Poll: Do you guys think it's okay for people to blame Queen for the British Empire's past?

Be advised that this is a public poll: other users can see the choice(s) you selected.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
  1. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    Because it's no more relevant than saying all humans are related which is true.
    Of course its relevant. At what point do you stop being related to someone in your opinion?

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by qwerty123456 View Post
    Of course its relevant. At what point do you stop being related to someone in your opinion?
    A few generations in my opinion, if we are going by that thinking we are all related to the Queen. Let's also be frank the royal family is not going to call on you because you have .0008% royal blood.
    Last edited by Draco-Onis; 2022-09-15 at 10:04 PM.

  3. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    A few generations in my opinion, if we are going by that thinking we are all related to the Queen. Let's also be frank the royal family is not going to call on you because you have .0008% royal blood.
    It's not about being called on. Some people in this thread think someone should be blamed for the past actions of their ancestors just because that particular person got more out of their lineage than someone else. My point was everyone has lots of dark shit possibly even worse than some king or some shit in their family trees should they be held accountable as well? Are those who in your eyes are just a few generations from the bad egg but didn't get the fame also responsible for their ancestors fuckups?

  4. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by qwerty123456 View Post
    It's not about being called on. Some people in this thread think someone should be blamed for the past actions of their ancestors just because that particular person got more out of their lineage than someone else. My point was everyone has lots of dark shit possibly even worse than some king or some shit in their family trees should they be held accountable as well? Are those who in your eyes are just a few generations from the bad egg but didn't get the fame also responsible for their ancestors fuckups?
    The queen holds a position of power they do not so I know what you are trying to say but it makes no sense.

  5. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    The queen holds a position of power they do not so I know what you are trying to say but it makes no sense.
    So what you are saying is that if a grandkid of the Bolsheviks came into power they should be blamed for their grandparents taking part in the revolution that killed the Russian royal family and any other grandkids that have shit lives shouldn't be blamed?


    And what does that have to do with her ancestors problems? You can blame her for shit she did but not them. You gonna blame a principal for having a pedo great great grandpa? That too is a position of power and yet it sounds absolutely stupid to blame them for some shit an ancestor did a 100 years ago. And you especially shouldn't be trying to blame someone for their ancestors past when you yourself have fucked up ancestors too. Also how many King/Queens were advised by others? Do you hunt down the descendants of some skeezing vizier that convinced a ruler to wipe out a village claiming they were rising against them when in reality he just wanted more land or some shit?

    What your saying is its ok to scapegoat someone as long as it fits within your specific criteria of someone having a position of power and being within a few generations.
    Last edited by qwerty123456; 2022-09-16 at 05:42 AM.

  6. #86
    Quote Originally Posted by qwerty123456 View Post
    No literally every person alive has several ancestors that has raped/killed/pillaged/cheated/what ever horrible thing their way to "the top". There are also millions of people related to the British Royals. Just because she got more out of her inheritance over farmer Bob doesn't make her responsible for the actions of their ancestors.
    So inherit the spoils but none of the sins.

  7. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by qwerty123456 View Post
    So what you are saying is that if a grandkid of the Bolsheviks came into power they should be blamed for their grandparents taking part in the revolution that killed the Russian royal family and any other grandkids that have shit lives shouldn't be blamed?


    And what does that have to do with her ancestors problems? You can blame her for shit she did but not them. You gonna blame a principal for having a pedo great great grandpa? That too is a position of power and yet it sounds absolutely stupid to blame them for some shit an ancestor did a 100 years ago. And you especially shouldn't be trying to blame someone for their ancestors past when you yourself have fucked up ancestors too. Also how many King/Queens were advised by others? Do you hunt down the descendants of some skeezing vizier that convinced a ruler to wipe out a village claiming they were rising against them when in reality he just wanted more land or some shit?

    What your saying is its ok to scapegoat someone as long as it fits within your specific criteria of someone having a position of power and being within a few generations.
    Okay let me give you an specific example the German government is still apologetic for what occurred to the Jews and is still doing investigations to make their descendants whole. Are they wrong in your book? Because my point is the queen ruled for for generations, the actions of the British empire aren't that far removed from her. She doesn't apologize, she doesn't return the stolen loot on the contrary she wears it proudly and in no way she makes gestures to make amends.

    If your grandfather rapes, kills and robs my family of all their jewelry and you go around wearing it of course you are responsible. She knows better she decided to keep quiet she decided to wear the blood of others on herself. What you are saying is there is no scenario to hold anyone responsible as long as a few generations have passed.

    We have examples of how it is done countless ones she chose not to follow it, you want her to have all of the wealth, power and no accountability.

  8. #88
    Blame? No.

    Hold responsible if she didn't do anything to make amends? Yes, certainly.

  9. #89
    lol at the linage dodging talk, everyone posting in this thread (minus freighter) is probably related to Charlemagne. So what?

    Here are some clear facts.

    The British Empire is the foundation upon which modern britian has been built.
    The British Empire did evil and violent things.
    Some of those evil and violent things took place during the Queens reign.

  10. #90
    The Insane Glorious Leader's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In my bunker leading uprisings
    Posts
    19,214
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    Okay those are negatives but what about the positives? Great Britain, led by its elites, pioneered science and the industrial revolution which is the largest source of progress to ever occur in human history... Also they were among the first peoples to develop democracy to maturity. So that trumps everything else, or at least cancels out the negatives.
    I love love the boot licking here..
    The hammer comes down:
    Quote Originally Posted by Osmeric View Post
    Normal should be reduced in difficulty. Heroic should be reduced in difficulty.
    And the tiny fraction for whom heroic raids are currently well tuned? Too bad,so sad! With the arterial bleed of subs the fastest it's ever been, the vanity development that gives you guys your own content is no longer supportable.

  11. #91
    Moderator Rozz's Avatar
    5+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    8,791
    We still have people saying the royal family is being scapegoated for representing the royal family...man..
    Moderator of the General Off-Topic, Politics, Lore, and RP Forums
    "If you have any concerns, let me know via PM. I'll do my best to assist you."

  12. #92
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,897
    Blame the person of the Queen (or now King Charles) for the historical actions? No.
    Blame those people for retaining the legacy benefits of those actions? Yes.

    However, if we're gonna apply that standard, we should be applying that standard equally. That means directly working against socioeconomic class differences that resulted from past bigotries, that means opposing capitalist exploitations, particularly (but not exclusively) of workers in developing countries with poor worker protection laws. I'm more concerned about the active harms caused by the likes of Jeff Bezos than the historical harms caused by the British Royals. Which doesn't mean I'm suggesting it be ignored, it means we need to be a little more aware of the context of what's still actively happening in the actual world. Would it be nice to redress those historical wrongs? Absolutely. But ending current exploitation should be more important. Without correcting the ongoing harms, redress doesn't end up actually helping for very long.


  13. #93
    Yes, and I think it should be clear that monarchs can be blamed (or credited) for the past of their countries and their families. To be a monarch is to take on and embody the personification of the state, for all the good and bad that this means. Individuals that don't wish to embody their nations in such a fashion should abdicate the throne. Nations that don't wish for individuals to be blamed in such a fashion should abolish their monarchies altogether. If you want to wear a crown and have effectively infinite money and speak as the figurehead for nation, you get to own the sins of your nation's past as well.

  14. #94
    The Unstoppable Force PC2's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    California
    Posts
    21,877
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    Yes, and I think it should be clear that monarchs can be blamed (or credited) for the past of their countries and their families.
    The current monarch should only be blamed personally for what (s)he has done wrong on a personal or professional level. King Charles III is not guilty of the bad stuff done by his ancestors unless he is still doing the same bad stuff and has not learned from their mistakes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    To be a monarch is to take on and embody the personification of the state, for all the good and bad that this means.
    That's just symbolic in modern European times though so I'd describe the monarch of GB as being closer to a fun cultural mascot rather than the embodiment of the state. As long as a monarch doesn't exert any significant amount of political influence and as long as they suppress their political biases then it doesn't really make sense to personally blame them for state issues anymore.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spectral View Post
    Nations that don't wish for individuals to be blamed in such a fashion should abolish their monarchies altogether.
    Nah British people should laugh off the haters who are using Queen Elizabeth and now King Charles III as scapegoats. The haters are just jealous that these folks were among the first peoples to succeed in creating a decent model of the world, which basically gave them god-like abilities to navigate the oceans and continents, and to transform the modern world in the last ~500 years.
    abolish their monarchies altogether.
    Also maybe that part is ultimately the correct result in the long-term, or maybe monarchies(in liberal democracies) can just stick around forever and don't need to be abolished. But regardless of what the best result is it should not be achieved in a coercive manner.
    Quote Originally Posted by Glorious Leader View Post
    I love love the boot licking here..
    Great me too, yummy. When I see lefty progressives attacking someone I usually end up finding that the person they're attacking is more reasonable than their critics.
    Last edited by PC2; 2022-09-18 at 02:36 PM.

  15. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by PC2 View Post
    The current monarch should only be blamed personally for what (s)he has done wrong on a personal or professional level. King Charles III is not guilty of the bad stuff done by his ancestors unless he is still doing the same bad stuff and has not learned from their mistakes.


    That's just symbolic in modern European times though so I'd describe the monarch of GB as being closer to a fun cultural mascot rather than the embodiment of the state. As long as a monarch doesn't exert any significant amount of political influence and as long as they suppress their political biases then it doesn't really make sense to personally blame them for state issues anymore.


    Nah British people should laugh off the haters who are using Queen Elizabeth and now King Charles III as scapegoats. The haters are just jealous that these folks were among the first peoples to succeed in creating a decent model of the world, which basically gave them god-like abilities to navigate the oceans and continents, and to transform the modern world in the last ~500 years.


    Also maybe that part is ultimately the correct result in the long-term, or maybe monarchies(in liberal democracies) can just stick around forever and don't need to be abolished. But regardless of what the best result is it should not be achieved in a coercive manner.


    Great me too, yummy. When I see lefty progressives attacking someone I usually end up finding that the person they're attacking is more reasonable than their critics.
    If I might comment, as I have mentioned, I don't either love or hate the British monarchy, I think Diana was their best hope of renewing or reforming their system somehow, but of course she was killed (lots of conspiracy theories there, some say that there were people who disliked her as a symbol of potential change in British society).

    I do think it's interesting how so many Americans seemed to intensely dislike the British monarchy though, lots of Americans on social media were celebrating her death a long time afterwards because of colonialism or something. I can only imagine what most ordinary British people thought as they mourned her death, and lots of other people in the USA happily celebrated; even Labour Party members generally have some respect for the Queen as part of British tradition at least. Is this really the general attitude towards the British these days? At my college, most people didn't even mention the Royal Family, I don't think I heard any of my fellow students mention Queen Elizabeth even once.

    I think if the British monarchy for example, released a statement that they heard their concerns, and created some kind of public trust fund or scholarship for people from disadvantaged backgrounds to benefit from, it might do a long way of indicating that they do take their complaints seriously and will try to do better.
    Last edited by OwenBurton; 2022-10-13 at 12:15 AM.
    "You see, there is balance in all things. Wisdom etched in our very fur: Black and white. Darkness and light. When the last emperor hid our land from the rest of the world, he also preserved...our ancient enemy, the mantid. So it is with your Alliance and your Horde. They are not strong despite one another; they are strong BECAUSE of one another. You mistake your greatest strength for weakness. Do you see this?"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •