The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1101  
Old 09-16-2017, 07:32 AM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
Regency a possible yes, abdication no IMO. I think Charles is probably resigned to that by now.
__________________

__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #1102  
Old 09-16-2017, 04:26 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dee Anna View Post
Regency a possible yes, abdication no IMO. I think Charles is probably resigned to that by now.
I don't think Charles has ever anticipated becoming King via his mother's abdication so no resignation on his part.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1103  
Old 09-16-2017, 09:22 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 3,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
Her famous words "I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong." actually does not say anything about the kingship. Were these words not spoken while she was still The Princess Elizabeth?

These words are often used to conclude: "See, she will never abdicate" but that is not what she said at all. She promised a lifeling dedication to serve the nation. No more, no less. Take the Duke of Edinburgh, or the Prince of Wales, or the Princess Royal: they are no King but can anyone deny they devoted their life to the service of the nation as well?
I agree with this 'take' on her words. And while I agree that abdication is unlikely because of general sensibilities in that matter - though like someone else mentioned, resignations have been happening where one never expected (the Pope, the Japanese Emperor, so who knows?) I do think a regency is very likely (maybe) coming. It seems to me the chess pieces are being arranged for that. Something is afoot. 2017/18. Just a hunch. Not at betting stage yet, though.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #1104  
Old 09-16-2017, 09:52 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 6,851
I definitely do not believe there will be an actual Regency unless she is deemed unfit to carry on. She seems a little old for Dementia or Alzheimers to suddenly appear.

As to Charles having to "resign himself" to waiting to be King, I well remember when some rude journalist asked him how it felt to have led a "useless life" waiting to become King. He replied that since his accession to the throne was dependant on the death of his mother, he was in no hurry. As to useless . . . hardly.
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #1105  
Old 09-17-2017, 06:03 AM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
I don't think Charles has ever anticipated becoming King via his mother's abdication so no resignation on his part.
In the sense that he has no expectation of that happening or even that he would ever want it to perhaps. Then again, we can only speculate, none of us are actual confidants of his.
__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #1106  
Old 09-17-2017, 06:36 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,225
I cant imagine that he would have ever expected it to happen.. He knows his mother and knows that she would never abdicate and he was reared in a RF for whom abdication signfiied a dereliction of duty.
So he can hardly be resigned to something happening which he knew would never happen.
Reply With Quote
  #1107  
Old 09-17-2017, 06:59 AM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
....So he can hardly be resigned to something happening which he knew would never happen.
I don't know, just because he knows it's not likely doesn't mean he can't be resigned to the fact. It all depends on whether he would have wanted it to happen or not. And that we do not know.
__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #1108  
Old 09-17-2017, 07:16 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,421
Charles has been keeping very busy with his role as The Prince of Wales and other interest that appeal to him. He knows the time will come when he will become the King and if anything, I think he is enjoying his time as the PoW and the bit of freedom that he has to pursue his passions. He knows that once he does become king, his life is going to go in a different direction and many of the things he enjoys now will be put aside or done in his own private time as he becomes an apolitical head of state.

I would tend to believe that he's resigned to the fact that life will change when he succeeds to the throne but he's in no hurry at all to get that role. I believe he's happy waiting and the longer his mother lives, the happier Charles is.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1109  
Old 09-17-2017, 02:54 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 1,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
She promised 'to serve.'

The question has to be asked 'is she really serving the nation and its future by hanging on so long that Charles will be nearly or even into his 80s when he succeeds and the call is for him to abdicate immediately and thus creating a very real constitutional crisis?'

Maybe setting up a Regency when she turns 95 would be way to smooth that transition so that Charles is seen as the monarch by the time he reaches that role.
I think you have a point here - a lot of people already want William to replace Charles. My mom asked me this the other day; she thought the Queen should 'skip Charles for William' and doesn't understand why she shouldn't or can't. I explained it to her, but of course there are many people out there who don't follow the monarchy's traditions closely and only know the 'pop culture' version of royalty that they see in glossy magazines and entertainment shows.

So if the idea of Charles becoming king over William is already unpopular, I don't think it will get any better if he's an 80 year-old man. The Diana story will get dredged up again, the suitability of Camilla to become Queen will be debated in popular media, and this will all contrast with William and Kate and their stable family and relative young age.

I don't think there will be an abdication really, but I do wonder about a regency. Although I wonder if it's too late already to draw people away from their preference for William.
Reply With Quote
  #1110  
Old 09-17-2017, 02:59 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,225
It doesn't matter if "people prefer William".. not that I think they do.. Charles is going to be the next King. And the queen's not going to abdicat.
Reply With Quote
  #1111  
Old 09-17-2017, 03:31 PM
Alisa's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,069
Exactly! Further more I have the rather strong opinion that William is no where ready to be King. At best I can see him being King in his 50s or so. Not before.
The succession list should remain as is!
__________________
Those who plot the destruction of others often perish in the attempt. ---Phaedrus
Reply With Quote
  #1112  
Old 09-17-2017, 03:33 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,225
It doesn't matter.. I don't believe he would want to be King a day earlier than he absolutely has to.. as he is pretty lacklustre IMO about doing royal duties. but regardless fo how he feels or how a section of the public feels, the next King is Charles.
Reply With Quote
  #1113  
Old 09-17-2017, 03:44 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 2,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
It doesn't matter if "people prefer William".. not that I think they do.. Charles is going to be the next King. And the queen's not going to abdicat.
It may not matter legally, but polls show for a fact that "people prefer William".

Quote:

Exactly! Further more I have the rather strong opinion that William is no where ready to be King. At best I can see him being King in his 50s or so. Not before.
The succession list should remain as is!

William is probably better prepared to ascend the throne than his grandmother was when she became queen at a much younger age. In fact, given the mostly ceremonial role of the king these days, It doesn't really take that much preparation to be an effective monarch. Two qualities seem to be important though in the modern monarchy: empathy with the public and being discreet/uncontroversial. On those two counts, I put William ahead of his "more experienced" father.
Reply With Quote
  #1114  
Old 09-17-2017, 03:59 PM
Skippyboo's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Atlanta, United States
Posts: 4,098
The Queen: Would She Consider Abdication or Retirement?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
It doesn't matter.. I don't believe he would want to be King a day earlier than he absolutely has to.. as he is pretty lacklustre IMO about doing royal duties. but regardless fo how he feels or how a section of the public feels, the next King is Charles.

I just counted 11 engagements for William from September 1 to September 12. That didn't count for multiple engagements in Liverpool the other day. The online CC wasn't totally up to date. William has been pretty busy since the move back to London.

William did have a part time job and two young kids and still did similar numbers to Harry who did not have a second job or a young family.

Still the popularity or lack of popularity doesn't govern the line of succession, the law does and the law says Charles is next.
Reply With Quote
  #1115  
Old 09-17-2017, 04:24 PM
duchessrachel's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Birmingham, United States
Posts: 356
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay286 View Post
I think you have a point here - a lot of people already want William to replace Charles. My mom asked me this the other day; she thought the Queen should 'skip Charles for William' and doesn't understand why she shouldn't or can't. I explained it to her, but of course there are many people out there who don't follow the monarchy's traditions closely and only know the 'pop culture' version of royalty that they see in glossy magazines and entertainment shows.

So if the idea of Charles becoming king over William is already unpopular, I don't think it will get any better if he's an 80 year-old man. The Diana story will get dredged up again, the suitability of Camilla to become Queen will be debated in popular media, and this will all contrast with William and Kate and their stable family and relative young age.

I don't think there will be an abdication really, but I do wonder about a regency. Although I wonder if it's too late already to draw people away from their preference for William.
I can't begin to imagine how uncomfortable that must make William feel that that is a strong desire among many people that he bypass his father. But, then again, the Royals are used to dealing with the press.
Reply With Quote
  #1116  
Old 09-17-2017, 05:27 PM
Muhler's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Eastern Jutland, Denmark
Posts: 9,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay286 View Post
I think you have a point here - a lot of people already want William to replace Charles. My mom asked me this the other day; she thought the Queen should 'skip Charles for William' and doesn't understand why she shouldn't or can't. I explained it to her, but of course there are many people out there who don't follow the monarchy's traditions closely and only know the 'pop culture' version of royalty that they see in glossy magazines and entertainment shows.

So if the idea of Charles becoming king over William is already unpopular, I don't think it will get any better if he's an 80 year-old man. The Diana story will get dredged up again, the suitability of Camilla to become Queen will be debated in popular media, and this will all contrast with William and Kate and their stable family and relative young age.

I don't think there will be an abdication really, but I do wonder about a regency. Although I wonder if it's too late already to draw people away from their preference for William.
You very much have a point, that applies to most monarchies (the Dutch being an exception), that is that in contrast to earlier times monarchs nowadays can expect to live long. Which means that every second heir will be "old" by the time he/she can take over. Having spend most of their lives in a kind of limbo and when they finally sit on the throne their subjects find them irrelevant because they are too old and haven't been on the throne long enough to make a lasting impact.
That is very much the problem for Charles.

It's not the problem that he is unpopular (that may also be debatable BTW) or Diana is still casting her shadow over his life. The problem is that Charles has been waiting so long that his ship has long since sailed.
Even if QEII should die tomorrow Charles will only be seen as an interim figure and he won't have the time, and probably not the energy either to really make a lasting impact on the "firm" let alone Britain. (Keep in mind that QEII has been blessed with an extraordinary good health.) Charles will be Charles the Old, rather than Charles the Reformer, or Charles the wise or even Charles the Blunderer. He will be a footnote in the minds of most people. - Because no matter what it's W&K who are the stars of the show. They are the ones people look to. They are the ones people follow. They are the ones who have the energy to be seen here there and everywhere. Simply because W&K are now in their prime.
They are the ones most people can relate to age-wise, family-wise, lifestyle-wise even, while Charles is for the OAP's.
Okay, I'm putting things a bit on the edge to illustrate my point, but I actually mean it. I'd say to most people >50 Charles is far less relevant than W&K.
So yes, it does make good sense to "skip" Charles.

That QEII should abdicate for other reasons than health, so that Charles should get on throne, is IMO too late. Such an abdication should have happened 20 years ago.
It's too late now. It makes no sense to abdicate in order to have someone younger and with more energy than yourself on the throne if that person has a himself reached the retirement age.
It makes much more sense to abdicate and have Charles renounce the throne in order for W&K to take over. - Then they can have the time to make a lasting impact and they can have the time for people to develop a similar devotion to W&K as people have to QEII.

So should QEII die tomorrow Charles would his country and the monarchy a great service if he only reigned for max ten years before abdicating himself. That would give W&K time to look after their children in their early years, before taking over in earnest. - And Charles would still be able to advise his son.

And it's a problem in other monarchies. We have CP's who are now approaching 50. (Denmark, Norway and to some extent Sweden). The CP's there are in their prime. They are increasingly, if not already, the ones most people look to. Yet the monarchs in those three countries are in fine health and can be expected to be around for many more years, if for no other reason than that they have access to the best possible health care.
Or should they do like the BRF? Wait and wait until the grandchildren are ready to take over?
And how about the future? The average lifespan is increasing. People born today can fully expect to live until 100, perhaps longer, and still be in pretty fine shape. - Are we to have monarchies where the average monarch is 90 years old? Having ascended the throne at the age of 80?

Wouldn't it be better to have a system where the CP's take over around the age of 45 and reign for some 30 years?

Abdications have taken place for generations in the Netherlands. Yet, the NLRF is still around. It has recently taken place in Spain, Belgium and soon Japan without any sign of the monarchies there come tumbling down.
Reply With Quote
  #1117  
Old 09-17-2017, 07:27 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,151


The tradition is not Dutch but more in the House of Nassau, which saw the following abdications:
Willem I of Orange-Nassau, King of the Netherlands and Grand-Duke of Luxembourg
Marie-Adelheid of Nassau, Grand-Duchess of Luxembourg
Wilhelmina of Orange-Nassau, Queen of the Netherlands
Charlotte of Nassau, Grand-Duchess of Luxembourg
Juliana of Orange-Nassau, Queen of the Netherlands
Jean of Nassau, Grand-Duke of Luxembourg
Beatrix of Orange-Nassau, Queen of the Netherlands

So it is waiting for an abdication of Henri of Nassau, the current Grand-Duke. In both the Netherlands and Luxembourg the monarchies look "strong and stable" to use a term and all these abdications have not at all eroded the support for the institution. On the contrary, we may say that in said countries, as well in Spain and Belgium, and soon in Japan, the monarchy has been (will be) rejuvenated.
Reply With Quote
  #1118  
Old 09-17-2017, 11:08 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Peru
Posts: 399
The abdication of Marie-Adelheid was quite different from the others; under huge pressure - not because the monarchy was stable, the monarch getting older and the next generation well prepared (of course Willem I also had some other reasons to abficate, including being unhappy about changes in his position).

Going back to the situation in the UK. I expect Charles to follow his mother: no abdication (after he has waited for so long). William might have a very different opion. I don't think he shares his grandmother's conviction that being King is for life (that abdicating would go contrary your God-given task), so I wouldn't be surprised if he would abdicating at some point in favor of George. It might, however, depend on the timing of his ascension to the throne.
Reply With Quote
  #1119  
Old 09-18-2017, 12:08 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,421
I think with all the talk of perhaps a regency when the Queen reaches 95 has absolutely nothing to do with popular opinion nor does it have anything to do with how other monarchs and heads of state are advocating abdication.

What it all has to do with is being prepared. It is having ideas in motion to encompass and ensure that the monarchy in the UK rolls along like a well oiled machine in top form to serve the people.

Elizabeth and Philip are in their 90s. Reaching that age does give one the knowing that they are not immortal. They know their health and clarity of mind when they wake up every morning is something to be thankful for. They know things can change at the drop of a hat. Older people tend to make wills as they grow older to express what their wishes are. The monarchy is like that too that all possibilities are covered and put into place to handle whatever may come.

Whatever happens, things are in place for Charles. He will be king upon the death of his mother. William will have his time to be the heir to the throne. All is as it should be. The monarchy is just astute enough to be prepared for all contingencies.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1120  
Old 09-18-2017, 05:42 AM
Dee Anna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Here, Ireland
Posts: 599
Given the family's longevity history (the last King exempted, heavy smoker etc.) things are stacked up for the next three heirs being relatively eldery, at least of pensionable age when taking the throne.

Of course Charles will be King - well unless he himself decides against it and why would he do that?

William is only starting to assume a full time royal role and still in the process of completing his own family. I very much doubt daily red boxes play any part in his own view of the future as of yet. Time enough for that when the time comes.
__________________

__________________
Be yourself; everyone else is already taken ..... Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
abdication, elizabeth ii, queen elizabeth ii, regency, retirement


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Would They Have Married? auntie Royal Life and Lifestyle 501 07-25-2014 12:23 PM




Popular Tags
best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria crown princess victoria daytime fashion current events denmark earl of snowdon fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein monarchy nassau news noice opening of parliament picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess beatrice princess claire of luxembourg princess diana lady spencer princess eleonore princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary style princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia state visit stephanie succession sweden swedish royal family uae wildlife victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:04 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises