[ SECRET POST #2405 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2405 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 099 secrets from Secret Submission Post #344.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

The question of monarchy and royalty is fundamentally and characteristically different than the question of inheritance in general. Because what the Queen will pass on to her heirs is not just money or influence; it is a unique and significant legal status, that of sovereign over the United Kingdom, and ruler over its subjects. That is an inescapable and real difference. Even if someone is given a massive inheritance from their parents and uses that to purchase influence, that's still different from someone being considered, for their entire life, categorically legally and formally distinct from ordinary people simply by virtue of one's parents. Hereditary monarchy is simply different from inheritance.

Even in the case of inheritance, although it is tricky, we do try to make regulations and taxes to control the effect that inheritance has on society and that massive economic inequities have on society, and we try to ensure that these things are limited. But the case is different here - for one thing, you can't possibly say that the royal family has their position because they've earned it. But more importantly, their inheritance is something other than money, it is a fundamental legal and political distinction.

I fully accept that there's thorny issues surrounding inheritance and surrounding power and social inequity, and that none of those issues would go away if a country got rid of its monarchy. However, being opposed to the monarchy doesn't mean that we can't address those issues at the same time. We can have many political beliefs, and advocate doing many things, simultaneously, especially when those beliefs don't contradict each other in any way and even reinforce each other.

A hereditary monarchy is in itself unjust and wrong, and therefore it should be ended. Full stop. Regardless of whether there are other problems in society (of course there are), or whether it's an economic benefit to the country, whatever the context surrounding it, it is unjust, illegitimate, and insupportable, and should be ended because of that.