The Royal Family #16

[TYL159]

Thee is no readon why Boris would be Head of State. That wouldn't work with our electoral system or Parliamentary system at all. We would mire than likely have a HoS like Ireland. They are elected and can be removed if they are incapable. There are plenty of occasions that bring in money in other countries. If we are relying on the occasional Royal Wedding to keep us going, we really are going down the toilet.

Yes there is. In 2019 Boris would have comfortably beaten Corbyn in a UK presidential election.

No we would not have a President like Ireland either as they are a small nation not a permanent member of the UN Security Council, G7 and G20 like us, France and the USA, the latter 2 all of which have powerful elected Presidents like we would if we ended the monarchy.

The Irish President has no more power than our monarchs anyway, while having nowhere near the global name and brand recognition nor revenue brought in.

I thought the Big issue selling was a major fail - it felt so off.

Of course you would, as you are an ideological republican, I am an ideological diehard constitutional monarchist, I am never going to give in to you

 

[JAR21]

I thought so too but was Charlotte there? Seemed it was only William. I think Kate should have been there.

She was in Plymouth

 

[Phoenix Lazarus]

This looks intriguing.

Newsnight photographer has 'shocking' picture of Prince Andrew

It is understood the Duke insisted the picture never become public, but Mark Harrison hinted that it may feature in a forthcoming film about how the BBC secured the interview.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[TYL159]

No way would Charles have gone to a poly but with his pathetically low grades he shouldn't have been allowed in Cambridge as you say only A grades would have been allowed to darken their door

That is not true, as I have already showed you plenty got into Oxbridge with B and C grades in the 1960s. In fact even at Oxbridge very few had straight As back then as it was pre grade inflation

 

[TYL159]

Scandinavian countruesxqre equal because they have good good governance. As a result, they have an equal society It's nothing to do with them going a Monarchy. They have a Monarchy because they are stable. They are not stable because they are a Monarchy. Their Royals have adapted to that society and have moved with the tines. They have also slimmed down, done useful work and have not hoarded as much wealth as ours has. If our Royals were more Scandinavian then I'd be happier.
Re Commonweslth Reslms, why didn't William or the Royals state at the beginning of their tour that they were happy gorcJsmaica to gecome a Republic? It was hardly a secret that they wanted it to be. William only changed his tune halfway through the tour after the PM basically told they were going.

Arguably they are. The only European nations in the first half of the 1940s that were not Nazi, Fascist or Communist were Sweden, the UK, Switzerland and Ireland.
Despite the vast majority of European nations being republics by then it was the constitutional monarchies that provided half the free nations left.

The Royal family position has always been it is up to Commonwealth realms whether they keep the monarch as head of state, William and Charles' Caribbean visits just confirmed that. William also added he may not even be head of the Commonwealth in future, it could be rotated amongst Commonwealth heads of government

 

[Boring Monday]

I'm not sure if Harry would have been surprised. He's been brought up knowing he was a spare part all his life. Apparently the QM used to treat Charles and William much more favourably than the other children. I think he just resented it and Meghan came along and whispered I his ear about how terrible it all was. Margaret was the same, as I suspect was Andrew, but he got treated much better by his mother than Charles did, so that probably made up for it.

If the book by the Robert Lacey and also thingy the Bodyguard … Ken? … is any indication Harry has always been well aware of his place in the pecking order.

 

[Great_Kate]

[

I don’t have a problem with some aspects of their PR. The idea that they aren’t as stuffy as previous generations, more approachable etc. Thats good stuff and needed if the monarchy is to survive. I also think the light they’ve shone on mental health should be applauded, of course it’s better to be depressed in a castle than depressed on the streets but the principle idea of seeing royals talk about something taboo can be effective. The problem is when the line is crossed into “oh we’re just like you” Kate spotted in The Range, “only” one nanny, a “modest” 4 bedroom house. But the question I ask is how much of this comes from them and how much is it the press setting them up to fail? We all knew it would happen, they rinsed the Cambridge’s, then put them on a pedastool to compare Harry and Meghan to and now the dragging is starting to creep back.

I agree. And honestly, most high up politicians have a press office and play pr games. Same for companies. It’s not as if they are only judged by their work.
I think with H&M sinking more and more into oblivion the press is about to turn against them again. At the moment they still have PA and Charles’ foundation, but soon enough they will talk about Wiliam‘s awkwardness, the cost of Kate’s wardrobe, their way of flying, vacations and engagement numbers with a chilling tone again. The press needs a village. W&K had a long break from the cycle but H&M are swallowed and chewed up enough. Nothing scandalous about their stupidities anymore. Bringing down the golden couple of the last three years will bring “fresh” material.

 

[Sideboard Bob]

Have you noticed how most of the people who criticize Harry ( although he deserves criticism in certain aspects) also dislike Diana?
Apparently speaking about disfunction in RF is worse than cheating, emotional neglect and ''keep the stiff upper lip Jack'' mentality.

I hadn’t noticed this, but I wasn’t really looking out for it. That’s so interesting though.

 

[TYL159]

Communist dictatorships are not direct comparisons with Parliamentary democracies either. That was my point. Monarchs cannot influence laws relating to the rest of us, but they do negotiate opt outs for themselves, undermining the Rule of Law.

Russia isn't a Communist dictatorship, Putin is a Nationalist President elected in elections.

Monarchs here can't even negotiate opt outs on their private property if Parliament disagrees

 

[Chocolategoggler]

They stopped playing the National Anthem in the cinema in about the 50's because the stampede for the door when it came on was dangerous, so I think there may be some rose coloured spectacles on that one!

It was countryside with farms around her then, lots of council housing and private housing started being built especially in the sixties. Now the only greenery I see is the odd grass verge. I expect country people were more into the Royal Family then.

 

[JAR21]

Didn't they do loads of zoom meetings with people over the pandemic?.....

Would you rather they'd done nothing at all?

 

[Jane Tee]

I think Paul McCartney was insistent his children went to the local state school but Stella talked about the difficulty of coming from a different background to the majority of other students. I'd have to look it up as it was a while back now!

Yes. I read this too. So Stella sent her children to rhe same Prep school that Prince William and Harry attended. Claudia Schiffer sent her kids there. Elle mcpherson too. And Emily Maitluss.

 

[Boring Monday]

Anyone know what this might be?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...aims-picture-Prince-Andrew-rock-Monarchy.html

He left his flies open and Little Andy popped out to say hello?

 

[Whatamadworld]

I only realised that Sophie had her children late in age. She would have been late 30s, early 40s. Never knew her children were that young. Only 14 and 18.

 

[CuriousCat92]

I was looking at the pictures of the Queen with Princess Anne yesterday and thinking that the only problem with slimming down the monarchy is that you have less members to help out in situations like that, where two people are needed.

I do think that they have to slim down but it’s tricky because they do need a certain number of people to go and do engagements or they lose visibility.

But then I think the whole titles thing is very silly and should just go, so clearly I am not made to be a royal advisor!

 

[Reraciara]

Was Kate def working? She often does Wimbledon in a personal capacity - often with Pippa?

She's a patron of some tennis society and shes using the royal box so yeah?

 

[thegirlscout]

I’ve never seen anything on that scale about any other public persons death.

I wonder if something similar will happen when the Queen dies

 

[Mrs Fluff]

Do William, Kate, Charles or Camilla smoke or drink? Never seen either of them do so which got me wondering if they do so.

Camilla definitely smoked. Don't know if she ever gave up.

 

[TYL159]

Well he wouldn't because Head of State is a ceremonial post, and can't be got rid of, no matter how awful the incumbent is. Boris will be gone by tomorrow. And the Monarch can just sit by and watch this omnishambles. Maybe an elected Head of State may have been able to intervene.

No it isn't always, if we were a republic most likely we would have an elected powerful President like France and the US, like us also permanent members of the UN Security Council. Boris would then be the elected Head of State.

If he loses the confidence of Parliament however the monarch can dismiss him.
The ceremonial Irish or German Presidents have no more power than the British monarch but nobody has heard of them outside their nations and they bring in no royal wedding or jubilee or coronation revenue

 

[Chablis1]

I know she's only 7 but I definitely get Princess Anne vibes.

Agree. It’s good to see.