The Royal Family Discussion Thread

[trastrick]

4 hours ago, Anna B said:

They are trying to get Charles quickly embedded in the public consciousnes, before there's any public debate about reforming or abolishing the monarchy. 

The whole of traditional Western society is crumbling under the politics of WOKE.  Family, Community and Country  all sacrificed at the alter of today's radical Liberal New World Order.

 

The Monarchy in their anxious haste to bow down to the politically correct movement, has just screwed itself again.

 

First that dear old Dowager was publicly lynched, and deep sixed for getting it wrong, now they foist an aging Charlie on the same public that won't buy him either!

 

I'm no Monarchist, but as a PR Agent for them, I would have skipped Charlie altogether, he's way past his "best before date", and gone with  William and Kate.

 

Perhaps they could have hung on for a few more years!

 

 

[PRESLEY]

17 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

Don't rise to the bait Elvis,  harvey19 is just goading you.

That's what he does instead of debating.

Not sure if he is trying to wind me up or just delusional. 

[Axe]

8 hours ago, Anna B said:

They are trying to get Charles quickly embedded in the public consciousnes, before there's any public debate about reforming or abolishing the monarchy. 

He has been embedded in the public consciousness since 1969 when his investiture took place.

[PRESLEY]

14 minutes ago, Axe said:

He has been embedded in the public consciousness since 1969 when his investiture took place.

He is inbedded in your consciousness along with Bozo and Co, to the point of delusion. 

[ECCOnoob]

59 minutes ago, Axe said:

He has been embedded in the public consciousness since 1969 when his investiture took place.

I have to agree. I do find some of the posts on this thread quite bizarre.

 

Some people are talking as if it's a surprise that Charles is becoming king or he's in some public vote in which he has to 'apply' and 'persuade' the public to take the throne.

 

Everybody knows that Charles would become king.  That's how the line of succession works.  Every time the Queen had any health scare everyone was there, waiting in the wings ready to go, in case the inevitable happened.  

 

As for the fuss about portraits and pictures, it's obvious that official public buildings and state residences will contain pictures, emblems and portraits of the head of state.  That is now going to be King Charles.  Just as it was changed over to Queen Elizabeth before and the multitude of Kings and Queens before that.

 

I find it rather pathetic that's all and every single little thing involving the monarch these days has to be oversimplified, overanalysed and picked apart with inevitable ridiculous comparisons like as to "...how many nurses would that pay for..". The answer. It wouldn't.

 

We live in a monarchy. Our state leader is a sovereign monarch. There is no majority desire or protest to change it. Even if it was changed, they will still be a constitutional president and they would still be great expense, pomp, ceremony and privilege applying which, as has been evidenced several times when doing figure comparisons between regimes, often leads to even more money being spent than  our own monarchy.  

 

We don't live in some deluded utopia where there's no leader and no hierarchy and everyone  is equal.  

 

We are about to have a national celebration which is going to focus the world's attention on this little island. That is the pulling power that the Monarch still has and one of our key fundamental identities, which, despite the critics, still to this day maintains us with status, influence and power which other much larger countries could only dream of.

 

They are not just some silly outdated tourist attraction.  

Edited April 15, 2023 by ECCOnoob

[Anna B]

1 hour ago, Axe said:

He has been embedded in the public consciousness since 1969 when his investiture took place.

True, but that was as Prince of Wales, and before all the Royal scandals which have rocked the monarchy.

[PRESLEY]

12 minutes ago, Anna B said:

True, but that was as Prince of Wales, and before all the Royal scandals which have rocked the monarchy.

Yes they have surely blotted their copy book and because of this, I have no respect for them what so ever.

[Al Bundy]

37 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

I have to agree. I do find some of the posts on this thread quite bizarre.

 

Some people are talking as if it's a surprise that Charles is becoming king or he's in some public vote in which he has to 'apply' and 'persuade' the public to take the throne.

 

Everybody knows that Charles would become king.  That's how the line of succession works.  Every time the Queen had any health scare everyone was there, waiting in the wings ready to go, in case the inevitable happened.  

 

As for the fuss about portraits and pictures, it's obvious that official public buildings and state residences will contain pictures, emblems and portraits of the head of state.  That is now going to be King Charles.  Just as it was changed over to Queen Elizabeth before and the multitude of Kings and Queens before that.

 

I find it rather pathetic that's all and every single little thing involving the monarch these days has to be oversimplified, overanalysed and picked apart with inevitable ridiculous comparisons like as to "...how many nurses would that pay for..". The answer. It wouldn't.

 

We live in a monarchy. Our state leader is a sovereign monarch. There is no majority desire or protest to change it. Even if it was changed, they will still be a constitutional president and they would still be great expense, pomp, ceremony and privilege applying which, as has been evidenced several times when doing figure comparisons between regimes, often leads to even more money being spent than  our own monarchy.  

 

We don't live in some deluded utopia where there's no leader and no hierarchy and everyone  is equal.  

 

We are about to have a national celebration which is going to focus the world's attention on this little island. That is the pulling power that the Monarch still has and one of our key fundamental identities, which, despite the critics, still to this day maintains us with status, influence and power which other much larger countries could only dream of.

 

They are not just some silly outdated tourist attraction.  

Once again, nail on head.

 

👍

[harvey19]

3 hours ago, PRESLEY said:

Not sure if he is trying to wind me up or just delusional. 

I was having a joke with you.

[Anna B]

I'd be very interested to see a poll of the people, to see how many now wish to abolish the monarchy. 

 

A great many people respected the late Queen even if they were somewhat opposed to the institution. She was a dutiful monarch and they at least wanted her to see out her days peacefully with the monarchy which she personified intact.

 

That's changed. So have the times. We don't live in the 1950s anymore.

 

The modern Royals have been found to have feet of clay, and the institution is hopelessly outdated, as Wills and Kate discovered when they tried to Lord it on a visit to the outposts of the Empire...

 

The Royals have a tough act to follow, and at the very least need a profound rethink of their positions in a modern society.

 

Edited April 15, 2023 by Anna B