Bob Falfa: Do we care?
what_now: DamnYankees: No. Why would they not keep Queen Elizabeth?How long do you have?Basically, the Kings of England have farked with Scotland for a thousand years. Henry the II tried to wipe out the entire boarder- you've seen Braveheart. Besides the made up romance, it's pretty accurate. Henry the...(fourth? I think?) captured the children and wives of the Scottish barons and murdered and raped them- in that order. Others, he hung from cages outside for YEARS.Henry the 7th married his daughter off to the Stuart king, and then invaded. Henry's Granddaughter Elizabeth executed their Queen (Mary Stuart), and then named Mary's son her heir. So the Scottish Stuarts were now Kings of England.But a few generations later, the Stuart King decided to be a Catholic, so they kicked him out, and invited his daughter and son in law (William and Mary) to come be King and Queen instead, and when they died, they Hanovers- the current ruling family took over.A few generations after that, the grandson of that Stuart King tried to invade through Scotland. The British didn't just beat the Scots- they wiped out survivors, women, children, animals and fields. They burned crops, they destroyed buildings.Google "Culloden". The Scottish aren't happy with the Hanovers (Windsors). There's a reason that when Elizabeth dies, her son will take a name other than "King Charles".
DamnYankees: what_now: DamnYankees: Yes, fair enough. But if that was the standard for rebellion then, is that not the same standard now? Would this random Spanish duchess treat them better than Elizabeth?Well, she wouldn't have anything to do with them, same as Elizabeth. I think the question is- could they squeeze more tourist dollars out of people with a brand new monarchy, and the answer is probably yes.Aren't there economic benefits to being part of the Commonwealth? I thought there were. But yea, this is a good point. I imagine the economics of it will matter.Also, lets not pretend this matters - Scotland isn't declaring independence.
OooShiny: 'Make me king, rename it Trumpland and I'll save your country by turning the whole place into a tartan-themed mini-golf astroplex financed by crushing junk debt that will haunt your descendants for the next 500 years.'[img.fark.net image 450x584]
ThatGuyFromTheInternet: Am I the only one wondering why an independent Scotland would need a monarch of any sort? I get if they stay a Commonwealth realm they'd keep Lizzy Deuce and the wacky Windsors as their royals like Canada or Australia do, but if they're even suggesting going far enough to not answer to that throne, why any?
what_now: DamnYankees: No. Why would they not keep Queen Elizabeth?How long do you have?
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Apr 24 2017 06:03:09
Runtime: 0.214 sec (213 ms)