Denmark has a new King, HRH King Frederik The 10th

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Venkuish1

Well, you find it difficult to comprehend?

Read my posts and give it a try.

I did read the posts in the thread but still the other poster is right because monarchy and democracy are incompatible.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: RussianTroll
Is this really democracy???

I for once find it difficult to comprehend how monarchy and democracy go together. They are incompatible.

I mean it’s a fine line, I can totally see a whole lot of scenarios where it could totally fall apart.

But look at Canada, Australia and the UK… it just seems to work far better than having a supreme leader (aka a president).

They technically could dictate decisions that could change our way of living. But they know (fear) the people would shut them down if they dared. So they just play the game and remain a symbolic head of state, for the most part.

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: RussianTroll
Is this really democracy???

I for once find it difficult to comprehend how monarchy and democracy go together. They are incompatible.

I mean it’s a fine line, I can totally see a whole lot of scenarios where it could totally fall apart.

But look at Canada, Australia and the UK… it just seems to work far better than having a supreme leader (aka a president).

They technically could dictate decisions that could change our way of living. But they know (fear) the people would shut them down if they dared. So they just play the game and remain a symbolic head of state, for the most part.

Do yo think it works in these countries?
But on the other hand Canada and Australia want to cut all ties with England.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: RussianTroll
Is this really democracy???

I for once find it difficult to comprehend how monarchy and democracy go together. They are incompatible.

I mean it’s a fine line, I can totally see a whole lot of scenarios where it could totally fall apart.

But look at Canada, Australia and the UK… it just seems to work far better than having a supreme leader (aka a president).

They technically could dictate decisions that could change our way of living. But they know (fear) the people would shut them down if they dared. So they just play the game and remain a symbolic head of state, for the most part.

Do yo think it works in these countries?
But on the other hand Canada and Australia want to cut all ties with England.

Do they really though?

I know there was a referendum back in 1999 in Australia, I would have voted yes, but I was too young. Regardless it was a clear ‘no’ outcome.

I think it all came down to a thought process of, if it ain’t broke then why fix it.

It’s a good argument too, I mean we get rid of the monarchy and change our whole form of government… who exactly are we gonna let decide how the new form of government works?

Like I said, I’d personally vote yes to become a republic if another referendum was cast today, but it’d just be out of purer boredom to see what happens, tbh.

It’d be a slippery slope. Especially when you consider politicians would be in charge of deciding how our new form of government would operate… so why try to fix something that ain’t broke?

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: RussianTroll
Is this really democracy???

I for once find it difficult to comprehend how monarchy and democracy go together. They are incompatible.

I mean it’s a fine line, I can totally see a whole lot of scenarios where it could totally fall apart.

But look at Canada, Australia and the UK… it just seems to work far better than having a supreme leader (aka a president).

They technically could dictate decisions that could change our way of living. But they know (fear) the people would shut them down if they dared. So they just play the game and remain a symbolic head of state, for the most part.

Do yo think it works in these countries?
But on the other hand Canada and Australia want to cut all ties with England.

Do they really though?

I know there was a referendum back in 1999 in Australia, I would have voted yes, but I was too young. Regardless it was a clear ‘no’ outcome.

I think it all came down to a thought process of, if it ain’t broke then why fix it.

It’s a good argument too, I mean we get rid of the monarchy and change our whole form of government… who exactly are we gonna let decide how the new form of government works?

Like I said, I’d personally vote yes to become a republic if another referendum was cast today, but it’d just be out of purer boredom to see what happens, tbh.

It’d be a slippery slope. Especially when you consider politicians would be in charge of deciding how our new form of government would operate… so why try to fix something that ain’t broke?

Republic it's the way.
You can't have both of the two worlds and monarchy it's an outdated system based on the rule of the very few. England keeps this outdated system as a source of income to the country. It's a good reminder imo how stupid people are who believe in kings and queens.

a reply to: Venkuish1

Congrats on insulting UK people.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Venkuish1

Congrats on insulting UK people.

Where is the he insult?

a reply to: Venkuish1

"It's a good reminder imo how stupid people are who believe in kings and queens."

Right there.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Venkuish1

"It's a good reminder imo how stupid people are who believe in kings and queens."

Right there.

That is not an insult.

a reply to: Venkuish1

Calling folk "stupid" is not an insult?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Venkuish1

Calling folk "stupid" is not an insult?

No

......