loomer wrote: ↑
Yes, and? An 'effectively universal' approval rating also serves to disprove your own assertion that no one gives a shit about the queen or what she's done.
That sure looks like an assertion, thus far unsupported, that no one in Britain cares about the Queen and what she's done. As for why I'm not addressing what you're saying? That's because it isn't under contention, and is in fact evidence against
your own position. Here's what's actually being argued:
I think you have misunderstood the point I was making, and I'm aware my phrasing could be a whole lot better. I am saying the anger or outrage directed at the the queen "accepting" Boris Johnson's "advice" is a non-issue in the UK. The anger and outrage is with Boris Johnson lying to the queen, and not over the queen accepting the "advice" of Boris Johnson to prorogue the government.
My point was directed at people like TRR who had harp about how the queen is bad for accepting the advice of the PM. That's the issue that no one in the UK gives a shit about.
Me: People do give a shit about the Monarchy and not everyone is happy about what the Queen's just done.
The bulk of the anger is directed at Boris Johnson and not at the Queen in the UK. Aside from a few backbenchers from labour and Op-Ed in more progressive but less well circulated papers, there has been no real discussion in the UK over the Queen's actions.
You: People don't care about the Queen and/or what she's just done (explicit); also only the British should comment on this (implicit).
That's not the point I am making. I'm saying people care about the Queen in the UK, but they don't care about the issue about the "Queen has done something wrong by listening to BJ". That's not a major discussion point in the UK. From what I've seen, it's only a major discussion point outside of the UK ( with people overestimating the degree of influence the monarchy has in the UK).
Evidence produced to show that people do give a shit about the queen isn't worth my time to engage with because, sure - no one is arguing otherwise other than you. If you wish to withdraw your assertion to the contrary, by all means, do so. At that point we'll have nothing to argue about because otherwise I agree with your explicit positions that the Queen enjoys popular support, the institution is well-regarded, and whether to do away with her is of course a matter for the British citizenry (though not one that other peoples may not form opinions on and engage in debate around - unless we're now advocating for universally closing the borders of political debate to only those peoples living within the nations under question, I see no reason to extend special privileges here to the British.)
My original point was to say "no one give a shit about the queen accepting the advice of the Prime Minister ( even if it is a shit advice by BJ)". The only people giving a shit about this particular issue seems to be the non-British ( people like TRR and etc).
Certainly - and I don't say otherwise. But since she's my Queen, I'm entitled to form opinions on her conduct in any of her holdings. You will note I did not claim that the views of Australians are the same as or determinative of the views of the English - only that your implicit suggestion that only the British should have opinions on the British Monarchy is invalid for Australians as your monarchy and our monarchy are so fundamentally entwined as to be identical, vested in the same person by the same rules of succession. Our governmental bodies and national sovereignties are distinct, but our monarchies are in fact one and the same body of personages despite the different title they enjoy. Accordingly, the conduct of my monarch is a perfectly appropriate topic for me to form an opinion on, wherever it takes place, as it is still carried out by my monarch even when she acts within a different governmental structure.
Because I see a possibility in which the commonwealth countries might still keep the monarchy even if the British did abolish the monarchy. The monarchy is vested in the same person, but it is still two different
monarchies. As the UK and Australia are considered two different countries, I see the monarchy of Australia as being entirely different from the monarchy of UK. Especially when Australia had a constitutional crisis because the representative of the monarchy in Australia, the governor-general of Australia in 1975 dismissed the Prime Minister from his office and gave it to the opposition.
So the representative of the monarchy in Australia have a more recent history of being directly intervening in political affairs compared to the monarchy in the UK. I think that's an important point we should bear in mind. I think it is valid for you to hold an opinion on the British monarchy, as I don't think you need to be British to have an opinion on it. But I think as outsiders ( in which I am one, even if I am living in the UK and have a right to vote as a commonwealth resident in the UK), we should not confuse our perspective with the perspective of the British. Generally speaking, I think international commentators should not have the same weight as domestic commentators regarding local affairs. We can lack some of the local context of an issue, and ended up making ineffective arguments as a result.
If you'd like us Australians not to form an opinion, perhaps you might like to force the Queen to abdicate and dissolve the title of Queen of Australia so that your monarch is not our monarch. Until that time, we'll keep doing so, though we may just have some very vocal opinions on that as well.
I'm not saying don't form an opinion, but I just want to say the opinions of the non-British ( unless you are a resident of the UK, and you have a right to vote in UK elections as a result of being a commonwealth citizen) doesn't matter as much in the grand scheme of things. In an international web-forum like SDN, we can comment all we want but our views doesn't really matter compared to the viewpoints expressed by the locals. An argument by an Australian, Canadian or Singaporean about why the British should abolish or keep the monarchy is going to be worth a lot less than the same argument made by someone who is British.
Yes, and? This still does nothing to prove your assertion that no one is upset by what the Queen's just done.
My assertion is no one is upset by what the Queen herself has done, because in the UK, she is pretty much acknowledged as an effectively powerless figure that have no choice but to accede to any request made by the PM. They are upset with what Boris Johnson has done, which is a different thing altogether. The target of most people's anger is with BJ and not with the queen.
They are, regardless of whether the Monarchy is utterly powerless (it's not) or have no political views (they do). The handwringing over whether she was deceived cuts to the heart of the issue: People want an excuse to maintain their faith, because they are upset and rattled, and it's easiest if they can say 'well, Boris lied to her! She didn't know better!' Far from being any kind of proof no one gives a shit, the handwringing is proof of the precise opposite - that people give quite a shit, because what just happened threatens their (innately incorrect) view of an apolitical and uninvolved monarchy.
Even if Boris Johnson didn't lie to her, there is unlikely to be much outrage directed at the queen. People gave a shit about what Boris Johnson has done to her, which is different from what she has personally done. The outrage is about "Boris Johnson DARED to lie to the queen?" and not "poor queen has to listen to Boris Johnson because she received an advice which was a lie".
You might think the two things are the same, but I will disagree. The direction of people's outrage matters. If the anger is directed at BJ, then it means the outrage is used to further support the monarchy as the physical embodiment of the nation. So it becomes an issue of BJ lying to the "physical spirit of the United Kingdom". If the anger is directed at the monarchy, then it is an issue about the monarchy failing in the eyes of the British.
One sort of anger reinforce support for the monarchy, the other sort of anger undermines support for the monarchy.
Humans are such funny creatures. We are selfish about selflessness, yet we can love something so much that we can hate something.