ParadigmShifter
Random Nonsense Generator
Yeah the PM can ask for the monarch to dissolve parliament, that is all (although there is going to be a new law about that).
The questions-not-worth-their-own-thread question thread XIII
- Thread starter Mathilda
- Start date
- Status
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
On paper, the monarch has a ton of power, but it's all based on the unspoken understanding that they will never, ever attempt to utilise so much as an ounce of it. The moment they tried to, parliament would turn against them and the monarch in question would find themselves in the dole queue by the week's end.
The British treat their monarchy somewhat like a show-dog- we're (inexplicably) proud of it, and like to show it off, but we don't want it pissing on the rug.
The British treat their monarchy somewhat like a show-dog- we're (inexplicably) proud of it, and like to show it off, but we don't want it pissing on the rug.
Xanikk999
History junkie
On paper, the monarch has a ton of power, but it's all based on the unspoken understanding that they will never, ever attempt to utilise so much as an ounce of it. The moment they tried to, parliament would turn against them and the monarch in question would find themselves in the dole queue by the week's end.
The British treat their monarchy somewhat like a show-dog- we're (inexplicably) proud of it, and like to show it off, but we don't want it pissing on the rug.
So whens the last time the monarch actually tried to use its power? I know it wasn't as long ago as before the English civil war and Charles I. Did your monarch use any of its substantial power since than?
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
It's hard to say- James II was the last king to attempt absolutism, which obviously ended badly for him, but the transition to the current state affairs probably happened between the reign of William & Mary and the later Hanoverian kings, each gradually removing themselves further and further from political life, until by the time of the Regency they were nothing more than figureheads. Mary II, for example, acted in a "presidential" role for much of her reign, governing in cooperation with parliament, while George IV spent most of his time drinking and shagging the servants. There were also a few incidents in Victoria's earlier reign when she attempted to over-rule parliament on certain minor issues, but they never really came to much.
Of course, then there's the 1975 Australian Constitutional Crisis, in which the Governor-General forced the dissolution of the current government in the Queen's name, but she was only nominally involved, so not that much can be made of it.
George V attempted to be semi-useful by mediating the Home Rule Crisis, culminating with the fruitless Buckingham Palace Conference. None of this was actually him employing his theoretical monarchic legal powers, but more of an attempt to bludgeon the Tories and Liberals into agreeing on something with the force of prestige alone. Of course, it didn't work. (Un?)fortunately the specter of civil war and class conflict was erased by the UK's entry into World War I, as the Liberals called on the scoundrel's patriotism that the Tories had been hyping up so well.
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
Do common spiders (like the ones you see hanging around your house) bite. Not poisonous ones.
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
You misspelled "was".
I suppose they might try to, but I think, when faced with a colossus like us, the "flight" instinct overwhelmingly trumps the "fight" one.
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
The reason is because there was a spider in my pants when I took them off . I dont know how it got in there but I have something that looks like a flea bite on my leg. It didnt hurt though.
Also true, but it wasn't as blatant as Simpson's was, or something. I'm not entirely clear on the details, and I think it's still argued.You misspelled "was".
Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
I guess it might've thought it was trapped and panicked? It'll be harmless, though- house spider venom basically just have enough to knock out a fly, not enough for anything larger than a mouse to even notice.
Either way, we dodged a bullet with them, so it's all good.Also true, but it wasn't as blatant as Simpson's was, or something. I'm not entirely clear on the details, and I think it's still argued.
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
Yeah thats what I thought. I read somewhere you shouldnt worry unless you start cramping or throwing up and I didnt do either of those so I didnt worry.
This bit was in an interview. Im not sure what that means, whats it mean?
"We've had a lot of trouble over the years; it's been a running soap opera."
I dont understand that as Ive never heard about a soap opera about that subject (My mom hasnt either and she watches a lot of them).
This bit was in an interview. Im not sure what that means, whats it mean?
"We've had a lot of trouble over the years; it's been a running soap opera."
I dont understand that as Ive never heard about a soap opera about that subject (My mom hasnt either and she watches a lot of them).
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
Oh. That makes sense. In my moms soap operas people are always shooting each other and then dying and then un-dying and all sorts of crazy stuff. And then when they finish un-dying they all do yucky things to each other.
In a book I read it was a trivia book it said that soap operas are called that because soap companies made them as advertisements.(I dont know where the "opera" comes from). But is that true?
In a book I read it was a trivia book it said that soap operas are called that because soap companies made them as advertisements.(I dont know where the "opera" comes from). But is that true?
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
Yeah the trivia book says they put them on in daytimes so the housewives (I think this was the 1920s or 30s) would listen while they did the housework. I have no idea why I read that article in the trivia book as I dont like soap operas theyre a bit silly. And my mom just sits in front of the TV staring when theyre on. (I dont like TV at all, really. I think the last show I watched on a TV was a Saturday Night Live they had on a few months back but I actually had to wait for it to show again.)
No, because the people at the bottom always lose. They're inherently unstable and exploitative, hence why they should be illegal, if they're not already.
shadowplay
your ad here
Not myself, but a close family member. Trying to convince her of the fact it's a pyramid scheme is damn near impossible, it's like religion to her. It's really eerie, and depressing. She's convinced she's going to become rich.
Though she did lose faith in the soap company, and has moved on to vitamins.
- Status