Win for democracy and fair representation of the working class!

Being Noble is like saying 'i used to have slaves(even if not, then feudalism was the de'facto slave system too!) and made profits from it'

Such people are enemies of humanity and democracy and markets. I hope one day they all just go.

King and his small family is fine btw. Cultural reason:)

▲

kbelder 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's not "I used to have slaves...", it's "My ancestors used to have slaves...".

Having a class of nobles is an embarrassment for a country, and they should have been kicked out of parliament a century ago. But don't attribute to the child the sins of the father; that's the same category of error that the concept of hereditary nobility falls into.

	▲	fmajid 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Sure, they are parasites descended from thugs as opposed to thugs descended from thugs. But you don't see them renouncing their unearned wealth built on rapine, slavery and colonial exploitation, which is to this day largely exempted from property taxes.

▲

coldtea 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>Win for democracy and fair representation of the working class

In Britain? Good luck with that.

▲

dude250711 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yep, getting rid of nobility is how USSR lived happily ever after.

▲

stvltvs 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Getting rid of hereditary nobility has worked out pretty well for the USA.

▲

dylan604 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Has it? By what metric are you using for that? Two Bush presidencies off the power of the senior patriarch. Current president comes from family wealth. Most of the oligarchs come from family wealth. It's not until the recent tech billionaires that became first generation oligarchs.

	▲	stvltvs 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		We've got work to do, but it could be worse. Point is that the problems of the USSR weren't caused by getting rid of the hereditary peerage.

▲

7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

coldtea 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Well, for all USSRs issues, getting rid of their nobility was one of the best things they did.

	▲	dylan604 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's what fills the vacuum that matters, just as POTUS is finding out in Iran. If you don't have a plan for after creating the vacuum, you're probably not going to be happy with how it is filled

▲

pydry 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Until the UK military pledge allegiance to democracy rather than the king, the royal family is also a risk to democracy.

Thailand is an object lesson in how monarchy is repeatedly used as a lever by military and business elites to overthrow democratic representation "in the name of the king".

It almost happened in the UK once, too, in the same way it happened in Thailand.

The reason the media is so keen on the institution is because it functions as a "break glass in case of emergency" for elites. It's not an organic part of the culture, it is shoved down our throats.

▲

anon84873628 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Should have used it to prevent Brexit.

Just look at the US right now to see how civil military control can go off the rails too.

	▲	stevenwoo 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I think the monarchy could have used its power to prevent Brexit, but the monarchy never uses its voice for anything controversial for the most part, that there was a valid referendum and the closeness of the vote and rancor at the time from leavers who held all the reins of power at the time might have made the partial public funding of monarchy untenable, too. Queen Elizabeth seemed particularly neutral even on Brexit, maybe Charles would have done differently?

▲

fmajid 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It happened in Australia in 1975, and Chuck was directly involved in it.