FSTDT Forums

Rubbish => Preaching and Worship => Topic started by: Jacob Harrison on July 12, 2018, 12:57:07 pm

Title: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Jacob Harrison on July 12, 2018, 12:57:07 pm
I did more research and found out who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.

Earlier I thought that the documentary Britain’s Real monarch proved that Edward IV was illegitimate and that therefore his younger brother George Plantagenet and his descendants are the rightful heirs to the throne of England. However I found out that other historians debunked the claims in that documentary.

It therefore means that Edward IV was legitimate and that the bill of attainder passed onto his treasonous younger brother that prevented his descendants from inheriting the throne was also legitimate.

You may think that it means that the Houses of Lancaster and York were unified when Edwards daughter Elizabeth of York married King Henry VII of the Lancasterian side. However she was the daughter of Edward and Elizabeth Woodville. Remember that Richard III seized the throne from his nephew Edward V because Edward’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville was declared an illegitimate bigamous marriage making Edward V illegitimate.

It therefore also makes Elizabeth of York illegitimate as well.

After Richard III’s son died, he named his nephew John de la Pole as his heir who died in 1487. His brother Edmund de la Pole succeeded him as the Yorkist heir till his death in 1513. He was then succeeded by Richard de la Pole, the last Yorkist heir to pursue the throne until his death in 1525. Their other brother William de la Pole was imprisoned in the Tower of London and died in 1439.

After that, the closest male relative following primogeniture was Thomas Manners 1st Earl of Rutland as the son of Anne St Leger who was the daughter of Anne of York, the eldest sister of Edward IV and Richard III.

His descendant and heir is this guy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Manners,_11th_Duke_of_Rutland

The good news is that he has a son 19 year old son Charles John Montague Manners who can be kidnapped, forced into a marriage, and forced to masturbate to produce an heir who can be raised to rule England.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: dpareja on July 12, 2018, 01:26:40 pm
So... kidnapping and rape.

Or, we could do with what the people expressed through Parliament and conclude that the current Queen is the legitimate monarch of the Commonwealth Realms.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Askold on July 12, 2018, 01:29:23 pm
You don't think that you can convince a 19-year old to become a king but you also think that you can convince tens of millions of people to follow your plan even though the subsequent wars are likely to kill millions and plunge the world into flames.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: dpareja on July 12, 2018, 01:30:52 pm
You don't think that you can convince a 19-year old to become a king but you also think that you can convince tens of millions of people to follow your plan even though the subsequent wars are likely to kill millions and plunge the world into flames.

And undo over a millennium of progress toward representative democracy.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: ironbite on July 12, 2018, 01:39:35 pm
But hey dreams are a thing and you should follow your's Jacob.

Ironbite-how goes your dream of fucking your second cousin?
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: dpareja on July 12, 2018, 01:42:34 pm
But hey dreams are a thing and you should follow your's Jacob.

Ironbite-how goes your dream of fucking your second cousin?

Destroyed now that niam's gotten there first. She's damaged goods now.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Jacob Harrison on July 12, 2018, 02:22:31 pm
You don't think that you can convince a 19-year old to become a king but you also think that you can convince tens of millions of people to follow your plan even though the subsequent wars are likely to kill millions and plunge the world into flames.

It will be done subtly. The organization that kidnaps the 19 year old and forces him to have a child, will secretly infiltrate British Parliament till they become a majority and then pass an act that makes the child King or Queen and gives Scotland independence(Since the Yorkist heirs never ruled Scotland).

Then England will invade Ireland, since the Kings of England were lords of Ireland. The English army will be stronger than the Irish army so Ireland will easily be conquered. France will then be invaded and conquered next because of English claims to the French throne.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Svata on July 12, 2018, 02:30:54 pm
Hey. I have a secret to tell you. No one gives a flying fuck who the rightful heir is here, except you.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Askold on July 12, 2018, 03:15:04 pm
a) Your plan hinges on making millions of people think that it's a good plan and you know that you can't even convince one 19 year old to go through with it willingly. This is called cognitive dissonance.

b) Ireland is part of EU. Attack on Ireland (which will not happen because your plan is so stupid that you won't even make it to phase one: "Convince at least one other person to join my cabal" but let's discuss this later bit anyway) would mean that EU would defend it and take down England.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Jacob Harrison on July 12, 2018, 03:58:33 pm
a) Your plan hinges on making millions of people think that it's a good plan and you know that you can't even convince one 19 year old to go through with it willingly. This is called cognitive dissonance.

b) Ireland is part of EU. Attack on Ireland (which will not happen because your plan is so stupid that you won't even make it to phase one: "Convince at least one other person to join my cabal" but let's discuss this later bit anyway) would mean that EU would defend it and take down England.

a) It doesn't take millions of people to  kidnap the 19 year old, infiltrate parliament and crown the child of the 19 year old King of England.

b) England can buy weapons from the United States(since the United States has had trade wars with the EU) as well as Russia. It can help England win the war.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Svata on July 12, 2018, 04:07:00 pm
How. The hell. Do you plan. To convince the people. To do. The fucking. Kidnapping.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on July 12, 2018, 05:19:11 pm
How. The hell. Do you plan. To convince the people. To do. The fucking. Kidnapping.
Oh don't worry, he's got that covered.

You're too late, pommyland is already run by an Aussie toff-his name's Rupert Murdoch! As for that other bloke, why the fuck would he want to leave somewhere sunny for where Britain is headed after May and Co. drive Britain off the Brexit cliff?

In any.case, aren't you here to root for Grand Moff Tarkin? In Australian that means with your cuz, in skin-tight Faberges.at

Your right. He probably wouldn’t. That is why I need you to found an organization that can kidnap him. Force him to get married and if he refuses sex with her, force him to masturbate so that his semen can be put in his wife without it having to be rape so that he can produce heirs that can be raised by the organization. Have members of the organization  emigrate to the UK and run in political offices. Have them join both political parties, to infiltrate parliament but to keep the plan a secret. Then once they get elected, they can pass a law making his eldest son King, and to give Scotland independence since the King is the heir to the throne of England not Scotland. Then England with it’s powerful army can invade Ireland and France.

In exchange for doing it, since you earlier complained about the Queen’s Governor General interfering in Australian politics, England will allow Australia to become a Republic since the legitimate heirs to the English throne never ruled Australia.

How does that sound?

His plan apparently hinges on convincing me, yeah-that guy, of the merits of it and to do the kidnapping, the forced handjob and form the illuminati to take over England. My motivation apparently will come from the opportunity to finally punt the governor general and get revenge for the dismissal of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam even if involves breaking a whole bunch of laws, more money and material than I'm ever gonna lay a finger on, rape, the endgame leading to absolute monarchy elsewhere and, oh yeah, World War fucking Three!

Should be a cinch.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Sigmaleph on July 12, 2018, 06:35:20 pm
I did more research and found out who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.

Earlier I thought that the documentary Britain’s Real monarch proved that Edward IV was illegitimate and that therefore his younger brother George Plantagenet and his descendants are the rightful heirs to the throne of England. However I found out that other historians debunked the claims in that documentary.

It therefore means that Edward IV was legitimate and that the bill of attainder passed onto his treasonous younger brother that prevented his descendants from inheriting the throne was also legitimate.

You may think that it means that the Houses of Lancaster and York were unified when Edwards daughter Elizabeth of York married King Henry VII of the Lancasterian side. However she was the daughter of Edward and Elizabeth Woodville. Remember that Richard III seized the throne from his nephew Edward V because Edward’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville was declared an illegitimate bigamous marriage making Edward V illegitimate.

It therefore also makes Elizabeth of York illegitimate as well.

After Richard III’s son died, he named his nephew John de la Pole as his heir who died in 1487. His brother Edmund de la Pole succeeded him as the Yorkist heir till his death in 1513. He was then succeeded by Richard de la Pole, the last Yorkist heir to pursue the throne until his death in 1525. Their other brother William de la Pole was imprisoned in the Tower of London and died in 1439.

After that, the closest male relative following primogeniture was Thomas Manners 1st Earl of Rutland as the son of Anne St Leger who was the daughter of Anne of York, the eldest sister of Edward IV and Richard III.

His descendant and heir is this guy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Manners,_11th_Duke_of_Rutland

The good news is that he has a son 19 year old son Charles John Montague Manners who can be kidnapped, forced into a marriage, and forced to masturbate to produce an heir who can be raised to rule England.

Yes, but have you considered that the line of Aerys the Second was attainted for tyranny and the throne passed to his first cousin once removed, Robert Baratheon, who had no legitimate issue, meaning that the rightful King has to be one of the unknown descendants of the sisters of Aegon the Fifth?
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Lana Reverse on July 12, 2018, 07:16:18 pm
I did more research and found out who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.

Earlier I thought that the documentary Britain’s Real monarch proved that Edward IV was illegitimate and that therefore his younger brother George Plantagenet and his descendants are the rightful heirs to the throne of England. However I found out that other historians debunked the claims in that documentary.

It therefore means that Edward IV was legitimate and that the bill of attainder passed onto his treasonous younger brother that prevented his descendants from inheriting the throne was also legitimate.

You may think that it means that the Houses of Lancaster and York were unified when Edwards daughter Elizabeth of York married King Henry VII of the Lancasterian side. However she was the daughter of Edward and Elizabeth Woodville. Remember that Richard III seized the throne from his nephew Edward V because Edward’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville was declared an illegitimate bigamous marriage making Edward V illegitimate.

It therefore also makes Elizabeth of York illegitimate as well.

After Richard III’s son died, he named his nephew John de la Pole as his heir who died in 1487. His brother Edmund de la Pole succeeded him as the Yorkist heir till his death in 1513. He was then succeeded by Richard de la Pole, the last Yorkist heir to pursue the throne until his death in 1525. Their other brother William de la Pole was imprisoned in the Tower of London and died in 1439.

After that, the closest male relative following primogeniture was Thomas Manners 1st Earl of Rutland as the son of Anne St Leger who was the daughter of Anne of York, the eldest sister of Edward IV and Richard III.

His descendant and heir is this guy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Manners,_11th_Duke_of_Rutland

The good news is that he has a son 19 year old son Charles John Montague Manners who can be kidnapped, forced into a marriage, and forced to masturbate to produce an heir who can be raised to rule England.

(https://media2.giphy.com/media/x56rvQQHvcLp6/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Jacob Harrison on July 12, 2018, 07:25:43 pm
How. The hell. Do you plan. To convince the people. To do. The fucking. Kidnapping.
Oh don't worry, he's got that covered.

You're too late, pommyland is already run by an Aussie toff-his name's Rupert Murdoch! As for that other bloke, why the fuck would he want to leave somewhere sunny for where Britain is headed after May and Co. drive Britain off the Brexit cliff?

In any.case, aren't you here to root for Grand Moff Tarkin? In Australian that means with your cuz, in skin-tight Faberges.at

Your right. He probably wouldn’t. That is why I need you to found an organization that can kidnap him. Force him to get married and if he refuses sex with her, force him to masturbate so that his semen can be put in his wife without it having to be rape so that he can produce heirs that can be raised by the organization. Have members of the organization  emigrate to the UK and run in political offices. Have them join both political parties, to infiltrate parliament but to keep the plan a secret. Then once they get elected, they can pass a law making his eldest son King, and to give Scotland independence since the King is the heir to the throne of England not Scotland. Then England with it’s powerful army can invade Ireland and France.

In exchange for doing it, since you earlier complained about the Queen’s Governor General interfering in Australian politics, England will allow Australia to become a Republic since the legitimate heirs to the English throne never ruled Australia.

How does that sound?

His plan apparently hinges on convincing me, yeah-that guy, of the merits of it and to do the kidnapping, the forced handjob and form the illuminati to take over England. My motivation apparently will come from the opportunity to finally punt the governor general and get revenge for the dismissal of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam even if involves breaking a whole bunch of laws, more money and material than I'm ever gonna lay a finger on, rape, the endgame leading to absolute monarchy elsewhere and, oh yeah, World War fucking Three!

Should be a cinch.

Well now the kidnapping will have to happen in England and not Australia because of who I discovered were the rightful heirs. But starting an Australian Republican Foundation can still work, because it will gain lots of members, certainly enough people who can go to England, do the kidnappinh, the forced marriage and masturbation, and infiltration of British parliament.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Lana Reverse on July 12, 2018, 07:27:25 pm
How successful do you think your little plan will be if you talk about it openly like this?
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Jacob Harrison on July 12, 2018, 08:42:52 pm
How successful do you think your little plan will be if you talk about it openly like this?

Well what if Tolpuddle Martyr founds the organization without you knowing. Then nobody will be able to stop the plan.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on July 12, 2018, 09:13:52 pm
How successful do you think your little plan will be if you talk about it openly like this?

Well what if Tolpuddle Martyr founds the organization without you knowing. Then nobody will be able to stop the plan.
The Tolpuddle Martyr organisation has just passed a binding resolution to fart in your general direction!
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: dpareja on July 13, 2018, 04:05:22 am
You do realize that all the republican movement in Australia (which is alive and vibrant) wants to do is find a republican model of government that enough people can agree on, get it put to the people as a proposed constitutional amendment, and pass said amendment? They couldn't give a flying fuck who the "rightful heir" is (hint: the body representative of the people has spoken on that, multiple times now) and certainly don't need England's "permission" to ditch the monarchy. (For that matter, the UK could ditch the monarchy if they wanted.)
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Jacob Harrison on July 13, 2018, 04:47:16 am
You do realize that all the republican movement in Australia (which is alive and vibrant) wants to do is find a republican model of government that enough people can agree on, get it put to the people as a proposed constitutional amendment, and pass said amendment? They couldn't give a flying fuck who the "rightful heir" is (hint: the body representative of the people has spoken on that, multiple times now) and certainly don't need England's "permission" to ditch the monarchy. (For that matter, the UK could ditch the monarchy if they wanted.)

The majority of the people of Australia keep voting on staying a monarchy so a quicker way for it to become a Republic is for England to get rid of the system of having an appointed Governor General which is the main thing that Tolpuddle Martyr complained about and change it’s own monarchy, which will cause Australia to abolish it’s own monarchy since the Windsors will no longer be in power in England.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: dpareja on July 13, 2018, 05:11:55 am
You do realize that all the republican movement in Australia (which is alive and vibrant) wants to do is find a republican model of government that enough people can agree on, get it put to the people as a proposed constitutional amendment, and pass said amendment? They couldn't give a flying fuck who the "rightful heir" is (hint: the body representative of the people has spoken on that, multiple times now) and certainly don't need England's "permission" to ditch the monarchy. (For that matter, the UK could ditch the monarchy if they wanted.)

The majority of the people of Australia keep voting on staying a monarchy so a quicker way for it to become a Republic is for England to get rid of the system of having an appointed Governor General which is the main thing that Tolpuddle Martyr complained about and change it’s own monarchy, which will cause Australia to abolish it’s own monarchy since the Windsors will no longer be in power in England.

1. They voted once on the matter and it probably failed because it had (necessarily) to be a choice between the status quo and the alternate system proposed. Finding a majority who want to ditch the monarchy is far easier than finding a majority who will agree on which alternative is best.

2. Nothing says that the other Commonwealth Realms couldn't continue to recognize the current legitimate (as per properly passed law, which you are willfully ignoring, you antidemocratic fucktard) line of succession to their thrones. They can go live permanently in any of their other realms. (This is why the Queen says "It's good to be home" when she comes to Canada or any of her other realms--she's speaking as Queen of that realm, and as such lives there; she's just not home very often.)
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Jacob Harrison on July 13, 2018, 09:40:44 am
You do realize that all the republican movement in Australia (which is alive and vibrant) wants to do is find a republican model of government that enough people can agree on, get it put to the people as a proposed constitutional amendment, and pass said amendment? They couldn't give a flying fuck who the "rightful heir" is (hint: the body representative of the people has spoken on that, multiple times now) and certainly don't need England's "permission" to ditch the monarchy. (For that matter, the UK could ditch the monarchy if they wanted.)

The majority of the people of Australia keep voting on staying a monarchy so a quicker way for it to become a Republic is for England to get rid of the system of having an appointed Governor General which is the main thing that Tolpuddle Martyr complained about and change it’s own monarchy, which will cause Australia to abolish it’s own monarchy since the Windsors will no longer be in power in England.

1. They voted once on the matter and it probably failed because it had (necessarily) to be a choice between the status quo and the alternate system proposed. Finding a majority who want to ditch the monarchy is far easier than finding a majority who will agree on which alternative is best.

2. Nothing says that the other Commonwealth Realms couldn't continue to recognize the current legitimate (as per properly passed law, which you are willfully ignoring, you antidemocratic fucktard) line of succession to their thrones. They can go live permanently in any of their other realms. (This is why the Queen says "It's good to be home" when she comes to Canada or any of her other realms--she's speaking as Queen of that realm, and as such lives there; she's just not home very often.)

Well if the Queen loses power in England, she will lose the power to appoint Governor generals, so even if Australia remains a monarchy under the Windsors, they will be free from the Windsors influence in politics.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: dpareja on July 13, 2018, 10:17:36 am
You do realize that all the republican movement in Australia (which is alive and vibrant) wants to do is find a republican model of government that enough people can agree on, get it put to the people as a proposed constitutional amendment, and pass said amendment? They couldn't give a flying fuck who the "rightful heir" is (hint: the body representative of the people has spoken on that, multiple times now) and certainly don't need England's "permission" to ditch the monarchy. (For that matter, the UK could ditch the monarchy if they wanted.)

The majority of the people of Australia keep voting on staying a monarchy so a quicker way for it to become a Republic is for England to get rid of the system of having an appointed Governor General which is the main thing that Tolpuddle Martyr complained about and change it’s own monarchy, which will cause Australia to abolish it’s own monarchy since the Windsors will no longer be in power in England.

1. They voted once on the matter and it probably failed because it had (necessarily) to be a choice between the status quo and the alternate system proposed. Finding a majority who want to ditch the monarchy is far easier than finding a majority who will agree on which alternative is best.

2. Nothing says that the other Commonwealth Realms couldn't continue to recognize the current legitimate (as per properly passed law, which you are willfully ignoring, you antidemocratic fucktard) line of succession to their thrones. They can go live permanently in any of their other realms. (This is why the Queen says "It's good to be home" when she comes to Canada or any of her other realms--she's speaking as Queen of that realm, and as such lives there; she's just not home very often.)

Well if the Queen loses power in England, she will lose the power to appoint Governor generals, so even if Australia remains a monarchy under the Windsors, they will be free from the Windsors influence in politics.

...that's not how that works at all.

She appoints viceroys for her other realms because she's not home very often as Queen of those realms, but she appoints them as such, not as Queen of the United Kingdom. Losing her status as Queen of the United Kingdom would not, itself, in any way diminish her role in her other realms.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Jacob Harrison on July 13, 2018, 12:30:41 pm
You do realize that all the republican movement in Australia (which is alive and vibrant) wants to do is find a republican model of government that enough people can agree on, get it put to the people as a proposed constitutional amendment, and pass said amendment? They couldn't give a flying fuck who the "rightful heir" is (hint: the body representative of the people has spoken on that, multiple times now) and certainly don't need England's "permission" to ditch the monarchy. (For that matter, the UK could ditch the monarchy if they wanted.)

The majority of the people of Australia keep voting on staying a monarchy so a quicker way for it to become a Republic is for England to get rid of the system of having an appointed Governor General which is the main thing that Tolpuddle Martyr complained about and change it’s own monarchy, which will cause Australia to abolish it’s own monarchy since the Windsors will no longer be in power in England.

1. They voted once on the matter and it probably failed because it had (necessarily) to be a choice between the status quo and the alternate system proposed. Finding a majority who want to ditch the monarchy is far easier than finding a majority who will agree on which alternative is best.

2. Nothing says that the other Commonwealth Realms couldn't continue to recognize the current legitimate (as per properly passed law, which you are willfully ignoring, you antidemocratic fucktard) line of succession to their thrones. They can go live permanently in any of their other realms. (This is why the Queen says "It's good to be home" when she comes to Canada or any of her other realms--she's speaking as Queen of that realm, and as such lives there; she's just not home very often.)

Well if the Queen loses power in England, she will lose the power to appoint Governor generals, so even if Australia remains a monarchy under the Windsors, they will be free from the Windsors influence in politics.

...that's not how that works at all.

She appoints viceroys for her other realms because she's not home very often as Queen of those realms, but she appoints them as such, not as Queen of the United Kingdom. Losing her status as Queen of the United Kingdom would not, itself, in any way diminish her role in her other realms.

But the new government of England will prevent her from being able to leave the country, so it will diminish her role in the other realms.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: dpareja on July 13, 2018, 12:33:37 pm
You do realize that all the republican movement in Australia (which is alive and vibrant) wants to do is find a republican model of government that enough people can agree on, get it put to the people as a proposed constitutional amendment, and pass said amendment? They couldn't give a flying fuck who the "rightful heir" is (hint: the body representative of the people has spoken on that, multiple times now) and certainly don't need England's "permission" to ditch the monarchy. (For that matter, the UK could ditch the monarchy if they wanted.)

The majority of the people of Australia keep voting on staying a monarchy so a quicker way for it to become a Republic is for England to get rid of the system of having an appointed Governor General which is the main thing that Tolpuddle Martyr complained about and change it’s own monarchy, which will cause Australia to abolish it’s own monarchy since the Windsors will no longer be in power in England.

1. They voted once on the matter and it probably failed because it had (necessarily) to be a choice between the status quo and the alternate system proposed. Finding a majority who want to ditch the monarchy is far easier than finding a majority who will agree on which alternative is best.

2. Nothing says that the other Commonwealth Realms couldn't continue to recognize the current legitimate (as per properly passed law, which you are willfully ignoring, you antidemocratic fucktard) line of succession to their thrones. They can go live permanently in any of their other realms. (This is why the Queen says "It's good to be home" when she comes to Canada or any of her other realms--she's speaking as Queen of that realm, and as such lives there; she's just not home very often.)

Well if the Queen loses power in England, she will lose the power to appoint Governor generals, so even if Australia remains a monarchy under the Windsors, they will be free from the Windsors influence in politics.

...that's not how that works at all.

She appoints viceroys for her other realms because she's not home very often as Queen of those realms, but she appoints them as such, not as Queen of the United Kingdom. Losing her status as Queen of the United Kingdom would not, itself, in any way diminish her role in her other realms.

But the new government of England will prevent her from being able to leave the country, so it will diminish her role in the other realms.

How and why the fuck would they prevent her from leaving the country? If she were deposed in the United Kingdom, she'd be a private citizen there.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Jacob Harrison on July 13, 2018, 01:27:38 pm
You do realize that all the republican movement in Australia (which is alive and vibrant) wants to do is find a republican model of government that enough people can agree on, get it put to the people as a proposed constitutional amendment, and pass said amendment? They couldn't give a flying fuck who the "rightful heir" is (hint: the body representative of the people has spoken on that, multiple times now) and certainly don't need England's "permission" to ditch the monarchy. (For that matter, the UK could ditch the monarchy if they wanted.)

The majority of the people of Australia keep voting on staying a monarchy so a quicker way for it to become a Republic is for England to get rid of the system of having an appointed Governor General which is the main thing that Tolpuddle Martyr complained about and change it’s own monarchy, which will cause Australia to abolish it’s own monarchy since the Windsors will no longer be in power in England.

1. They voted once on the matter and it probably failed because it had (necessarily) to be a choice between the status quo and the alternate system proposed. Finding a majority who want to ditch the monarchy is far easier than finding a majority who will agree on which alternative is best.

2. Nothing says that the other Commonwealth Realms couldn't continue to recognize the current legitimate (as per properly passed law, which you are willfully ignoring, you antidemocratic fucktard) line of succession to their thrones. They can go live permanently in any of their other realms. (This is why the Queen says "It's good to be home" when she comes to Canada or any of her other realms--she's speaking as Queen of that realm, and as such lives there; she's just not home very often.)

Well if the Queen loses power in England, she will lose the power to appoint Governor generals, so even if Australia remains a monarchy under the Windsors, they will be free from the Windsors influence in politics.

...that's not how that works at all.

She appoints viceroys for her other realms because she's not home very often as Queen of those realms, but she appoints them as such, not as Queen of the United Kingdom. Losing her status as Queen of the United Kingdom would not, itself, in any way diminish her role in her other realms.

But the new government of England will prevent her from being able to leave the country, so it will diminish her role in the other realms.

How and why the fuck would they prevent her from leaving the country? If she were deposed in the United Kingdom, she'd be a private citizen there.

Because the government of England will be members of the organization and they will keep her under extreme supervision to prevent her from leaving so prevent her from organizing resistance to the New Regime.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: dpareja on July 13, 2018, 02:01:34 pm
Because the government of England will be members of the organization and they will keep her under extreme supervision to prevent her from leaving so prevent her from organizing resistance to the New Regime.

Got it. You're an authoritarian antidemocratic theocrat with delusions of living in the Middle Ages.

Go wank to niam deflowering your second cousin.
Title: Re: I discovered who the actual rightful heir to the throne of England is.
Post by: Tolpuddle Martyr on July 13, 2018, 10:00:21 pm
Because the government of England will be members of the organization and they will keep her under extreme supervision to prevent her from leaving so prevent her from organizing resistance to the New Regime.

Got it. You're an authoritarian antidemocratic theocrat with delusions of living in the Middle Ages.

Go wank to niam deflowering your second cousin.
Well, we knew both of those things are indisputably true.

Again Jacob, Brits are a relative rarity here. In your next youtube video can you film the responses of various Brits reacting to your manifesto for rape, regicide and war in western Europe?

You get extra credit if you find some Millwall ultras and lay it on them after their team lost one nil!