense of continuity and stability rather than having an elected head of state whose past (political?) life might create a baggage of inherited distrust.
Separately, and controversially, I do not see Sir Tom as doing something “incredible”. Hats off to him for the very extended walk around his garden at the age of 99 but, in itself, it was not that exceptional. Had it have happened 30 years ago he would probably have raised £300. The credit for “incredible” goes not to Sir Tom but to Facebook because it was the power of social media that raised £300 to £30,000,000. Harry Billinge I’ll accept was incredible as were the 160,000 others who landed on the Normandy beaches alongside him.