Royal News

Souleater

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
1,835
Reaction score
2,814
Points
153
So stepping back from the republic, monarchy debate.
Harry Windsor is interviewed by James Corden in LA for prime time TV about the fact that media coverage of his life 'drove' him to abandon his family and support network for a peaceful unintrusive life in the most mediacentric city in the most mediacentric country in the world,
discuss
 

blessmycottonsocks

Antediluvian
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
5,530
Reaction score
9,381
Points
284
Location
Wessex and Mercia
Thing is, the monarch is the ruler of this country in theory.
Q: Who do the Armed Forces swear to? A: How's it done in other countries, especially ones that have been monarchies until recently? I'd suggest they are sworn to the laws of the nation. Thus, command devolves to politicians. At least you can vote them out. I know they aint perfect but ...
Q: Who would rule our country? A: The government, as it does now. You don't think 'Er Maj. comes up with all the ripping wheezes we get now personally? The government comes up with a law, it's run through Parliament then it's rubber stamped by the Queen.
Q: The monarchy has popular support. Why change it? A: Because popular support isn't maintaining the monarchy but the traditionalists in the high echelons of The Monarchy. All those lackies - suited old men (for 'tis ever so) whose family has served the royals for generations (i.e. earning a bloody good income and influence) and who maintain standards (i.e. preserving the status quo). If the royals were to be sidelined then they'd find it difficult to finance their property portfolio and their lifestyles. The parasites have a vested interest in preserving the host.

I've no axe to grind (to use a phrase) concerning individual members of the family but they are anachronistic because because they've been maintained so far. There has been no reason for royal reform, apart from the cosmetic changes. This is why they're desperate to find suitable 'mates' to prevent inbreeding. They could do so ... but not to the high standard that they seem to demand. They want to modernise ... or rather appear to modernise but they are flying in the face of time.
Compulsory military service was abolished in France in 1996. In its place though there was a mandatory attendance for 18 year olds to a one-day seminar about patriotism and selfless service to your country. My daughter attended her session at the French Lycée in London.
Some old general gave a patriotic speech and all the attendees had to stand and make some vow to uphold the values of the motherland (followed by the singing of La Marseillaise bien sûr).
By the time my son turned 18, even that was no longer mandatory (much to his relief).
I note though that Macron is reintroducing military service and, presumably, all the patriotism and nationalism that accompanies it.
 
Last edited:

Stormkhan

Disturbingly familiar
Joined
May 28, 2003
Messages
4,459
Reaction score
1,310
Points
184
Thing is, soldiers don't need a King or Queen to inspire them to fight. If the monarchy were to go, there'd still be armed forces.
 

Endlessly Amazed

Endlessly, you know, amazed
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Messages
97
Reaction score
354
Points
53
Location
Arizona, USA
I can’t sing and don’t know all the words to my country’s (US) anthem. Armed forces and US federal employees swear to support (or support and defend) the constitution. I deplore the US media depicting the spouse and children of a president as “First” anything. They are irrelevant to governmental administration. They, and the president, are just US citizens like me. The president works for me! And I voted to fire the ass of the last one.

I suspect that elevating a monarch, president, tribal chief, etc. above the others in the group is an atavistic response to the need for social carnivores to have a leader to most efficiently organize decisions. I hope we have outgrown this.

When thinking about the UK monarchy, I think that centuries of media manipulation of the public (fear, respect, allegiance, pride, awe, etc.), planning wealthy and powerful alliances with other wealthy and powerful families (perfectly natural, some would say), and deliberately entangling a family’s role with that of actual governance (crafty and self-serving), combine to make a whole which is difficult to separate into parts. These are selfish and all too human motivations. I see these things in my own country, a little differently played out.

I suspect that the UK monarchy will eventually end. My understanding of UK government is that it is already representative, with Parliament members directly and the PM indirectly elected to office by citizens’ vote. If the monarchy members all died or disappeared, it would make no difference to the actual governance of the country. The monarchy fills no actual governmental role which would result in a void if it disappeared. The monarchy, like many extremely wealthy families across the world, are selfish blood-suckers. (Thus proclaims the unwashed Proletariat!)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

brownmane

off kilter
Joined
Feb 1, 2019
Messages
1,378
Reaction score
2,790
Points
154
Location
Ontario, Canada
Bearing in mind that QE2 is the soverign of 15 other nations and doing away with the monarchy would throw all of those in to a situation too

Queen Elizabeth II is also the Sovereign of 15countries in the Commonwealth of Nations: Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, the Solomon Islands, and Tuvalu.
Not many Canadians are concerned with maintaining the historical connection with the British monarchy. They are totally figureheads over here.
 

Souleater

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Jan 10, 2021
Messages
1,835
Reaction score
2,814
Points
153
Not many Canadians are concerned with maintaining the historical connection with the British monarchy. They are totally figureheads over here.
You still like playing in our games :hahazebs:
 

Trevp666

It was like that when I got here.........honest!!!
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,296
Reaction score
8,222
Points
219
Location
Welwyn Garden City (but oddly, not an actual city)
Still, it's all at least as relevant as the Royal Family is to real life, eh?
Aaaah nice to see your royalist tendencies are still hiding Stu!
I can hear Lizzie preparing your knighthood "For Services to the Royal News thread", as we speak........lol.
 

Stormkhan

Disturbingly familiar
Joined
May 28, 2003
Messages
4,459
Reaction score
1,310
Points
184
In the miniscule chance that I would be offered a knighthood, my first question would be ... "what do I get out of it apart from a fancy title and what does it cost me?"
I can see it being a (cheap) gift to recognise good work but, frankly, I'd be impressed in myself that I had a title. Nice bit of ego massage, nice bit of kudos but as a "gift" from the monarch, it wouldn't bother me.
As long as it didn't commit me to obligations to the monarchy, I might accept it. After all, you can buy honours (either online or through the Conservative Central Office) so not many bragging rights.
 

Trevp666

It was like that when I got here.........honest!!!
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
3,296
Reaction score
8,222
Points
219
Location
Welwyn Garden City (but oddly, not an actual city)
I'd refuse it.
I don't think anyone is surprised.
You would, however, be missing a trip to Buck Pal, and afternoon tea with Her Maj.....
 

Lord Lucan

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Feb 17, 2017
Messages
3,287
Reaction score
8,938
Points
204
Anyone watching the Opera show with Harry & Megan?
It's not on here until 7.30 p.m tonight. Only just past 8 in the morning at the moment, although I've just asked my wife if she'd like me to record it as we'll be out this evening, so it looks like we'll be watching it at some point.
 

blessmycottonsocks

Antediluvian
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
5,530
Reaction score
9,381
Points
284
Location
Wessex and Mercia
Anyone watching the Opera show with Harry & Megan?
No interest whatsoever (although I expect my wife will tape it).

In fact, the only mild interest in things royal that I have is the speculation over Charles' supposed esoteric or borderline occult beliefs.
He's openly admitted to talking to plants and that he believes they respond to him.
He has hinted that he wants to discontinue the "Defender of the Faith" title and replace it with a pan-religious defender of all faiths role.
There has been press speculation about him dabbling in the ouija and other esoterica (auras, kirlian photography etc.).
In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if he's read the occasional Fortean Times (or even browsed this very forum)!
 
Last edited:

David Plankton

I AM HIM.
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
6,400
Reaction score
9,285
Points
309
Now, what about those royals eh?
Prince Phillip is dead! (Conspiracy Theory - calm down)

Durham County Council has sent out an email (today - Sunday 7th March) to all departments, stating the protocols to be observed in the event of a 'notable death'. This has nothing to do with Phillips recent stay in hospital - don't panic.
Flags at half mast.
Wearing of mourning and black ties.
Cancellation of events. ( yeah, like every event for the last twelve months - there are no events to cancel )

I have a very low opinion of my local council, but it sunk to even lower depths when they sent out an email earlier today telling us how to behave in the event of the death of Phillip, or some other 'notable'.

Over 100,000 dead from covid and we're expected to observe mourning for one person.

The conspiracy angle - and it didn't take long - was that Phil was already dead and that the Firm was waiting to release the news just before the Oprah Winfrey interview, and thereby suck all of the wind from the sails of that media vessel.

Like most conspiracy bollocks, it'll be just that. I wanted to plant it here...you never know.
 

Yithian

Parish Watch
Staff member
Joined
Oct 29, 2002
Messages
31,461
Reaction score
39,816
Points
309
Location
East of Suez
This interview is very silly. And so are some of the things being claimed:

Surprise at being asked to curtsy before a reigning monarch? I don't believe this.

A refusal to make their son a prince? Blame George V!

They were secretly married prior to the public wedding? I would be astonished if this was legally true as the then sixth in line to the throne needs the Queen's permission. Has anybody told the Archbishop of Canterbury? I was married overseas and needed certification from the British Embassy.

As anybody can see upthread, I respect Prince Harry and wished nothing but good for the couple, but this kind of tabloid-fodder is offensive to common sense and deeply unwise.
 

Naughty_Felid

kneesy earsy nosey
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
8,442
Reaction score
11,181
Points
294
This interview is very silly. And so are some of the things being claimed:

Surprise at being asked to curtsy before a reigning monarch? I don't believe this.

A refusal to make their son a prince? Blame George V!

They were secretly married prior to the public wedding? I would be astonished if this was legally true as the then sixth in line to the throne needs the Queen's permission. Has anybody told the Archbishop of Canterbury? I was married overseas and needed certification from the British Embassy.

As anybody can see upthread, I respect Prince Harry and wished nothing but good for the couple, but this kind of tabloid-fodder is offensive to common sense and deeply unwise.
It's not the reason the Royals are offensive is it?
 
Top