Post Whatever You Are Thinking At This Very Moment

[CrystalGeezer]

It's donning on me how crucial Matt is to the weird shit I do in my brain listening to Morrissey shows, I've completely learned his style and worked with it. Family comes first though, goodness before greatness. I wish him well.

[Girl-with-the-Thorn]

So glad this Jubilee madness finishes tomorrow. What really bugs me, as someone who'd like to think of herself as a Republican, is the fact that the media (especially big institutions like the BBC) could have used the run-up to this weekend as a great opportunity to produce some interesting programming about alternative views on the monarchy. However, as far as I can tell it's just been the same old sycophantic shite, very dull and not at all balanced.

[Oh my god, it's Robby!]

weird how when you Brits you say "Republican"
it something that means something totally different from what it means over in the USA...

[Anonymous]

So glad this Jubilee madness finishes tomorrow. What really bugs me, as someone who'd like to think of herself as a Republican, is the fact that the media (especially big institutions like the BBC) could have used the run-up to this weekend as a great opportunity to produce some interesting programming about alternative views on the monarchy. However, as far as I can tell it's just been the same old sycophantic shite, very dull and not at all balanced.

Smash the aristocracy!

Republicanism: insipid, gesture politics, espoused by teenagers and bed-wetting, middle class liberals who want, merely, to affect a superficial, "anti-Establishment" pose. Risible. Opposition to the monarchy is a distraction from the real structures of power and inequality in the twenty-first United Kingdom. If you're going to use a political "cause" as a vehicle through which you can try to make yourself seem transgressive on an Internet message board, find one that will redistribute wealth to a greater degree than the paltry £0.70 per person, per annum, that the House of Windsor costs us. Otherwise, you're just perpetuating the problem by which you claim to be so exercised.

It isn't 1777 - or even 1977 - anymore.

[Girl-with-the-Thorn]

weird how when you Brits you say "Republican"
it something that means something totally different from what it means over in the USA...

Yes, it is a bit weird- I've never understood it in terms of being a name for a political party in the US as I thought you're already a republic of sorts, but then I don't know very much about American politics.

EDIT: I've just found out that although this law is rarely enforced, under the Treason Felony Act of 1848 it is still technically illegal to promote Republicanism in print here in the UK, and until fairly recently it was an imprisonable offence to do so. Shocking.

[Anonymous]

Yes, it is a bit weird- I've never understood it in terms of being a name for a political party in the US as I thought you're already a republic of sorts, but then I don't know very much about American politics.

EDIT: I've just found out that although this law is rarely enforced, under the Treason Felony Act of 1848 it is still technically illegal to promote Republicanism in print here in the UK, and until fairly recently it was an imprisonable offence to do so. Shocking.

It isn't unusual for laws to remain on the statute book but to slip into disuse. What's "shocking" is that you want to try to portray this as a Serious Issue. Nobody has been prosecuted under the provisions of the Treason Felony Act in almost one hundred and thirty years. Spare us the faux-outrage.

Incidentally, while we're on the subject of that great republic, the United States of America - it's a bastion of social and economic justice, is it? A beacon of hope, lighting the way to "freedom" for the benighted British masses, so in thrall to royalty?

[CrystalGeezer]

Not to detract from this rivetting discussion about the British political system, but I was reading I Can Haz Cheeseburger photos and came to this disturbing thought: what if people are taking pictures of their deceased cats and putting cute captions on them?

Do cat bodies do this? No cat I've ever owned or housesit takes these shapes. Creepy.

[Iona Mink]

Not to detract from this rivetting discussion about the British political system, but I was reading I Can Haz Cheeseburger photos and came to this disturbing thought: what if people are taking pictures of their deceased cats and putting cute captions on them?

Do cat bodies do this? No cat I've ever owned or housesit takes these shapes. Creepy.

I've had cats that sleep like that in the past. It's normally when they are feeling completely secure in their surroundings.

[CrystalGeezer]

I've had cats that sleep like that in the past. It's normally when they are feeling completely secure in their surroundings.

Oh shit. I must make cats edgy. Or they are reflecting another being not completely comfortable in their environment and mirroring that.

[Iona Mink]

Oh shit. I must make cats edgy. Or they are reflecting another being not completely comfortable in their environment and mirroring that.

Or maybe it's because they don't know you. I'm sure with your own cats they will spring these sleep positions on you one day.

That first one is probably as a result of an incomplete turn. The second, hmm, as a guess? The cat may have been positioned that way. As a kid, I used to contort my kitten into doing something similar, ie holding him like a baby until he fell asleep. As he got older I could still get him to do it. I could be making stuff up here but that's what it looks like to me.

[Girl-with-the-Thorn]

It isn't unusual for laws to remain on the statute book but to slip into disuse. What's "shocking" is that you want to try to portray this as a Serious Issue. Nobody has been prosecuted under the provisions of the Treason Felony Act in almost one hundred and thirty years. Spare us the faux-outrage.

Incidentally, while we're on the subject of that great republic, the United States of America - it's a bastion of social and economic justice, is it? A beacon of hope, lighting the way to "freedom" for the benighted British masses, so in thrall to royalty?

Well sorry, but I do think of it as a serious issue- it's not faux outrage, I just find it strange that such an outdated and clearly useless law is still in existence. Also, I never even mentioned the USA except in the context of different meanings of the term 'Republican', which is a separate discussion altogether. Oh, and don't patronise me. Thanks.

[Peterb]

Well sorry, but I do think of it as a serious issue- it's not faux outrage, I just find it strange that such an outdated and clearly useless law is still in existence. Also, I never even mentioned the USA except in the context of different meanings of the term 'Republican', which is a separate discussion altogether. Oh, and don't patronise me. Thanks.

Hi The Most Excellent GwtT,
Couldn't agree with you more about the jubilee. The BBC appear to be in the thrall of the royals. Over the last couple of days with dreadful events in Syria etc, the headlines are dominated by all this nonsense. And you are right to be angry about that law still being on the statute book.

[Anonymous]

Well sorry, but I do think of it as a serious issue- it's not faux outrage, I just find it strange that such an outdated and clearly useless law is still in existence. Also, I never even mentioned the USA except in the context of different meanings of the term 'Republican', which is a separate discussion altogether. Oh, and don't patronise me. Thanks.

Yeah, just answer my question about the USA, since you referred to it.

If you don't want to be patronised, then don't raise an issue where none exists just so that you can kid yourself that you are, in some way, Radical. You're not.

And since you ignored it first time around...

Smash the aristocracy!

Republicanism: insipid, gesture politics, espoused by teenagers and bed-wetting, middle class liberals who want, merely, to affect a superficial, "anti-Establishment" pose. Risible. Opposition to the monarchy is a distraction from the real structures of power and inequality in the twenty-first United Kingdom. If you're going to use a political "cause" as a vehicle through which you can try to make yourself seem transgressive on an Internet message board, find one that will redistribute wealth to a greater degree than the paltry £0.70 per person, per annum, that the House of Windsor costs us. Otherwise, you're just perpetuating the problem by which you claim to be so exercised.

It isn't 1777 - or even 1977 - anymore.

[Girl-with-the-Thorn]

Hi The Most Excellent GwtT,
Couldn't agree with you more about the jubilee. The BBC appear to be in the thrall of the royals. Over the last couple of days with dreadful events in Syria etc, the headlines are dominated by all this nonsense. And you are right to be angry about that law still being on the statute book.

Thanks Peter. You're right, there are so many infinitely more important things to give news coverage to.

Yeah, just answer my question about the USA, since you referred to it.

OK then. No, I don't hold the US up as an example of how the UK should be run, not in the slightest. Aside from the US having its own problems, every country has different needs and it would be silly to fashion the leadership and functioning of one completely after another. As I've said before, I won't pretend to know a huge amount about American politics so I'm not going to get into a big debate about this.

If you don't want to be patronised, then don't raise an issue where none exists just so that you can kid yourself that you are, in some way, Radical. You're not.

You seem pretty riled up about my political views and the way I choose to express them (as seen below) considering you don't know me. I would tell you to calm the fuck down but it would be entirely useless.

Smash the aristocracy!

Republicanism: insipid, gesture politics, espoused by teenagers and bed-wetting, middle class liberals who want, merely, to affect a superficial, "anti-Establishment" pose. Risible. Opposition to the monarchy is a distraction from the real structures of power and inequality in the twenty-first United Kingdom. If you're going to use a political "cause" as a vehicle through which you can try to make yourself seem transgressive on an Internet message board, find one that will redistribute wealth to a greater degree than the paltry £0.70 per person, per annum, that the House of Windsor costs us. Otherwise, you're just perpetuating the problem by which you claim to be so exercised.

It isn't 1777 - or even 1977 - anymore.

If you say so.

[Oh my god, it's Robby!]

ahh better, this thread is less cluttered now
anyways, I am just wondering if perhaps, I should not be downloading 2 different things while also being on here
it either gets really sluggish or my downloads go down to like 30 KB/sec

[Anonymous]

OK then. No, I don't hold the US up as an example of how the UK should be run, not in the slightest. Aside from the US having its own problems, every country has different needs and it would be silly to fashion the leadership and functioning of one completely after another. As I've said before, I won't pretend to know a huge amount about American politics so I'm not going to get into a big debate about this.

Hang on, the USA is a republic! It's a much more open & equal society, isn't it? It's like a veritable utopia there.

You seem pretty riled up about my political views and the way I choose to express them (as seen below) considering you don't know me. I would tell you to calm the fuck down but it would be entirely useless.

No, I'm trying to provoke some of the passion you claim to feel for the republican ideal. Funnily enough, though, you don't seem to have any.

If you say so.

Seriously? You can't defend the principles you claim to hold? Never thought about republicanism in any great detail? Just unthinkingly parrotting what Morrissey says about the royals?

Well, there's a surprise.

[CrystalGeezer]

What's happening?

[Girl-with-the-Thorn]

Seriously? You can't defend the principles you claim to hold? Never thought about republicanism in any great detail? Just unthinkingly parrotting what Morrissey says about the royals?

Well, there's a surprise.

Nope- I just have better things to do right now than to argue about it with you. I've posted about it before so if you want any proof of my 'passion' you can search it out yourself.

[Pav1ova]

Damn weather.

[Anonymous]

Nope- I just have better things to do right now than to argue about it with you. I've posted about it before so if you want any proof of my 'passion' you can search it out yourself.

Better things to do? What, like dealing with the responsibilities and obligations of your actual life, as opposed to frittering away spare moments on the Internet, co-opting other people's - other generations' - causes into your sense of self so that you can feel subversive? If you genuinely felt that abolishing the monarchy would directly and substantially alter your (or anybody else's) life, you would be willing to stand your ground and defend what you claim as your principles. The truth is that your "principles" are no more than adolescent window-dressing.

Get back to me when in your "gap year" when you have some free time... that is, if Mummy and Daddy haven't paid for you to go off travelling to India or somewhere.