Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 6 of 7     «   Prev   3   4   5   6   7   Next
Everyman

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 17
Reply with quote  #76 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronVonServers
Because its NOT another nation's heritage.  It is ours. 

You continue to refuse to open your eyes and see that as a family grows and expands the children and grand children start 'families' of their own, without relinquishing the attachment to the parents and grand parents.  As grows the family, so do cultures.  Her Majesty is every bit as much my Queen as she is Paul's Queen, even though he lives in the United Kingdom, and I live in West Florida.  Her Majesty belongs to us both, as does the use of the English Language, and the enjoyment of Shakespeare.  Does your 1st cousin's Grandma also being your Grandma make her any less your Grandma? - Of course not. The Shared Crown works in the same way.

No, Colonialism preceded Imperialism.  The Colonies (as administered by Great Britain) were confined to the strip of land between the sea and the mountains.  The Proclamation of 1763 made it quite plain that the colonists were NOT to interfere with the Indians, nor steal anymore of their land.  This restriction of aggressive expansion was part of the build-up to the war of 1776. 

It IS working today, for the 16 Nations collectively know as the Commonwealth Realms.  Do the Canadians seem especially neoconservative to you?  Perhaps St. Lucia is?  Or what about Belize? -- Oh I know you must be talking about the aggressive Antiguans.   You claim you haven't read about how this can work today - Did you visit the Canadian Monarchy site? 

It's not that I won't open my eyes, it's that I don't agree. That's all. Your family analogy doesn't work to make your point, but it did work to help me articulate my point. An expanding family with children and grandchildren is exactly how we both see the way it should be. BUT we have different ways of defining this.

 

I see it like this: the expanding family--in other words--royal blood, marries other royalty, just like in the middle ages. This way true royalty is in charge, but they become actual true residents and real sovereigns of the country they are ruling. Example: King Bill of Arkansas marries Princess Betty of Missouri, making her Queen of Arkansas. Their son, Prince Bob, becomes king when his parents kick the bucket. He marries...blah, blah, you get the point.

 

With this silly model, Arkansas and Missouri can use the royalty of the other place, but they don't claim to have control over the other. In fact, if one ever attempted to take over the other, there would be reason for a just war in self-defense. Additionally, and maybe most important to this thread, if a group of "colonists" merge over into Missouri soil from Arkansas, remaining loyal to the monarch in Arkansas, that does not give Arkansas justification for eventually trying to take over Missouri.

 

Granted, these are the mere ramblings of a monarchical novice. So, attack at will.


__________________
Everyman

"Christus' lore and His apostles twelve
He taught, but first He followed it himselve."
-Geoffrey Chaucer
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,993
Reply with quote  #77 
We aren't Orphans, we don't need to attempt to create a new Monarchy.

Perhaps both of our ideals could be realized by having the Royal Dukes who are not Heirs to the Throne come over to both reign and rule - creating Her Majesty and successors as Emperors of this 'new empire'  (it'd take a few generations to get 50+ of them though ).

If we went that route, we'd want the Royals to marry Commoners, or Royals from the other Houses of Europe for a while though, not the neighbors!


__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
Everyman

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 17
Reply with quote  #78 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronVonServers
We aren't Orphans, we don't need to attempt to create a new Monarchy.

Does the time that has past mean nothing? Are we now not our own, no matter how illegitimately you think that may have occurred?


__________________
Everyman

"Christus' lore and His apostles twelve
He taught, but first He followed it himselve."
-Geoffrey Chaucer
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,993
Reply with quote  #79 
No matter how long I'm gone from home, its still home when I return.  The longer I am gone, the sweeter the return and reunion.

We are still Anglo-Americans.  Our Heritage is eternally bound to Great Britain, the Rule of Law, the English Language, Shakespeare, in some ways we are more British than the United Kingdom, those poor folks have gone European (Metric).  We still buy Gas by the Gallon, and Sugar by the Pound.


__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
SupremeDirector

Registered:
Posts: 192
Reply with quote  #80 
Yes but Baron, the land may be truly England's, and we might speak their language, etc., but we are also made up by many immigrants of other nations, and our culture has developed from a mixture of British, Irish, African, Hispanic, Indian, Asian, etc. I agree with Everyman, the time that has past has been too great, a union cannot be mutually beneficial at all.
__________________
Long Live The King, Long Live Louis XX!

"So pride yourself on what you are, And hold them all to words they can't take back. I've seen a place (it comes) to me in dreams, Where fires die but light still shines for us to see! Would God bless a murder of the innocents? Would God bless a war based on pride? Would God bless a money-hungry government? Noooo! Would God bless our ineffective court system? God bless the sweatshops we run. God bless America? God bless America?" ~Rise Against (Blood Red, White & Blue)
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,993
Reply with quote  #81 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupremeDirector
Yes but Baron, the land may be truly England's, and we might speak their language, etc., but we are also made up by many immigrants of other nations, and our culture has developed from a mixture of British, Irish, African, Hispanic, Indian, Asian, etc. I agree with Everyman, the time that has past has been too great, a union cannot be mutually beneficial at all.


The mixture of other blood into my veins doesn't lessen my relationship or love for my grandmother, nor does the admixture of of other cultures into ours lesson our tie to Great Britain, (BTW the King of Ireland during the revolution was HM George III, perhaps that fact alone will help you to see that acknowledgment of the Shared Crown doesn't mean throwing one's own 'one-off' culture away).

__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net


Registered:
Posts: N/A
Reply with quote  #82 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronVonServers

We are still Anglo-Americans.  Our Heritage is eternally bound to Great Britain, the Rule of Law, the English Language, Shakespeare, in some ways we are more British than the United Kingdom, those poor folks have gone European (Metric).  We still buy Gas by the Gallon, and Sugar by the Pound.

 
M. le Baron,
 
For you, as a Protestant, this may be true. For me, as a Catholic, there is an entire universe waiting. First of all, the Rule of Law is not British, it is an heritage of Catholic Europe. Of course, if you meant British Common Law, you'd be right, but there are many of us who have studied both the Common Law and the Roman Law and prefer the latter.
 
As to the language, yes it is my mother tongue, taught me by two Hampshire women, my grandmother and my mother, but I still mourn the loss of Latin as the common language of educated Europeans.
 
Shakespeare? Yes, he was English, but even tho' he was Catholic I tend to find him boring. Give me Homer, Virgil and Dante, the literary founders of our Greco-Roman Catholic Civilisation and Culture any day. As a general rule, I don't bother with British literature. I read Catholic literature, a few of whose practitioners were British, but most of whom are Continental.
 
Regarding measurement systems (a silly argument to begin with!), I don't know if you realise that the Saxons had a metric (base ten) system based on the length of Wotan's armstretch before it was destroyed by the "European" Normans and replaced with the equally "European" system of gallons, inches and pounds.
 
But in the last analysis, as I sit at my keyboard typing this, I sit on land never ruled by the British Crown. Yes, it was "claimed" by the "coast to coast claims" of the early colonial period, but effective rule was never realised. The first white settlement in this area was a fort of the French Army a few miles upstream on the Missouri from where I live. I sit on land that was ruled at various times by His Most Catholic Majesty of the Spains or His Most Christian Majesty of France and Navarre. Why, as a Catholic, should I offer my allengiance to a foreign, heretical House which never ruled this land when there are Catholic claimants whose ancestors did rule here?
 
I am perfectly willing to accept the claims of the King of Spain (whomever he may be!) to the south west, but the Louisiana Purchase was French Territory, stolen from its rightful owner by the Revolution and the usurper  Napoleon and unlawfully alienated to the United States. I support the claim of my liege lord, Louis XX, by God's grace, King of France and Navarre to this territory and would oppose any attempt to steal the territory from him and incorporate it into some heretical "Commonwealth" under the House of Windsor.
pauljluk

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 202
Reply with quote  #83 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupremeDirector

Look at the cultures and peoples of the Fertile Cresent, are you going to try and tell me they are civilized or advanced in any way Rosa? They had the resources, but they were too buzy killing each other to do anything with it.


Look at the history of monarchical Europe - it is strewn with wars, conflicts and massacres. The longest period of continuous peace between states/realms in western Europe has been that achieved by its democracies in the last 60 years.
pauljluk

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 202
Reply with quote  #84 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronVonServers
No matter how long I'm gone from home, its still home when I return.  The longer I am gone, the sweeter the return and reunion.

We are still Anglo-Americans.  Our Heritage is eternally bound to Great Britain, the Rule of Law, the English Language, Shakespeare, in some ways we are more British than the United Kingdom, those poor folks have gone European (Metric).  We still buy Gas by the Gallon, and Sugar by the Pound.

Look at a map - we "poor folks" have always been European. Our language and culture is fundamentally European, however much we distracted ourselves by looking further afield for a time. Our old weights and measures (libra, solidi, denarii, galóns etc) were all of European origin.

Metric also originated in Europe, but it is now worldwide. The USA, Liberia and Burma are the only countries on Earth which do not use the metric system, but I guess you guys will catch up with the rest of humanity one day
pauljluk

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 202
Reply with quote  #85 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SupremeDirector
Yes but Baron, the land may be truly England's, and we might speak their language, etc., but we are also made up by many immigrants of other nations, and our culture has developed from a mixture of British, Irish, African, Hispanic, Indian, Asian, etc. I agree with Everyman, the time that has past has been too great, a union cannot be mutually beneficial at all.

Have you visited Canada, Australia or New Zealand recently? They, too, are made up of immigrants (and natives) of many other nations, and probably give more formal recognition to their non-British heritage than the USA does, but they are still realms of Queen Elizabeth II, sharing the same political and legal heritage. While the American people are of diverse ethnic and cultural origin, the American state is largely of the British tradition, even where the British crown never ruled.
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,993
Reply with quote  #86 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauljluk

Look at a map - we "poor folks" have always been European. Our language and culture is fundamentally European, however much we distracted ourselves by looking further afield for a time. Our old weights and measures (libra, solidi, denarii, galóns etc) were all of European origin.

True, I was using a later starting point (after the establishment of the current nation-state). Like many others I tend to go to 1066 and say 'This is when the history of England and its successors starts".  Not really defensible, but the invasion does mark a clear 'turning point'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauljluk

Metric also originated in Europe, but it is now worldwide. The USA, Liberia and Burma are the only countries on Earth which do not use the metric system, but I guess you guys will catch up with the rest of humanity one day

Unfortunately we are being drug down by the weight of numbers.  One can't even buy a real fifth of whiskey anymore, its a 750ml bottle now..

The 'measurements' maybe a silly example, but they do point out that we have retained parts of the culture from before the separation. (Our gallon didn't get the 'adjustments' that the English one did for example, thats why you can still find conversion charts for US Gallon - Imperial Gallon). 

__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,993
Reply with quote  #87 
Jovan,
I can understand a desire to retain the Crowns of the European Monarchs here, including the French Crown. (even though the Spanish and French crown went into abeyance for a while, the French one remaining there).

However, let me be sure to clarify for you and others that the 'Louisiana Purchase' did NOT include all of what is currently Louisiana. 

Yes, it included a whole lot more land in the Midwest than is currently part of the state of Louisiana, but it did NOT include anything east of the Mississippi, specifically it did not include the 'Florida Parishes' currently claimed as part of the State of Louisiana. 

France's King (Whoever he is) has no claim whatsoever to the Floridas, and the Spanish Crown forfeited all claim when Charles IV abdicated.


__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
pauljluk

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 202
Reply with quote  #88 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronVonServers

True, I was using a later starting point (after the establishment of the current nation-state). Like many others I tend to go to 1066 and say 'This is when the history of England and its successors starts".  Not really defensible, but the invasion does mark a clear 'turning point'.

Yes, it was a turning point from which England became more, not less, entwined in European affairs and culture, initially because the Norman and then Angevin realms spanned the channel and included large parts of France. Up until the relatively short period when the British Empire held sway, Europe had always dominated English/British trade and cultural relations, and it was natural that we would turn there again with the demise of empire. The interaction has been two-way, though : e.g., most European countries have adopted a Westminster-style parliamentary democracy, and with innovations such as our National Health Service, we were among the pioneers of the European social model which differentiates modern Europe from the US.

Quote:
Unfortunately we are being drug down by the weight of numbers.  One can't even buy a real fifth of whiskey anymore, its a 750ml bottle now..

The 'measurements' maybe a silly example, but they do point out that we have retained parts of the culture from before the separation. (Our gallon didn't get the 'adjustments' that the English one did for example, thats why you can still find conversion charts for US Gallon - Imperial Gallon). 

Does the whiskey taste any different in 75cl bottles? I've never understood the fuss some people make over weights and measures : once one is used to a new system it makes no practical difference to our culture or quality of life at all.

There were various types of gallon in use on both sides of the Atlantic until we both decided to standardise in the early 19th century, but the US standardised on the "wine gallon" while the UK standardised on the "ale gallon".

In some ways the US retained old practices (including linguistic features) which the UK dropped, but in others it was the other way round. You even adopted a European-style decimal currency before the Europeans themselves thought of it
pauljluk

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 202
Reply with quote  #89 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaronVonServers
France's King (Whoever he is) has no claim whatsoever to the Floridas, and the Spanish Crown forfeited all claim when Charles IV abdicated.

Where do you guys get this strange idea that the Spanish Crown forfeited its colonial rights when Carlos IV abdicated, let alone that West Florida would therefore return to the British crown? I've never heard of any such legal principle or precedent. Setting aside the option of a colony taking matters into its own hands, there were only two legal possibilities, as far as I can see : either you recognize the legitimacy of Carlos IV's abdication, in which case all his rights (including those over West Florida) passed to his successors (Joseph Bonaparte and/or Ferdinand VII), or you don't recognize the abdication, in which case all his rights remained with him de jure. Either way, West Florida remained the territory of whoever was the rightful King of Spain. By 1819, that was indisputably Ferdinand VII, and he ceded the territory to the USA.
BaronVonServers

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 11,993
Reply with quote  #90 
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Pauljluk
Does the whiskey taste any different in 75cl bottles? I've never understood the fuss some people make over weights and measures : once one is used to a new system it makes no practical difference to our culture or quality of life at all.
  I don't know, I've always poured it out of the bottle before I tasted it.   (Really it only matters for some of my recipes, I can adjust, but I hate wasted whiskey!)

For me its
1) comfort with the old way.
2) issues with doing everything by orders of magnitude
3) I like fractions.

The first one, is the least 'rational' I suppose, it is certainly the one argued with the greatest passion (which usually means little rational argument), conversion costs are the only 'rational' argument I've seen bandied about.....

The second is more difficult for me to properly express (Which I guess means it like rationality too ).  multiplying by tens every time makes the math easy, but it doesn't fit with my experience of the world, it doesn't match up to my expectations for precision. 
An order of magnitude isn't the usual progression for desired precision.  When I measure very small things I use fractions of an inch, for my normal stuff, I use feet,  for larger stuff that'll still fit in my house I use yards and for long distances I use miles.  The progression isn't orders of magnitude - from small to normal, is 12 times, from normal to big its 3 and from big the very large its 1760 times. 
When one uses a non decimal system, one tends to 'keep the scale more humanly based', and to mind the 'small stuff' better on larger measures, while still not getting lost in the minutia. 

I'm 6ft 1 and a half.  That's the 'normal expression' for my height, with the 'ID Card' expression being 6ft 1.  The 'smaller scale' numbers (1 inch) are More than an order of magnitude less the the 'larger scale' numbers (6 feet), so the differentiation is greater than it would be using the 'order-of-magnitude' method.  You know my height more accurately using 2 values (6 and 1 for feet and inches) than you do using two values (1 and 8  - or depending on where you round 1 and 9 - meter and decimeter). to get the same level of precision, you'd need three digits in metric (meter decimeter centimeter).

I do wish I could formulate the 'retained precision when changing scale' argument better

The Third one is, obviously personal, but I like halves and thirds and fourths and fifths, eighths, and sixteenths,  and using them in daily life.



__________________
"In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas"

I am NOT an authorized representative of my Government.

Learn more about the Dominion of British West Florida at http://dbwf.net
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.