Our chance to forswear allegiance
- This topic has 79 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Lancaster Branch meeting – anyone can come – especially if you’re not a member of SPGB
“Should we get rid of the monarchy
Is it time to ditch this old-fashioned game of thrones, rooted as it is in slavery, robbery, murder, tax dodging and unsavoury sex scandals? Would an elected head of state make any difference to your life?
Join us for a talk and discussion at the Friends’ Meeting House, 2pm on Saturday 13 May.”
The case against changing to a republic making any difference can be stated in two words: one is “America”, the other is “France”.
The case against changing to a republic making any difference can be stated in two words: one is “America”, the other is “France”.
At least people in those countries have the opportunity to elect a ‘head of state’, unlike the UK. That they don’t use that limited democracy to best serve their interests can only be lamented.
To all practical purposes the head of the British capitalist state is the PM, whom the duped workers do vote for. So it’s of no consequence, as ALB rightly points out.
The U.S. is a republic, but it has more idolisers of the British royals than Britain has.You are not saying, are you, that the limited political democracy that exists in the UK and other constitutional monarchies is more limited than in the USA and France? A case could be made out for saying that it is less limited as the presidents of these two states are in effect elected kings with decision-making powers that constitutional monarchs don’t have.
Also, in some republics, the head of state is not directly elected, not in Germany or Italy for instance. I know the president of Austria is, but does that make Austria more democratic than Germany?
In any event, that is not the point. The point is that, whatever the constitutional situation, the economic situation is that capitalism exists in both republics and constitutional monarchies and that a changeover from the latter to the former would make no difference (whatsoever) to the problems generated by capitalism. It would be a completely irrelevant change and so not worth campaigning to bring about.
Likewise, the U.S. has no state church (attached here to the monarchy), yet the U.S. is riddled with Jesus mania.
To all practical purposes the head of the British capitalist state is the PM, whom the duped workers do vote for.
UK voters don’t elect a Prime Minister directly.
There also isn’t a requirement for the Prime Minister to have won a general election as a party leader before they come into office, or to stay in office.
“This week, on his fancy carriage ride, Charles will be surrounded by many preposterous objects. He’ll be holding the world’s largest diamond on the end of a stick. He’ll be wearing a hat with a ruby that Henry V wore into battle. He’ll be sitting on a chair over the Stone of Destiny, a stone English kings stole from the Scots over 700 years ago.”
🙂 🙂 🙂
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/03/king-charles-iii-coronation-canada-britain
Keeping, removing or criticizing the monarchy will not make any difference. Capitalism will continue in England extracting profits from the sweat of the working class like in any other capitalist country. The president of the USA is also a king and it has more power than the English monarchy, it is the political representative of the USA capitalist class
Yes but you love Capitalism don’t you hen?
Nope, but unlike you and your little band of bruvvers, I recognise it’s here to stay, at least for the foreseeable future, cock.
Lizzie45
Participant
Yes but you love Capitalism don’t you hen?Nope, but unlike you and your little band of bruvvers, I recognise it’s here to stay, at least for the foreseeable future, cock.
——————————————————————————————–
Here, you have shown how little you know about Anthropology, and you do know anything about Historical Materialism, all societies are temporary, there is not any sociological, political and economical eternity, they have always been replaced by a new society or a new mode of production, It was clearly indicated by Marx in the Communist Manifesto, and Engels in the Anti Duhring, by itself the working class is socialist because ti tends to socialize all means of production and the society and that is reason why the capitalist have brainwashed the minds of peoples like you by using their own ideology to avoid the taking of class consciousness. Primitive communism lasted longer than capitalism and it was replaced by a new mode of production.” Primitive communism lasted longer than capitalism and it was replaced by a new mode of production.”
I’ll say it did! Over a MILLION years!
And i’ll also challenge Lizzie’s “power over nature” phrase, which is in line with the CONQUEST mode of thought with which the capitalists are now destroying the very planet. It’s also in line with the bourgeois hierarchical interpretation of evolution, which evolutionary scientists and cross-species ethologists have long since debunked, as did Darwin himself: even though many Marxists still espouse it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.