Replies

“Why? You operate a hereditary allocation of wealth system in the US. You die, your earthly goods and chattels pass to your blood relatives. It’s the same principle.”

It wouldn’t be worth fighting another war with the UK, but we long ago parted ways, with respect to this “principle,” that being rolyalty.

I find it sort of humorous that Canadians, Australians, Indians hold the King or Queen of England and Northern Ireland, to be their divinely selected leader.

Much more hilarious are Nigeria, Pakistan and Belize. Why doesn’t the Queen pull Nigeria and Pakistan at least into the 18th or 19th centuries?

No, the principle I was talking about was not royalty. It was the inheritence principle. It is practiced worldwide. It is practiced in the US. You don't disagree with us over this, unless you think all of your earthly goods should be forfeit to the State in the event of your death?

I find it rather incredible myself that such diverse countries and societies can still be bound together by something that is so simple. India, however, has opted out I believe.

The Queen does not "pull Nigeria and Pakistan into the 18th or 19th centuries" because that is not her job. She is not a tyrant to command them to act in any way. It is up to the duly elected governments of those countries to reform their societies as they see fit. For you to think them backwards is your perception.