tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post502694762387292332..comments2024-03-23T08:00:26.020+00:00Comments on THE MONARCHIST: An Interview with the MonarchistUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-18968708274249619912009-04-25T21:33:00.000+01:002009-04-25T21:33:00.000+01:00Anonymous at the top kind of displays all the qual...Anonymous at the top kind of displays all the qualities lacking which you mentioned in your post and does the job sublimely. Conversely it's like getting a picture of a thug next to a post about a sink estate. I enjoy this blog. Thank you for the incredibly well written and informative post that certainly gives food for thought and simple polite consideration on a subject I hadn't focused on too much before. It would be great to read a post in future on "the best way to perserve our historic constitutional liberties" through the monarchy.alisonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-2058677792684889772009-04-25T13:17:00.000+01:002009-04-25T13:17:00.000+01:00I apologise, I'm not sure why I brought Cromwell u...I apologise, I'm not sure why I brought Cromwell up, must be the lateness of the hour here.<br /><br />There is, however, -something- missing in our sterile society today. I don't claim to know exactly what it is, but I get the feeling that the gentlemen here sense it too.<br /><br />I've only been around for a couple of decades, and yet it seems to me that our culture is crumbling, decaying into irrelavence.<br /><br />D.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-55629757030700267462009-04-25T12:36:00.000+01:002009-04-25T12:36:00.000+01:00Gentlemen, and in response to Mac in particular:
...Gentlemen, and in response to Mac in particular:<br /><br />Like Mr. Baltzersen I do not honestly believe anyone here is a Monarchist purely due to some peculiar fetish for noble titles, as if they were something to be collected or treated like a fashion accessory.<br /><br />To the contrary, as a casual observer, it would seem the Monarchist is far more concerned with the values of respect and self-dignity behind a title He mentioned 'virtue' many times in this his last post, and the frivolous comment about an Earldom was merely a sidenote.<br /><br />One could also point out sir, that many of the individual rights and freedoms championed in the British constitutional monarchy and system of law were instituted by the *nobility* - not, as the Monarchist points out, by mass populism. <br /><br />Need I mention Cromwell?<br /><br />D.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-70560622419395402312009-04-24T19:52:00.000+01:002009-04-24T19:52:00.000+01:00Gentlemen,
I don't think anyone here has as main ...Gentlemen,<br /><br />I don't think anyone here has as main motivation for wanting to go back to the old monarchical and aristocratic order a desire to be an Earl. As has been demonstrated, there are thoughts about what one would like to be in another age. But main motivation? I don't think so.<br /><br />As has been addressed, we have seen much progress within the areas of technology, medicine, and dentistry. Although Big Brother does benefit from this progress, so this progress isn't clear cut either.<br /><br />To say that we should appreciate the freedom of our time, instead of wanting to go back to a time of serfdom, is hardly enlightened. There may be facets of days gone by we do not want back, but the modern regime intervenes in our lives, homes, and businesses to an unprecedented level.<br /><br />We are told that we are free in this day and age because we can throw our masters out if they behave badly. Yes, the individual's influence is immense in a mass democracy. Go and pore a bucket of water in Lake Superior and watch the water level rise.J.K. Baltzersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00096616644588479917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-52614696206401910182009-04-24T16:27:00.000+01:002009-04-24T16:27:00.000+01:00I thought the attitude I was referring to was pret...I thought the attitude I was referring to was pretty clear with the included quote. However for clarification, I was specifically alluding to:<br /><br />A. Pretences to an imaginged aristocratic golden age. Strange how no one ever seems to want to wind back the clock so they can be a domestic or factory worker. It is this type of (mis-informed) association of would be toffs and chinless wonders, that the likes of Helen Clark work so hard to associate with the monarchy.<br /><br />B. But the major gripe I have is with the womens magazines. They probably account for 90% of the population's exposure to the monarchy. Is it any wonder that the regard in which the monarchy is held is so low when most of its exposure is based on clothes, who's shagging who or who was seen at which nightclub with whom?<br /><br />I will freely take issue with your assertion of the notion of the aritstocrat as defender of the people's liberty. Noblesse oblige aside, one only has to look to France to defeat that argument. In fact one of the stregnths of the British crown, as opposed to her continental cousins, was the distinct lack of importance of the British aristocracy.<br /><br />Personally, I am happy to judge a Gentleman or not by his charater rather than his chromosomes.<br /><br />Yours,<br /><br />MacAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-32972274990667158342009-04-24T15:42:00.000+01:002009-04-24T15:42:00.000+01:00Who is this blowhard, Anonymous, and what attitude...Who is this blowhard, Anonymous, and what attitude would that be, Mac? <br /><br />I think the post is bang on: the aristocrat and the politician are to be loathed for their self-important and paternalistic ways, but at least the aristocrat had redeemable qualities and attributes worthy of perpetuating.<br /><br />The big difference is that the aristo was at heart an individual, who wrapped his vanity in the nobleman's cause, whereas the politician wraps his vanity in the cloak of a people's cause, which makes him dangerous to the liberty of every individual. <br /><br />Anonymous prefers the people's cause, because he would like nothing better than to stave your skull in with a truncheon, anyone that is who doesn't share his wicked hate for the nobleman.Bolingbrokehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07403736132216152383noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-68374425728347790592009-04-24T14:13:00.000+01:002009-04-24T14:13:00.000+01:00"I've always had a certain fondness for an Earldom..."I've always had a certain fondness for an Earldom. A Duke is just too much, Marquess does not roll off the tongue. Viscount or Baron? Too upstart. An Earldom seems a reasonable compromise" <br /><br />I am afraid I must agree with Anonymous' asserstion, likening (some) of the comments to that of "14 Years old girl's" blog. Sure it's all very harmless to be sure, but it is attitudes like these and those of the women's gossip magazines which I submit, do so much to denegrate the Monarchy in today's society.<br /><br />I am not a monarchist because I wish I was born an earl in a previous age, but rather because a constitutional monarchy is the best way to perserve our historic constitutional liberties.<br /><br />Your aye,<br /><br />Mac<br /><br />PS Happy Anzac dayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-32455085253894374542009-04-23T18:50:00.000+01:002009-04-23T18:50:00.000+01:00Anonymous: If you find our views particularly dist...Anonymous: If you find our views particularly distasteful, then you need not read them. The Web is a vast and varied place, surely you can find a place that better suits your views. And if you are here to read ours, then at least give them a respectful disagreement. A true gentleman disagrees without demeaning. <br /><br />As for the post: A lovely and interesting one. The 20th and 21st centuries have made some great bounds in the areas of science and medicine, as well as social acceptance of the previously downtrodden and disenfranchised, like women and Africans. However, we have also lost much in the way of virtue and respectable behavior.Gladstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01100967698376616565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-36691181779116270462009-04-23T18:10:00.000+01:002009-04-23T18:10:00.000+01:00Once again, a wonderful display of intellectual ma...Once again, a wonderful display of intellectual masturbation combined with irrepressible smugness and disdain. Truly you are descending into a spiral of madness and irrelevance that cannot be stopped. <br /><br />I wonder why your bother putting this up on blog for all to see since your audience seems to be limited to a handful of devoted crackpots, old hacks and dimwits. You despise the masses but for some reason you feel the need to broadcast your dribble on the web for all to see.<br /><br />You endeavour is not so different from that of a 14 year old girl who blogs about Miley Cyrus. Completely irrelevant and only of interest to another 14 year old Miley fan. The rest of the world neither needs to know nor does it want to know about your deep “feelings” towards crusty old monarchs or your fascination for tweed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-86019856886082510402009-04-23T15:57:00.000+01:002009-04-23T15:57:00.000+01:00I think I would have been contented to live the li...I think I would have been contented to live the life of an aristocratic officer, Kipling. As for titles, I have a particular fondness for the Order of the Bath. <br /><br />The Bath is the Earldom of knighthoods, not as honourific as the Garter, but not as lowly as the knightless Commonwealth ones. Make me a knight!The Monarchisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10362198840081512460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8162816964941896969.post-88823119663416683532009-04-23T02:46:00.000+01:002009-04-23T02:46:00.000+01:00It is a lovely post Mr. Monarchist. Bickerstaff i...It is a lovely post Mr. Monarchist. Bickerstaff is a fine name. I have a preference for Richard Dryden myself.<br /><br />An eccentric question, usually the best kin, if the Life Peerages Act was to be repealed - and so it should be - and Her Majesty was to grant you a title, what rank of nobility would you prefer? How would style yourself?<br /><br />I've always had a certain fondness for an Earldom. A Duke is just too much, Marquess does not roll off the tongue. Viscount or Baron? Too upstart. An Earldom seems a reasonable compromise. I very much like the ring of Lord Dovercourt. It's a street name near where I grew up in Toronto, named after a large home built by staunch monarchists many years ago.Kiplinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04838567321326673782noreply@blogger.com