Celebrating the royal wedding - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talking about and organise marches, demonstrations, writing to your local Member of Parliament etc.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

User avatar
By Fasces
#13676405
What's nationalism got to do with it, Guillotine? We're republicans too! Love for our people, not some idiot with a crown!
User avatar
By sans-culotte
#13677516
The death of the Royal Wedding street party

The Royal Wedding may signal the end of the road for street parties in Britain, as a study finds only one in three councils has received applications to host a bash to celebrate the nuptials.

Freedom of Information responses were obtained from over 100 local authorities across the UK last month by Republic, the campaign group for an elected head of state.

According to the study, three quarters of all local authorities have received five or less applications from communities planning a traditional-style party on 29 April.

The average number of street party applications for each authority was 4.6 while Kent County Council had the highest number recorded with 54.

Altogether, councils across Britain have reported a modest 4,000 applications for road closures on 29 April.

There appears to be somewhat of a divide between north and south, with fewer applications being submitted to northern councils.

Twelve of the northern councils have not registered to host a party at all while other areas such as Blackpool, Bolton and Leicester have only made one application. Comparatively, Bristol has clocked up 53 applications.

There have been just 110 or so approved in the whole of Wales. Cardiff is leading the pack with 35 applications.

Campaign manager for Republic, Graham Smith, said the results came as no surprise.

“There is no longer a great deal of interest in the Royal Family. We did a poll as well and 90 per cent of people couldn’t care less. And that reflects that pattern,” Mr Smith said.

“We had a discussion 10 years ago about the Grand Jubilee and people going on about street parties and then wondering why there weren’t so many. They keep kidding themselves that there are going to be more street parties than there are, but it’s on the decline.

“People have basically been told that they’ve got the day off, and most people will say ‘oh well thanks for the day off I’m going to do something else’. They’re not going to go and organise a street party to celebrate the wedding.”

In addition to this seeming lack of interest, citizens have also reportedly been put off by council demands for hundreds of pounds in public liability insurance.

Those who want to stage traditional street parties would need to pay for 'traffic management companies' due to legislation introduced by Labour seven years ago that prevents locals from blocking through roads using home-made signs.

Hardly surprising then that there are far fewer street parties planned for 29 April than there were for the wedding of the Prince of Wales and Lady Diana Spencer in 1981 – given that residents can no longer make a last-minute decision to close off their road.

Despite people’s fatigue with street bashes and the Royal Wedding in general, it’s been all hands on deck from the government trying to drum up enthusiasm for street parties, even Prime Minister David Cameron has been doing his part.

Possibly sick of running a political party he thought he would try his hand at putting on a royal one by applying for a licence to hold a street party on Downing Street.

It will be the third event he and wife Samantha will attend on the day, as the pair have also been invited to witness the royal nuptials at Westminster Abbey and then to a lunchtime Buckingham Palace reception.

But the Camerons are unlikely to be hit with the same barrage of red tape and costs that ordinary citizens face if they want to celebrate the big day of Prince William and Kate Middleton.

Along with the decrease in applications for road closures, travel agents have seen a boom in overseas travel plans for the long weekend, implying many citizens just want to get away from the fuss.

http://uk.royalwedding.yahoo.com/blogs/ ... party-3599

Well, seems like the people have already decided to stick it up to the royals.
User avatar
By Maxim Litvinov
#13677519
Does it? Do Britons really still do street parties?

Seems more likely that Britons are sticking it up the street party, rather than the wedding.
By Thompson_NCL
#13681610
What Maxim said.

It has nothing to do with a lack of support for the monarchy, and everything to do with the changes to our modern culture.
User avatar
By Otebo
#13681769
David Cameron wrote:We've done our bit by ripping up red tape and many councils have done the same.

To those councils that are asking.....for licences, insurance and other bureaucracy my message is clear:

Don't interfere, don't get in the way and don't make problems where there are none. Let people get on and have fun.

And my message to everyone who wants to have a street party is: I'm having one and I want you to go ahead and have one too.


All well and good. Though only if you are a royalist apparently.

Camden Council has been accused of discrimination on the grounds of political belief after seeking to ban a republican street party, despite previous confirmation that the event could go ahead. The campaign group Republic, who have organised the party, have vowed to fight the decision.

Camden initially gave the go ahead in March for Earlham Street in Covent Garden to be the site of Republic's party. But with just three weeks to go the Council has refused to provide a temporary traffic order to close Earlham Street, effectively banning the event altogether.
User avatar
By SomeRandom
#13683375
Yeah, this is the proleterian's event after all, marked on the calandars and everything. :lol:

Except the geographic disparity seems to bring that assumption into question - why are the Home Counties the most enarmoured, when it's the wealthiest area in the UK? Why are Northern, Welsh and Scottish decidedly cooler - the proletarian hotspots, as it were?

Oh that's right, because this is primarily a middle-class obsession, and it fucking shows when we're told how a Royal wedding will brighten the nation at the exact same time as mass redundancies, withdrawal of government support, hiked (regressive) taxation, 'the biggest squeeze in living standards in 90 years' and efforts to chip away at what little remains of the welfare state. But not to worry, we can all look forward to that big day when two privileged people get married(!)

Oh and did the author just try and suggest Labour are mainly republicans?! :lol: Yeah - the same the way they're socialists, no doubt.
User avatar
By Section Leader
#13683463
My grandmother is looking forward to the royal wedding, much to my embarrassment. I'm hoping this will be the Last Hurrah for the monarchy and that support will completely collapse upon the death of the Queen. If I had a car I'd probably turn up for the Republican Convention.
User avatar
By Old Brit
#13683787
For the love of god cant you republicans give it a break for one minute. If you dont approve of the monarchy then dont watch the wedding, but how does it serve your purpose or anyone elses purpose by trying to ruin the marriage ceremony of two people. This isnt even a state occassion technically and the taxpayer isnt paying for it.

And before any revolutionaries get quoting the security costs at me just think of how much money has been wasted policing your various protests over the past few months, the only difference is this is the name of a much happier occassion and is something people can celebrate if they want to.

Britain is a monarchy, live with it.
User avatar
By Section Leader
#13683818
Old Brit wrote:For the love of god cant you republicans give it a break for one minute. If you dont approve of the monarchy then dont watch the wedding, but how does it serve your purpose or anyone elses purpose by trying to ruin the marriage ceremony of two people. This isnt even a state occassion technically and the taxpayer isnt paying for it.

If it's supposed to be a private non-state occasion then why will it be the biggest wedding in the land and why will it be on all the TV channels?

And before any revolutionaries get quoting the security costs at me just think of how much money has been wasted policing your various protests over the past few months, the only difference is this is the name of a much happier occassion and is something people can celebrate if they want to.

'Our protests'? They were anarchist protests and not indicative of the opinion of most people who oppose the monarchy. Anarchists hate pretty much everyone, they would even attempt to oppose my ideal state.

Britain is a monarchy, live with it.

No, we won't.
User avatar
By Stormsmith
#13683853
I don't see why republicans feel the need to spoil this couple's day. Republicans would be the first to whinge if someone acted as ungraciously to them on their wedding day. Are republicans not afraid to be regarded as rather mean-spirited and vulgar? Do they worry that might make the people in the centre of the road a little uncomfortable being lumped in with them? Wouldnt it be better to make a more tasteful case on another day?

Also, not going to a street party is not the same as not supporting the monarchy. Street parties, tail-gate parties, are a fashion.

Section Leader wrote:If it's supposed to be a private non-state occasion then why will it be the biggest wedding in the land and why will it be on all the TV channels?

For the simple reason that news providers are capitalistic endevours. The more popular a subject, the more the network can charge for advertising space, or in the case of papers and ournals, the more pages of advertising can sold. The royals are money-makers, and I expect newspapers etc will promote Kate as a sort of Diana: the next generation. People all over the world take an interest in the British monarchy.
User avatar
By Cartertonian
#13684095
Stormsmith wrote:Are republicans not afraid to be regarded as rather mean-spirited and vulgar?

On the contrary, Stormsmith, rabble-rousing, malcontent numbnuts pride themselves on it... :roll:

Section Leader wrote:No, we won't.

I rather think you will. :|
User avatar
By Old Brit
#13684126
Section Leader wrote:If it's supposed to be a private non-state occasion then why will it be the biggest wedding in the land and why will it be on all the TV channels?


Only the matters of the monarch, her spouse and her heir are matters of state. Also none of it is being paid for by the state which clears it from being a state occassion, only the policing costs are which would have to be paid in the case of any large event, state or otherwise.

Section Leader wrote:Our protests'? They were anarchist protests and not indicative of the opinion of most people who oppose the monarchy. Anarchists hate pretty much everyone, they would even attempt to oppose my ideal state.


It was an example, I used this because as a rule the people that went on recent protests tend to be from the republican mould. Also I wasnt simply refering to the anarchist elements, the fact that anyone protested meant the protests had to be policed in case they turned violent. You could argue that this isnt the protesters fault, equally you could argue that its not the royal couples fault that the thousands of people who want to be at the wedding need to be kept safe.

Section Leader wrote:No, we won't.


You will, being British requires you to be a subject of her majesty. If you dont like being under a monarch move to a country which is a republic, but you stop being British once you do.
User avatar
By ingliz
#13684219
only the policing costs

... at an estimated £50 - 80 million.
By Thompson_NCL
#13684234
... at an estimated £50-80 million


But

The Royal Family generated £500m for the UK economy last year, with one in every eight of the 30m tourists that descend on the UK spending money on royal attractions.


And in the next two years we have the Royal Wedding and Queens Jubilee. I think we can safely assume that figure will double 8)
User avatar
By Old Brit
#13684257
Let us not forget the £200,000,000 a year from the Crown estates, projected to increase substantially over the next 5 years.
User avatar
By Prosthetic Conscience
#13684274
Old Brit wrote:For the love of god cant you republicans give it a break for one minute. If you dont approve of the monarchy then dont watch the wedding, but how does it serve your purpose or anyone elses purpose by trying to ruin the marriage ceremony of two people


Stormsmith wrote:I don't see why republicans feel the need to spoil this couple's day. Republicans would be the first to whinge if someone acted as ungraciously to them on their wedding day.


I think Johann Hari destroys these points quite well today:

Of course, when two people get married, it's a sweet sight. Nobody objects to that part. On the contrary: republicans are the only people who would let William Windsor and Kate Middleton have the private, personal wedding they clearly crave, instead of turning them into stressed-out, emptied-out marionettes of monarchy that are about to jerk across the stage. We object not to a wedding, but to the orgy of deference, snobbery, and worship for the hereditary principle that will take place before, during and after it.
...
There's going to be an attempt over the next fortnight to paint republicans as the Grinch, trying to ruin the "big day" for William and Kate out of a cocktail of kill-joy curmudgeonry and mean-spiritedness. The opposite is the truth.

The monarchist spin-machine, the tabloids and the tea-towel industry have created a pair of fictitious characters for us to cheer, while the real people behind them are being tormented by their supposed admirers. Think back to the 1981 royal wedding and you realise how little we know about these people we are supposed to get moist and weepy over. While millions wept at the "fairytale wedding", Diana was ramming her fingers down her throat, Charles was cursing that he didn't love her, and they both stood at the aisle raging against their situation and everyone around them, while the nation cheered.

Similarly, from beneath the spin, the evidence is pretty clear that William and Kate will be smiling at us through gritted teeth. We now know from several impeccable sources that for a long time as a young man, William raged against the monarchy and wanted no part of it. He once screamed at photographers: "Why won't you just let me be a normal person?" Alistair Campbell's diaries show that William is "consumed by a total hatred of the media", who he believes – pretty accurately – ruined his mother's life and contributed to her death.

This hasn't faded: he jibed in his most recent interview that he always aims to "outfox the media". But he knows the monarchy today is a rolling media road-show selling nothing but itself. That's why, in her last interview with the BBC's Jennie Bond, Diana said William had told her longingly that she was "very lucky to be able to give up your HRH" – her royal status. Republicans want to set this couple free to have good, happy lives in the Republic of Britain – which they would clearly take as a blessed relief.

When we republicans object to the hollow pantomime, we are not being negative or nasty. We are proposing a positive vision. Britain is full of amazing and inspiring people – so many that if we were to choose a ceremonial president, as they do in Ireland, we would be spoiled for choice. I can't think of anything more patriotic, and more deserving of a tumult of Union Jacks waving at a thousand street parties, than the belief that every child in Britain should grow up knowing that one day, if they do everything right, they could be our head of state. And I can't think of anything less patriotic than saying that the feudal frenzy of deference and backwardness we are about to witness is the best that Britain can do.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/co ... 67904.html

The whole college bubble is popping, and it's lef[…]

:roll: Unsupported claims can be ignored Meanwhil[…]

'State of panic' as Putin realises he cannot wi[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

will putin´s closest buddy Gennady Timchenko be […]