On 6/6/2022 10:46 PM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC+10, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:45:47 PM UTC-7, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>> a republic doesn't have
>>> to be a democracy
>> A "republic" that is not a
>> democracy is nothing but
>> a sugar coated dictatorship.
>>> but look at the quantity.
>> ?!?
>>
>> dk
>
> 1. Being a republic and being a one-party state are not mutually exclusive. Many of the world's republics are authoritarian or in Africa, miltary dictatorships. All the European monarchies are parliamentary democracies.
> 2. We have a vast quantity of bread in Australia.
>
> Andrew Clarke
> Canberra

The definition of a republic is one in which power is in the hands of the people and their elected representatives. I'm not sure if that implies elections must be free or fair. Is a country a republic because it calls itself one? Is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea a democracy? A Republic?

Op 2022-06-07 om 05:06 schreef Frank Berger:
> On 6/6/2022 10:46 PM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC+10, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:45:47 PM UTC-7, andrewc...@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> a republic doesn't have
>>>> to be a democracy
>>> A "republic" that is not a
>>> democracy is nothing but
>>> a sugar coated dictatorship.
>>>> but look at the quantity.
>>> ?!?
>>>
>>> dk
>>
>> 1. Being a republic and being a one-party state are not mutually
>> exclusive. Many of the world's republics are authoritarian or in
>> Africa, miltary dictatorships. All the European monarchies are
>> parliamentary democracies.
>> 2. We have a vast quantity of bread in Australia.
>>
>> Andrew Clarke
>> Canberra
>
> The definition of a republic is one in which power is in the hands of
> the people and their elected representatives.

That's not a good definition. According to this some monarchies are
republics.
(And: "is one" what?)

On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 10:29:24 +0200, Gerard
<g_hendriksen-nospam-@live.com> wrote:

>Op 2022-06-07 om 05:06 schreef Frank Berger:
>> On 6/6/2022 10:46 PM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC+10, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:45:47 PM UTC-7, andrewc...@gmail.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> a republic doesn't have
>>>>> to be a democracy
>>>> A "republic" that is not a
>>>> democracy is nothing but
>>>> a sugar coated dictatorship.
>>>>> but look at the quantity.
>>>> ?!?
>>>>
>>>> dk
>>>
>>> 1. Being a republic and being a one-party state are not mutually
>>> exclusive. Many of the world's republics are authoritarian or in
>>> Africa, miltary dictatorships. All the European monarchies are
>>> parliamentary democracies.
>>> 2. We have a vast quantity of bread in Australia.
>>>
>>> Andrew Clarke
>>> Canberra
>>
>> The definition of a republic is one in which power is in the hands of
>> the people and their elected representatives.
>
>That's not a good definition. According to this some monarchies are
>republics.
>(And: "is one" what?)

To add to my confusion, I have read that the difference between a
republic and a democracy is that a republic has a government which
tries to serve all the people equally while a democracy is one where
the people themselves make the decisions.

On 6/7/2022 10:39 AM, Ricardo Jimenez wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 10:29:24 +0200, Gerard
> <g_hendriksen-nospam-@live.com> wrote:
>
>> Op 2022-06-07 om 05:06 schreef Frank Berger:
>>> On 6/6/2022 10:46 PM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC+10, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:45:47 PM UTC-7, andrewc...@gmail.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> a republic doesn't have
>>>>>> to be a democracy
>>>>> A "republic" that is not a
>>>>> democracy is nothing but
>>>>> a sugar coated dictatorship.
>>>>>> but look at the quantity.
>>>>> ?!?
>>>>>
>>>>> dk
>>>>
>>>> 1. Being a republic and being a one-party state are not mutually
>>>> exclusive. Many of the world's republics are authoritarian or in
>>>> Africa, miltary dictatorships. All the European monarchies are
>>>> parliamentary democracies.
>>>> 2. We have a vast quantity of bread in Australia.
>>>>
>>>> Andrew Clarke
>>>> Canberra
>>>
>>> The definition of a republic is one in which power is in the hands of
>>> the people and their elected representatives.
>>
>> That's not a good definition. According to this some monarchies are
>> republics.
>> (And: "is one" what?)
>
> To add to my confusion, I have read that the difference between a
> republic and a democracy is that a republic has a government which
> tries to serve all the people equally while a democracy is one where
> the people themselves make the decisions.

Maybe the confusion (and I share it) is that there are no unmodified republics and no unmodified democracies. It's the modifier that tells you what's going on, as in a constitutional republic. A simple democracy as I think I understand it is that all public decisions are made by simple majority rule. The opposite, almost, of having guaranteed rights for minorities.

Maybe in the definition I gave above (and it's common) "in the hands of the people" simply means there is no monarchy. Though I fail to see any substantive difference between Korea's leadership and monarchs.

To me "in the hands of the people" implies, or should imply, a structured means (short of revolution) to replace leaders with other leaders.

The definitions of all these terms include the term "elected" without specifying where elections are fair and free. A country with rigged elections (I don't mean the U.S.) is not a "representative government" in any real sense.

On 6/7/2022 4:29 AM, Gerard wrote:
> Op 2022-06-07 om 05:06 schreef Frank Berger:
>> On 6/6/2022 10:46 PM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 8:25:00 AM UTC+10, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, June 5, 2022 at 10:45:47 PM UTC-7, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> a republic doesn't have
>>>>> to be a democracy
>>>> A "republic" that is not a
>>>> democracy is nothing but
>>>> a sugar coated dictatorship.
>>>>> but look at the quantity.
>>>> ?!?
>>>>
>>>> dk
>>>
>>> 1. Being a republic and being a one-party state are not mutually exclusive. Many of the world's republics are authoritarian or in Africa, miltary dictatorships. All the European monarchies are parliamentary democracies.
>>> 2. We have a vast quantity of bread in Australia.
>>>
>>> Andrew Clarke
>>> Canberra
>>
>> The definition of a republic is one in which power is in the hands of the people and their elected representatives.
>
> That's not a good definition. According to this some monarchies are republics.
> (And: "is one" what?)
>

The point of the definition (and I didn't make it up), I think, is that a "republic" is precisely NOT a monarchy. We're not talking about modern parliamentary monarchies, where the monarch is just for show and nostalgia.

"One" meant "government." Fairly obvious, but I could have said it better.

As I said before, just because a country calls itself a republic, or a democracy, doesn't mean it is one.

I think "power in the hands of the people and their elected representatives" implies free and fair elections.

I expect y'all have heard this expression --

Just because there can be good kings doesn't mean it's good to have kings.

But who remembers this lyric?

Kings don't mean a thing on the street of dreams...

On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 6:49:12 AM UTC+10, number_six wrote:
> I expect y'all have heard this expression --
>
> Just because there can be good kings doesn't mean it's good to have kings.
>
> But who remembers this lyric?
>
> Kings don't mean a thing on the street of dreams...

"I'd not have a palace if I were a king,
It's more than a palace, it's my ev'rything;
There's a queen waiting there in a silvery crown,
In that shanty in old shanty town."

A characteristically sentimental view of what it's like to live in a shanty town. Streets of dreams is all they've got.

Andrew Clarke
Canberra

On 6/7/22 10:39 AM, Ricardo Jimenez wrote:

>
> To add to my confusion, I have read that the difference between a
> republic and a democracy is that a republic has a government which
> tries to serve all the people equally while a democracy is one where
> the people themselves make the decisions.

More like a republic is a government which is designed to serve the
representatives of the people who elected them.

-Owen

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:25:09 AM UTC-8, Andy Evans wrote:
> So Prince Andrew is paying a lot of money, i.e. millions, to Virginia Giuffre whose role in all this is far from clear, as is his own. As a UK taxpayer I don't give a damn about the sleaze - it's what you expect in high places - but where is this money coming from? My guess is it comes from the UK taxpayer. That much I do care about. I mean, the guy doesn't have a job so......
>
> "Andrew's office and the expenses incurred by carrying out official duties are paid for by the Queen's private income, the Duchy of Lancaster. According to the Times, a British newspaper, the Duke of York receives around $323,000 a year from the queen for his royal role and this payment is tax-free".
>
> You can be sure the out of court settlement is several times that amount - add a naught and keep going.

Prince Charles:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-charles-accepted-dollar3m-in-cash-stuffed-into-bags-and-suitcases-from-sheikh

On Monday, June 27, 2022 at 9:53:11 AM UTC+10, gggg gggg wrote:

> Prince Charles:
>
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/prince-charles-accepted-dollar3m-in-cash-stuffed-into-bags-and-suitcases-from-sheikh

"Prince Charles’s acceptance of a suitcase containing €1 million in cash from a Qatari sheikh is to be reviewed by the Charity Commission.

The Prince of Wales is said to have received three separate cash payments from a former prime minister of the Gulf state totalling more than £2.5million, which were then handed to his charity.

The heir to the throne is alleged to have personally accepted the cash donations for the Prince of Wales's Charitable Fund between 2011 and 2015 from Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani, who was prime minister of Qatar between 2007 and 2013.

Clarence House said the donations were "passed immediately" to the charity, which “carried out the appropriate governance and have assured us that all the correct processes were followed”.

There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing by either party, but the details have raised further questions about the judgment of the future king ...

"It is alleged that the cash was handed to Royal aides who counted out the now discontinued €500 notes, which were named the "bin Laden" because of links to the funding of terrorism.

One former adviser who handled some of the cash said that "everyone felt very uncomfortable about the situation".

Private Coutts bank, which has served the Royal Family for decades, then collected the cash and it was paid into the accounts of the Prince of Wales's Charitable Fund (PWCF). There is no suggestion that the payments were illegal.

The PWCF is a grant making charity that has bankrolled a number of the Prince’s personal projects, including Dumfries House in Scotland.

A Charity Commission spokesman said last night: “We are aware of reports about donations received by the Prince of Wales’s Charitable Foundation. We will review the information to determine whether there is any role for the Commission in this matter”.

- The Daily Telegraph, London.

I would be most interested to hear more about the President Biden Charitable Fund and the President Trump Charitable Fund. I suspect that if they exist they would bear a close resemblance to the Meyer Lansky Charitable Fund, the Vito Genovese Family Charitable Fund or even more so, the Mayor William Hale Thompson Charitable Fund, much of which was later found stuffed under the floor of the Chicago Mayor's Office.

Andrew Clarke
Canberra

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:25:09 AM UTC-8, Andy Evans wrote:
>
> So Prince Andrew is paying a lot of money,
> i.e. millions, to Virginia Giuffre whose role
> in all this is far from clear, as is his own.

This is precisely the point of the payments:
to keep things unclear and to prevent them
forever from becoming clear.

dk

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:25:09 AM UTC-8, Andy Evans wrote:
> So Prince Andrew is paying a lot of money, i.e. millions, to Virginia Giuffre whose role in all this is far from clear, as is his own. As a UK taxpayer I don't give a damn about the sleaze - it's what you expect in high places - but where is this money coming from? My guess is it comes from the UK taxpayer. That much I do care about. I mean, the guy doesn't have a job so......
>
> "Andrew's office and the expenses incurred by carrying out official duties are paid for by the Queen's private income, the Duchy of Lancaster. According to the Times, a British newspaper, the Duke of York receives around $323,000 a year from the queen for his royal role and this payment is tax-free".
>
> You can be sure the out of court settlement is several times that amount - add a naught and keep going.

https://news.yahoo.com/prince-andrew-fbi-next-target-ghislaine-maxwell-124728695.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-62366487

On Sunday, June 26, 2022 at 6:51:32 PM UTC-7, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I would be most interested to hear more about the President Biden Charitable
> Fund and the President Trump Charitable Fund. I suspect that if they exist they
> would bear a close resemblance to the Meyer Lansky Charitable Fund, the Vito
> Genovese Family Charitable Fund or even more so, the Mayor William Hale
> Thompson Charitable Fund, much of which was later found stuffed under
> the floor of the Chicago Mayor's Office.

Obviously none of the comparisons you brought up are or were Blue Blood
British Royals. If a claim can be made with a straight face that the heir to
the throne accepting a suitcase filled with cash is no different than a
mobster receiving the same, one is implicitly saying the Royals are
no better than mobsters. Case closed.

dk

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:25:09 AM UTC-8, Andy Evans wrote:
> So Prince Andrew is paying a lot of money, i.e. millions, to Virginia Giuffre whose role in all this is far from clear, as is his own. As a UK taxpayer I don't give a damn about the sleaze - it's what you expect in high places - but where is this money coming from? My guess is it comes from the UK taxpayer. That much I do care about. I mean, the guy doesn't have a job so......
>
> "Andrew's office and the expenses incurred by carrying out official duties are paid for by the Queen's private income, the Duchy of Lancaster. According to the Times, a British newspaper, the Duke of York receives around $323,000 a year from the queen for his royal role and this payment is tax-free".
>
> You can be sure the out of court settlement is several times that amount - add a naught and keep going.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/clip-emerges-of-liz-truss-calling-monarchy-disgraceful-before-meeting-with-queen

On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 4:25:39 PM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:
>
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/clip-emerges-of-liz-truss-calling-monarchy-disgraceful-before-meeting-with-queen

This is the first meaningful and
useful article you ever posted
on r.m.c.r.

dk

On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 4:25:39 PM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:25:09 AM UTC-8, Andy Evans wrote:
> > So Prince Andrew is paying a lot of money, i.e. millions, to Virginia Giuffre whose role in all this is far from clear, as is his own. As a UK taxpayer I don't give a damn about the sleaze - it's what you expect in high places - but where is this money coming from? My guess is it comes from the UK taxpayer. That much I do care about. I mean, the guy doesn't have a job so.....
> >
> > "Andrew's office and the expenses incurred by carrying out official duties are paid for by the Queen's private income, the Duchy of Lancaster. According to the Times, a British newspaper, the Duke of York receives around $323,000 a year from the queen for his royal role and this payment is tax-free".
> >
> > You can be sure the out of court settlement is several times that amount - add a naught and keep going.
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/clip-emerges-of-liz-truss-calling-monarchy-disgraceful-before-meeting-with-queen

https://countercurrents.org/2022/09/evil-empire-let-the-monarchy-die-along-with-elizabeth/

On Tuesday, February 15, 2022 at 10:25:09 AM UTC-8, Andy Evans wrote:
> So Prince Andrew is paying a lot of money, i.e. millions, to Virginia Giuffre whose role in all this is far from clear, as is his own. As a UK taxpayer I don't give a damn about the sleaze - it's what you expect in high places - but where is this money coming from? My guess is it comes from the UK taxpayer. That much I do care about. I mean, the guy doesn't have a job so......
>
> "Andrew's office and the expenses incurred by carrying out official duties are paid for by the Queen's private income, the Duchy of Lancaster. According to the Times, a British newspaper, the Duke of York receives around $323,000 a year from the queen for his royal role and this payment is tax-free".
>
> You can be sure the out of court settlement is several times that amount - add a naught and keep going.

Could the following from Lampedusa's novel "Il Gattopardo" (The Leopard) apply to the British royals?:
- The wealth of many centuries had been transmitted into ornament, luxury, pleasure; no more; the abolition of feudal rights had swept away duties as well as privileges; wealth, like an old wine, had let the dregs of greed, even of care and prudence, fall to the bottom of the barrel, leaving only verve and color.

Could the British royals have become more ornamental than anything else? According to a study guide of THE LEOPARD:
- The narrative accounts the political changes taking place in Sicilian society where the royal families are losing influence. Therefore, it focuses on the loss of social status that is granted on the royal members by birthright. However, Prince Fabrizio as the protagonist who believes he is above everyone and deserves the royal rights has to come to the realization that it is no more. It showcases how the families lost their influence and titles and their status only became ornamental as the Italian political influence took hold.

https://pagesix.com/2023/01/07/royals-set-up-war-room-over-prince-harrys-spare-memoir/