The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #341  
Old 11-26-2017, 07:40 AM
andrew's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Arad, Romania
Posts: 229
.

The difference between commoners and royals or nobles was that the latters had access to better education and manners due to their status. Nowadays almost everybody can have access to these things that can model you into a nobler being, so I don't think the problem is that commoners marry into the royal family. The problem might be when they forget that people are expecting more from them. It is not enough to be a normal, down-to-earth person if you are a royal. You have to set a positive example for others-and when royals fail to do it, they usually get a second chance but when a commoner married into the royal families fail to live up to expectations, they are torn apart.
And yes, I agree you have to maintain an air of dignified mistery if you're royal, otherwise you end up being a celebrity who is doing everything to keep people interested in their persona.
I kind of blame Prince Philip(who was a prince marrying into a royal family) with his 1969 documentary about the Royal Family,he really opened up Pandora's box with that. It was like a Big Brother show.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #342  
Old 11-26-2017, 08:08 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,095
The gene pool of eligible partners would be awfully small if royalty still had to limit themselves so narrowly when choosing a partner. It is not healthy.
Maxima is a very intelligent woman who has been a good partner for W-A.
I have nothing but respect for Daniel, I think he will be for Victoria what Philip has been for Elizabeth. I think Meghan changed her life to adhere to the "rules for royalty" I don't think she'll embarrass the BRF.
They have conducted themselves with more class than much of the so called nobility does that I think you believe are suitable.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #343  
Old 11-26-2017, 08:21 AM
JR76's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 1,411
I've never really understood the criticism of the 1969 documentary. The Scandinavian monarchies, Denmark especially, have made several close up documentaries but still being able to maintain their private lives and without loosing the sense of magic surrounding the institution. If anything I'd blame the Wales & York debacles during the 80s-90s for creating a royal Big Brother show.
Regarding Dukes often voiced opinion regarding the marriages of the modern day royals I do agree to an extent that in the end the status of the royal families will be affected when they continue to marry just about everybody.
That said there are commoners and there are commoners - as I remember it was said by a man on the street in Oslo interviewed by Swedish TV around the time of Haakons marriage to Mette-Marit:"There is no need for any set-up marriages to an European princess but there has to be some standards. We have prominent Norwegian families that could provide good matches for the Royal family like the Haraldsens did 30 years ago." Sofia has behaved impeccable since she married Carl-Philip and is together with Daniel huge assets to Sweden and the Royal family but in the end, in my opinion, it weakens the institution to have photos of one of its members
bare-chested with a snake.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #344  
Old 01-14-2018, 09:52 PM
Frozen Royalist's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Raleigh, United States
Posts: 131
Given Jeremy Corbyn is in charge of the Labour Party right now and a bit of a republican, what would this mean for the British Royal Family if he became prime minister right now? Even though he as stated he wouldn't try to fight for a referendum on the monarchy you can't help but wonder if this would give republicans like Graham Smith more legitimacy as a viable option for the UK. Ignoring Brexit and other things, once again what would a prime minister Jeremy Corbyn mean for the Royal Family? Keep in mine opinion polls are showing Labour in the lead right now.

-Frozen Royalist
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #345  
Old 01-14-2018, 10:29 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,300
Nothing.

They have had republic PMs before but they know there is no way a referendum would be successful at the moment as support for the monarchy has been consistent for most of the last century and a half at over 75%. There was a dip in the 90s to under 70% but it never dropped below 60%.

In Australia, for instance, we have a republican PM and he is from the Liberal (Conservative side of politics) but he knows a referendum wouldn't get up at the moment. Both sides of politics here have basically accepted it won't happen until after the Queen dies. Current support for a republic here is lower than it has been since the mid-90s and remember we have already rejected a republic once.

With a royal wedding in the offing Corbyn knows that a referendum wouldn't be successful even though it would be his personal desire.

The next election in the UK isn't necessary for 4 years and a lot can happen in that time. It is not unusual for the polls to be against the government mid-term.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #346  
Old 01-15-2018, 11:03 PM
Frozen Royalist's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Raleigh, United States
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Nothing.

They have had republic PMs before but they know there is no way a referendum would be successful at the moment as support for the monarchy has been consistent for most of the last century and a half at over 75%. There was a dip in the 90s to under 70% but it never dropped below 60%.

In Australia, for instance, we have a republican PM and he is from the Liberal (Conservative side of politics) but he knows a referendum wouldn't get up at the moment. Both sides of politics here have basically accepted it won't happen until after the Queen dies. Current support for a republic here is lower than it has been since the mid-90s and remember we have already rejected a republic once.

With a royal wedding in the offing Corbyn knows that a referendum wouldn't be successful even though it would be his personal desire.

The next election in the UK isn't necessary for 4 years and a lot can happen in that time. It is not unusual for the polls to be against the government mid-term.
Thanks, even though I try to remain optimistic about the whole cause for a constitutional monarchy I can't help get worried about what I deem the slightest upset to the system. I understand that Royal Family is popular with 7 or 8 out of 10 Britons usually in favor but still I can't help but get worried at times. But yes a lot can happen in four years.

-Frozen Royalist

P.S. Truth be told I get worried a lot over even the most minor of things.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #347  
Old 01-16-2018, 02:00 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,563
Why worry? If the monarchy in the UK comes to an end, it will be because the people of the UK don't want it any more..or possilbly because the RF don't want to go on with it. Its their decision.. and It will hardly cause any harm to anyone.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #348  
Old 01-16-2018, 02:16 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 10,209
Just a really odd question. Should it ever happen that the monarchy is abolished, any clue what they'd call the UK then?
__________________
I dream of a better tomorrow, where chickens can cross the road and not be questioned about their motives.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #349  
Old 01-16-2018, 02:43 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 11,300
Just drop the UK and call it Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Mostly the country is referred to as GB now so why change what many people think is the country's name?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Royalist View Post
Thanks, even though I try to remain optimistic about the whole cause for a constitutional monarchy I can't help get worried about what I deem the slightest upset to the system. I understand that Royal Family is popular with 7 or 8 out of 10 Britons usually in favor but still I can't help but get worried at times. But yes a lot can happen in four years.

-Frozen Royalist

P.S. Truth be told I get worried a lot over even the most minor of things.
I do find it interesting that someone who lives in a republic would really get worked up about the possibility of the remaining constitutional monarchies in the world changing to what you have.

Certainly I expect a few of the Queen's remaining realms to follow the majority of the countries of which she was Head of State when she ascended the throne to be republics quite early in Charles' reign. I don't think George will be King of more than maybe 3 - 4 countries and possibly only the UK.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #350  
Old 01-16-2018, 03:34 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 7,815
In my opinion the UK monarchy is the safest of all European monarchies, Liechtenstein and Monaco aside. But all monarchies are vulnerable and have to find their way to be an added value to (and for) society.

The danger is the domino effect when in one of the monarchies a referendum will be held. When Sweden holds a referendum, you can set your clock on similar demands and online petitions in the Netherlands, Belgium of Spain: "If the Swedes can speak out about their form of state, why can't we? Does the Government not trust the will of their own people?"

But Britain society is so complex. The state structure is so complex. When even something like a House of Lords (a totally unelected legislative body) is tolerated, the British monarchy is as solid as a rock.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #351  
Old 01-16-2018, 04:27 AM
Nice Nofret's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Posts: 543
I very much hope that we (Europe) keep our monarchies - at least these countries have now head of states you do not cringe every time they open their mouth / twitter.

Politicians come and go (hopefully) but monarchs are giving a country an idientification figure - somthing very much needed in our fast changing times IMHO
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #352  
Old 01-16-2018, 05:36 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 3,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Just a really odd question. Should it ever happen that the monarchy is abolished, any clue what they'd call the UK then?
Probably Commonwealth of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Commonwealth was actually the term used when Britain was briefly a republic in the 17th century.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #353  
Old 02-02-2018, 09:57 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 3,514
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/w...-a3756191.html

Quote:
Prince William and Prince Harry are the most liked members of the Royal Family since modern records began, exclusive research reveals today.
The caring Princes have overtaken the Queen - and are now more liked than their own parents were over thirty years ago.
They also share with the Monarch the highest approval ratings of any Royals, indicating high public approbation for the way they carry out their duties.
The findings by Ipsos MORI in a poll for the Evening Standard are a triumph for the modern approach established by the young heir and his brother, who swept away stuffy manners to bare their emotions in public.
William is the most liked, named unprompted by 62 per cent of Britons.
The level of public affection is even higher than that recorded for his mother Diana, Princess of Wales, which was 45 per cent in 1984 and 47 per cent in 1994.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #354  
Old 02-02-2018, 10:22 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 5,082
A remarkable poke in the eye for any republicans hoping for a waning of support for the monarchy in Britain in coming decades. This is very pleasing, especially coming from this polling company which certainly can't be accused of conflating approval figures for the monarchy!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #355  
Old 02-02-2018, 11:02 PM
Leopoldine's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 400
Not super-special for Charles either, although, while the Queen Mother was alive and Diana was dazzling, HM was said to have observed how she was stuck in between two widely-admired people.

Charles is in that hammock now.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #356  
Old 02-02-2018, 11:13 PM
Frozen Royalist's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Raleigh, United States
Posts: 131
Personally I think everything will work out for Prince Charles when he becomes king. He might not be as popular as QEII but I think he'll do a decent job. Plus we do have Prince William after him and keep in mind the Prince of Wales is a little old (I know members of the House of Windsor tend to live a long time but still).

-Frozen Royalist
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #357  
Old 02-03-2018, 02:00 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 7,701
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozen Royalist View Post
Personally I think everything will work out for Prince Charles when he becomes king. He might not be as popular as QEII but I think he'll do a decent job. Plus we do have Prince William after him and keep in mind the Prince of Wales is a little old (I know members of the House of Windsor tend to live a long time but still).

-Frozen Royalist
If he lives as long as even his father he has another 26 years or more. He could be on the throne for more then 20 years.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


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





Popular Tags
birthday birthday celebration carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge style duke of edinburgh europe family general news general royal discussion gloucester hasnat khan hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta margarita infanta sofia irene urdangarín iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein miguel urdangarin monarchy news nobel nobel prize noice prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince harry prince nicholas prince oscar princess alexandra princess beatrice princess claire princess claire of luxembourg princess diana princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine 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 silvia sofia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge hats uae nature victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:11 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises