offshoremanxman Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 9 minutes ago, Holte End said: Yes it is really going well for the folk in Liverpool, If that is the civilized world, please let me live in ignorance. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 2 hours ago, Augustus said: Poor old angry Manx nationalist can't get his head around the "British Crown Dependency" bit. It's the Isle of Man's USP and everyone sensible knows it. The Island wouldn't be viable as a sovereign state. Imagine how much the new embassies in London, Washington and Beijing would cost? I'm far from a nationalist, the complete opposite in fact, nor am I angry, just pointing out a logical progressive step for the island in light of recent events. If you have read my posts you would know that I'm not even suggesting that the island shouldn't be a crown dependency, that's not what I've suggested at all. It never ceases to amaze me how the merest hint of a tiny bit of constitutional modernisation brings frothy mouthed, angry, belittling responses from people I can only guess would have been happier living in the 19th century. You've just suggested the island wouldn't be viable as a sovereign state - I agree, So why then do we need a head of state? It's a perfectly logical and calmly posed question. What is the point of the Lord of Mann? The King would still be the head of state in the UK, we'd still be dependent on the UK, we'd just be removing a costly and unnecessary position and very slowly be moving our constitution out of the "too hard" pile and towards something which reflects the progressing values of our society. Now would seem to me to be the ideal time to have the debate. Sadly when it comes to the royal family, some British people's power for rational or logical thinking seems to desert them and they become all shouty and colonial, and as a modern society we remain constrained by a constitution which belongs in the 19th century. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 12 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said: I'm far from a nationalist, the complete opposite in fact, nor am I angry, just pointing out a logical progressive step for the island in light of recent events. If you have read my posts you would know that I'm not even suggesting that the island shouldn't be a crown dependency, that's not what I've suggested at all. It never ceases to amaze me how the merest hint of a tiny bit of constitutional modernisation brings frothy mouthed, angry, belittling responses from people I can only guess would have been happier living in the 19th century. You've just suggested the island wouldn't be viable as a sovereign state - I agree, So why then do we need a head of state? It's a perfectly logical and calmly posed question. What is the point of the Lord of Mann? The King would still be the head of state in the UK, we'd still be dependent on the UK, we'd just be removing a costly and unnecessary position and very slowly be moving our constitution out of the "too hard" pile and towards something which reflects the progressing values of our society. Now would seem to me to be the ideal time to have the debate. Sadly when it comes to the royal family, some British people's power for rational or logical thinking seems to desert them and they become all shouty and colonial, and as a modern society we remain constrained by a constitution which belongs in the 19th century. But you haven’t pointed out a logical progressive step. You haven't explained what reform you want to see, just to remove the Lord of Mann. I asked if you wanted the need for Royal Assent to our legislation to be removed. You haven’t answered that. Lord of Mann is a title, what you need to think about is the role and function and what should replace it. Not many are against reform and nor am I, but I really do not know what you want to achieve. Despite what you say, I do not 'play' the constitution card, but it is constitutional change that you want. Fine, but what change do you want? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willie Thorne Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 On 9/9/2022 at 10:07 AM, Banker said: Don’t worry Rob is returning early from his Baltic cruise to pay his respect , not sure why! At least it ended better than his last Baltic Cruise. Even if the Queen did cut it short for them. https://cueballsdiaryofasadman.wordpress.com/2017/09/08/this-week-pining-for-the-fjords-week-ending-8th-sept/ 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTailT Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 Wonder if Ashford is going with his trolly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 19 minutes ago, NoTailT said: Wonder if Ashford is going with his trolly? Bet Wills and Kate can't wait to meet up for a bit of a jaw. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 23 minutes ago, Gladys said: But you haven’t pointed out a logical progressive step. You haven't explained what reform you want to see, just to remove the Lord of Mann. I asked if you wanted the need for Royal Assent to our legislation to be removed. You haven’t answered that. Lord of Mann is a title, what you need to think about is the role and function and what should replace it. Not many are against reform and nor am I, but I really do not know what you want to achieve. Despite what you say, I do not 'play' the constitution card, but it is constitutional change that you want. Fine, but what change do you want? I don't know how I could explain it any clearer to be honest. Yes remove the Lord of Mann title, I've suggested several times it doesn't need replacing, it's completely unnecessary. It's constitutionally unclear as to what the role and function is, what is done as Lord of Mann and what is done because we're a dependency. I'd be all in favour of scrapping royal assent, of course I would, any objectively thinking person in the 21st century would. I'd certainly be in favour of removing the Governor, a very costly and non-representative hang over from colonial times. How much of this could be achieved by scrapping the Lord of Mann title? I have no idea, and here's the thing, neither does anybody else, it's no reason not to do it though, if all that's achieved is the scrapping of the title it's at least a start. We should not sacrifice the values of our society to suit a constitution, that's the tale wagging the dog, our constitution needs to change and progress to reflect the changing views, values and culture of our people. Every journey starts with a first step and we've recently experienced a once in a lifetime opportunity to take that first step in as least offensive and disruptive way as possible, we'd be mad not to consider it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 11 minutes ago, A fool and his money..... said: You've just suggested the island wouldn't be viable as a sovereign state - I agree, So why then do we need a head of state? It's a perfectly logical and calmly posed question. What is the point of the Lord of Mann? The King would still be the head of state in the UK, we'd still be dependent on the UK, we'd just be removing a costly and unnecessary position and very slowly be moving our constitution out of the "too hard" pile and towards something which reflects the progressing values of our society. Now would seem to me to be the ideal time to have the debate. Sadly when it comes to the royal family, some British people's power for rational or logical thinking seems to desert them and they become all shouty and colonial, and as a modern society we remain constrained by a constitution which belongs in the 19th century. I genuinely don't know what you're on about. If you accept that the Isle of Man is best continuing in some form of dependency relationship with the UK, then their head of state is our head of state. We don't get a say in the matter, that's what dependency means. If you're referring to the title of the Lord of Mann, that doesn't cost us anything. As William Cain showed in that mischievous lecture, it's pretty much a recent 'invented tradition'[1], especially as the British monarch's main title in the Isle of Man. It actually has no legal status. But there would still be a head of state and it would be their decision on how they were represented on the Island and how that representation was paid for. [1] When I first read the Hobsbawm and Ranger collection of essays some decades ago, I did consider doing some work on Manx examples. But then I thought: "Christ, where would you start? They're all invented". 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newsdesk Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 (edited) 39 minutes ago, NoTailT said: Wonder if Ashford is going with his trolly? Perhaps she’ll get one of GB News’ finest right wing loonies (and Deacon in the UK Free Church) to get them married at the same time - sort of like a Brexit Nazi wedding. Edited September 10, 2022 by Newsdesk 1 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A fool and his money..... Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 9 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: I genuinely don't know what you're on about. If you accept that the Isle of Man is best continuing in some form of dependency relationship with the UK, then their head of state is our head of state. We don't get a say in the matter, that's what dependency means. If you're referring to the title of the Lord of Mann, that doesn't cost us anything. As William Cain showed in that mischievous lecture, it's pretty much a recent 'invented tradition'[1], especially as the British monarch's main title in the Isle of Man. It actually has no legal status. But there would still be a head of state and it would be their decision on how they were represented on the Island and how that representation was paid for. It's very simple, I accept the IOM is best having some form of dependency with the UK or elsewhere and I agree that means their head of state is our head of state effectively in international terms, although we are not a state. I am and have repeatedly referred to the Lord of Mann title and don't agree that it doesn't cost us anything. In pure monetary terms you may be right to a point, but what does it cost us culturally? What does it cost us in societal terms? What does it cost us in terms of our democracy our identity? Is it still appropriate for our "head of state" to be appointed in this way, does it still represent what we're all about? Also, does it hinder us as a logical first step to further constitutional reform which very much does cost us financially? We can't put it off for ever. The world has moved on since the time of kings and queens and our constitution should reflect this. Don't get me wrong, I think there is a place for historical culture and tradition to be preserved and celebrated. I just don't think something as fundamentally significant to our governance as our constitution is that place. The very word dependent or dependency implies need. There are many things in our constitutional relationship with the UK that we simply don't need as they serve no purpose. Our own head of state is one of them and this is an ideal opportunity to address that. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 50 minutes ago, Newsdesk said: Perhaps she’ll get one of GB News’ finest right wing loonies (and Deacon in the UK Free Church) to get them married at the same time - sort of like a Brexit Nazi wedding. That is just embarrassing on so many levels:- "Are you for hire?" Really? "Unfortunately this isn't a proposal as I am already taken." I sure that clarification was welcome. "....this lucky bloke..." I think the lucky bloke needs to evaluate that. "....to have you marry us would be having the best of both." Both what? is this really DA's partner? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b4mbi Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 7 minutes ago, Gladys said: That is just embarrassing on so many levels:- "Are you for hire?" Really? "Unfortunately this isn't a proposal as I am already taken." I sure that clarification was welcome. "....this lucky bloke..." I think the lucky bloke needs to evaluate that. "....to have you marry us would be having the best of both." Both what? is this really DA's partner? Difficult to tell. The judgement shown in the posting of that tweet would suggest so, but on the other hand, it didn't mention crosses or garlic and was posted at 3.34pm so presumably in daylight. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newsdesk Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 15 minutes ago, Gladys said: That is just embarrassing on so many levels:- "Are you for hire?" Really? "Unfortunately this isn't a proposal as I am already taken." I sure that clarification was welcome. "....this lucky bloke..." I think the lucky bloke needs to evaluate that. "....to have you marry us would be having the best of both." Both what? is this really DA's partner? I just loved the fact they’re avid GB News followers to the point they want to be married by one. If you ever have the chance to watch GB News on Freeview you should. Its hilarious mix of presenters includes Dan Wootton of the Daily Mail, Nigel Farage, ex Fox News Mark Steyn, and other awful Right-wingers like Michael Portillo and Andrew Pierce. It’s like Al Jazeera for White Van men. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoTailT Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Newsdesk said: It’s like Al Jazeera for White Van men. Quite possibly the most hilarious - yet accurate - description of GB News I've ever heard. Edited September 10, 2022 by NoTailT 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passing Time Posted September 10, 2022 Share Posted September 10, 2022 21 hours ago, offshoremanxman said: Charles is basically an idiot. He's more intelligent and loved a lot more than you that's for sure 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.