• Huldra [they/them, it/its]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Like I've said before, the idea of authoritarianism is pure propaganda to exonerate the west from all the shit it has done, does and will do and instead position those things as aspects that belong to the enemy. Therefore the only truly bad things about the west is either shit it has done in the past or the threat that it will some day become like its enemies, it can never just be bad on its own cause "at least we arent authoritarian".

    • Nagarjuna [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Friendly reminder that 1984 was a critique of post war Brita*n.

      • Huldra [they/them, it/its]
        ·
        3 years ago

        It possesses far more direct and overt references to the Soviet Union and propaganda about the Soviet Union than it ever does about Britain, if it was intended as a critique of Britain it failed at every step to establish that and we can obviously see this in how it is perceived by literally everyone everywhere, and furthermore it wouldnt matter even if all the literal obvious USSR references was removed cause again, the theory of Authoritarianism excludes all western countries that arent overt enemies of the west, Britain wasnt an enemy so at worst there was the fear that it may one day come to slightly resemble its enemies, not that it was and had always been authoritarian.

        • Nagarjuna [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Okay. Sure, but Orwell's criticisms of Britain were grounded in having been a colonial policeman and having been homeless in Britain.

          His criticisms of the Soviet Union were grounded in seeing them suppress the revolutionary left in Spain during the civil war.

          He was criticizing both in order to advocate for the kind of socialist politics he'd be exposed to in Spain.

          A lot of elements were clearly references to Britain, the tenements, the bucolic aesthetic of the proles, the rampant censorship, the forever wars, etc.

  • Claus [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Oh yes. The monarchy is only a figurehead the attracts tourism. They don't affect political discourse or the way the country runs.

  • JoesFrackinJack [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    lol so many americans would absolutely bring back a monarchy if they had the option

  • MaoTheLawn [any, any]
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    Need good arguments for dunking on royalists. Help pls.

    What do I say when they say:

    Royal family costs taxpayers 50p per year, and bring in more money than that in tourism. They're harmless - no proper influence on state affairs. Just a money making machine.

    • Sphincter_Spartan [any,comrade/them]
      ·
      3 years ago

      The tourism to the likes of Buckingham palace is easily rivaled or beaten by similar locations in Europe that lack a royal family. Versailles, for example, attracts more tourism than Buckingham palace. If the royal family had all privileges and titles revoked tomorrow, it wouldn't have the effect on tourism the people making that argument believe, all the historical buildings would still be there, the history would still exist.

      The figure most royalists use for the cost of the royal family also only counts the money given directly to the royal family annually for their personal use. When security costs, renovations on royal accommodations and the like are considered, the figure rises drastically.

      • invalidusernamelol [he/him]
        ·
        3 years ago

        It would probably increase because there wouldn't be disgusting parasites living in the place and it could be more opened up.

    • Express [any,none/use name]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Is the queen acting like some sort of greeter? Just take the buildings and cut out the middle man for the line to go up more. People don’t care about the Royals, they care about the aesthetics and history.

    • 5bicycles [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I'll admit to being a cynical asshole but just dunk on them. Don't even bother to engage with this sort of shit without an audience, you're not gonna change anyone's mind who thinks there is an economic benefit to this horseshit, shit's all just made up numbers to paint your arguement as scientific.

      Just call them willful serfs or peasants or something. Really appeal to the individualism, maybe you'll change someone elses mind when they can't square the difference between being a rational totally selfmade individual in favor of supporting a fucking monarchy.

  • kuttarbaccha [they/them]
    ·
    3 years ago

    Except I have been to both Korea and UK. And the truth is that Koreans are far more critical of their government than the brits are of their monarchy.