The Monarchy under Charles

[cepe]

There seems to be an enormous misunderstanding here. Apart from the RVO, Garter and OM the Queen or any other UK Monarch does NOT award honours.

99.9% awarded is by Government.

 

[ladongas]

Do we believe that Charles really takes his own chef to dinner parties? Well, that settles it: I'm never inviting those two to one of my fine parties. Humph!

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

There seems to be an enormous misunderstanding here. Apart from the RVO, Garter and OM the Queen or any other UK Monarch does NOT award honours.

99.9% awarded is by Government.

You're right again.

 

[cepe]

Do we believe that Charles really takes his own chef to dinner parties? Well, that settles it: I'm never inviting those two to one of my fine parties. Humph!

No, I dont

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Do we believe that Charles really takes his own chef to dinner parties? Well, that settles it: I'm never inviting those two to one of my fine parties. Humph!

I've heard this before, but I don't know if it's true. You must not believe everything you read, especially in this book.

 

[hernameispekka]

I've heard this before, but I don't know if it's true. You must not believe everything you read, especially in this book.

I agree. Mayyyyybe if he has alot of allergies, or someone have tried to poison him before (those 2 warrant a little paranoia when it comes to food). But I doubt he would do it out of snobbery

 

[Osipi]

Do we believe that Charles really takes his own chef to dinner parties? Well, that settles it: I'm never inviting those two to one of my fine parties. Humph!

I really don't believe it but if it were true, Charles and Camilla would be on the top of the list for a party. Leave the cooking to them.

I do, however, tend to believe that he will travel with certain things he likes but may not be available where he's going. This isn't unusual for me as I have done the same thing when traveling somewhere. I take my own blends of teas with me.

 

[hernameispekka]

I really don't believe it but if it were true, Charles and Camilla would be on the top of the list for a party. Leave the cooking to them.

I do, however, tend to believe that he will travel with certain things he likes but may not be available where he's going. This isn't unusual for me as I have done the same thing when traveling somewhere. I take my own blends of teas with me.

Yeah, that I could understand. My mom, the few times she travel, have taken "knäckebröd" (Swedish hard bread) with her because that is the only thing she can eat in the morning without getting squeamish.

 

[Dman]

"I think Charles will make some major changes to modernize the monarchy but he will not undermine the very foundation of a hereditary system."

US Royal Watcher, I agree.

 

[hernameispekka]

"I think Charles will make some major changes to modernize the monarchy but he will not undermine the very foundation of a hereditary system."

US Royal Watcher, I agree.

I agree. Doing something like that with the argument that merit should go before heritage would be like shooting himself in the foot and feeding arguments to the republicans

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

This book is just rubbish.

Prince Charles: Hellbent on being a meddling monarch | Daily Mail Online

Prince Charles: Hellbent on being a meddling monarch. New book reveals ambition that could cause a British constitutional crisis.

In September, the Queen will become Britain's longest-serving monarch
But her popularity raises questions about Prince Charles' future reign
He is planning to make a considerable impact in his first six months
A new book reveals his ambition that could cause a constitutional crisis
It's believed he is turning his attention to overhauling the honours system
His official biographer believes a 'quiet constitutional revolution is afoot'
It's believed he will intervene beyond scope of any previous monarchs

He will not intervene beyond scope of any previous monarchs and and he will not cause a constitutional crisis. He knows what he's doing, he's not stupid.

Prince Charles's treacherous household 'like Wolf Hall', courtiers say - Telegraph

Prince Charles’s household is so torn apart by power struggles and treachery that courtiers have nicknamed it Wolf Hall, according to a new book.
Staff working for the Prince have reportedly likened Clarence House to the Tudor court of Henry VIII, where backstabbing and infighting was commonplace.
The revelations appeared in a new biography of the Prince by Catherine Mayer, a journalist for Time magazine, who met the Prince and spoke to some of his closest aides.
In parts, the book paints a devastating portrait of the future king grappling with insecurities while struggling to effectively manage his many charities and business interests.
Charles: The Heart of a King, by Catherine Mayer, suggests Clarence House is riddled with “glaring systemic weaknesses”. Any criticism of the Prince - who is known to courtiers as ‘the Boss’ – can send him spiralling into “despair”, she says.

The author adds that turf battles between Charles’s staff “are common and bloody”.
In extracts reported in The Times, she writes: “One former householder refers to Clarence House as Wolf Hall, in reference to the treacherous and opportunistic world depicted by Hilary Mantel in her fictionalised account of the rise of Thomas Cromwell under Henry VIII.”
Much of the difficulty is caused by Charles’s inability to create clear roles for his staff, she writes. Often he reportedly creates unnecessary turf wars between courtiers by failing to set clear boundaries.

I don't believe in this nonsense, he has done a very good job with the Duchy of Cornwall.

However in response to the book, royal aides revealed Charles has discussed the “sensitive matter” of what sort of king he should be with the Queen, and no one else.

Sources close to the Prince told The Telegraph that anyone who claims to have insight into his thoughts on kingship is merely “hypothesising” because “there is no-one other than his mother with whom he would discuss such a sensitive matter”.

A spokesman for the Prince said: “Speculation about what sort of king the Prince of Wales will make has been around for many, many years and the Household and the Prince have never commented on this and neither will they do so now.”

And this is one of the reasons I don't believe in this nonsense from Catherine Mayer.


This has been a bad start to what that should have been a another good year for the royal family with the royal birth and the Queen's milestone in September.

 

[royal rob]

There doesn't appear to be anything in that we don't know or is that bad!
Don't think any one is silly enough to think he's faultless


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[MARG]

I hope you are saying there is nothing in it that hasn't been speculated on before. Anything else is pure speculation, or, to be more percise, impur speculation.

I an tickled by the way the "Aides" have effectively rubbished the entire books with their very subtle statements that Charles discussed his future Kingship with HM alone. No other person present so . . . aides and friends are pure fiction and, if they are there . . . what about the rest of the book.

Oh never mind, I am sure they are all quite right and HM is indeed in the process of organising a way to disinherit her eldest son.

 

[royal rob]

MARG maybe I should have said nothing we haven't heard said about him.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[SElizabeth]

I found this speech of Charles and I think it says a lot about the type of man he is and the king he will be:

The Holocaust is an unparalleled human tragedy and an act of evil unique in history and it is for these reasons that we must always remember it and honour its Jewish victims – and the Nazis’ other victims.

But Holocaust Memorial Day is not just a memorial to those six million innocent Jewish men, women and children – it is also universal because the Jews in this story represent all of us.

That is why the Holocaust is not just a Jewish tragedy, nor merely a dark page from the Second World War, but a warning and a lesson to all of us of all faiths in all times. The memory of this suffering and the unspeakable, yet almost incredible, details of the Nazis’ diabolical enterprise can help future generations, wherever they may be, understand not just what happened across Europe, but how this came to happen. And why similar terrible things have happened in places such as Bosnia and Rwanda. It should also help us reflect on how we should respond to other dreadful events in the Middle East today.

We still often fail to stop these tragedies in time because the circumstances are always different – but this only makes Holocaust Memorial Day more important and relevant than ever, for it enables us to rally together, to recognize the workings of wickedness, to exercise vigilance and, hopefully, to stop such atrocities in the future. I could have read from the writings of those like Anne Frank, who wrote so touchingly about their experiences, but what I find so deeply poignant and powerful are the three lines scratched anonymously into a wall by a victim of the Holocaust, which read:

"I believe in the sun even when it’s not shining.

I believe in love even when I don’t feel it.

I believe in God even when He is silent”.

I like this man and he has a heart I believe that is open to all the people.
Sorry if I am not allowed to print this here, and I hope to offend no one.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

I think Charles is going to be a wonderful King. He is kind and non judgmental, something he has from The Queen.

 

[sthreats]

I found this speech of Charles and I think it says a lot about the type of man he is and the king he will be:

The Holocaust is an unparalleled human tragedy and an act of evil unique in history and it is for these reasons that we must always remember it and honour its Jewish victims – and the Nazis’ other victims.

But Holocaust Memorial Day is not just a memorial to those six million innocent Jewish men, women and children – it is also universal because the Jews in this story represent all of us.

That is why the Holocaust is not just a Jewish tragedy, nor merely a dark page from the Second World War, but a warning and a lesson to all of us of all faiths in all times. The memory of this suffering and the unspeakable, yet almost incredible, details of the Nazis’ diabolical enterprise can help future generations, wherever they may be, understand not just what happened across Europe, but how this came to happen. And why similar terrible things have happened in places such as Bosnia and Rwanda. It should also help us reflect on how we should respond to other dreadful events in the Middle East today.

We still often fail to stop these tragedies in time because the circumstances are always different – but this only makes Holocaust Memorial Day more important and relevant than ever, for it enables us to rally together, to recognize the workings of wickedness, to exercise vigilance and, hopefully, to stop such atrocities in the future. I could have read from the writings of those like Anne Frank, who wrote so touchingly about their experiences, but what I find so deeply poignant and powerful are the three lines scratched anonymously into a wall by a victim of the Holocaust, which read:

"I believe in the sun even when it’s not shining.

I believe in love even when I don’t feel it.

I believe in God even when He is silent”.

I like this man and he has a heart I believe that is open to all the people.
Sorry if I am not allowed to print this here, and I hope to offend no one.

Agree with you very touching speech and he didn't just read it. He spoke from the heart.
We used to sing this in school during Holy Week.

 

[Rudolph]

The Prince of Wales should carry on “meddling” | Conservative Home

 

[padams2359]

I think the changes will be as drastic as when Edward VII ascended after Victoria. The fundamentals of the Monarchy will remain, but many things surrounding it will change. The monarchy is very good at reading the people. Things needed to change between Victoria and Edward VII, but stability and continuity was needed during the time of George V, Edward VIII, and George VI. Major changes during the long reign of Elizabeth II could have made her look fical and prown to flip flop. Acceptance and morals have changed so much since the early '50s until now.

 

[Winnie]

Over the years I have taken a great interest in Charles. I personally feel that he will be an excellent King as he is not afraid to show people exactly how he feels on subjects. He won't have to make big speeches on the subjects, you will just know. That to me is good. His mother comes from a different mind-set and emotions are kept for private moments --stiff upper lip, and all that, in public. She is correct and proper for her generation, Charles will be for his. I can't, and don't, want to think of the world without Queen Elizabeth II, but when it happens, Charles will be there doing the very best he can for the British citizen and the world in general.

 

[hernameispekka]

I think the changes will be as drastic as when Edward VII ascended after Victoria. The fundamentals of the Monarchy will remain, but many things surrounding it will change. The monarchy is very good at reading the people. Things needed to change between Victoria and Edward VII, but stability and continuity was needed during the time of George V, Edward VIII, and George VI. Major changes during the long reign of Elizabeth II could have made her look fical and prown to flip flop. Acceptance and morals have changed so much since the early '50s until now.

The difference is that Victoria wasn't liked that much since she hid away and Elizabeth is really loved.

 

[Rudolph]

Most of the changes will be implemented by the government and not Charles personally. Charles will make changes to his court but in a constitutional monarchy it will be the parliament that dictates the reign of Charles, just like with his predecessors

 

[Iluvbertie]

The difference is that Victoria wasn't liked that much since she hid away and Elizabeth is really loved.

Victoria was revered. She was certainly extremely popular. The unpopular years were the 1860s but from the 1870s on she was most certainly popular and by the end was almost 'goddess' like in stature - because she wasn't seen that much and was so 'old'. Her diamond jubilee was massive and the support for her kept on growing.

The feelings of loss when she died were also massive with people asking 'what will we do' 'how will we cope' etc etc.

 

[hernameispekka]

Victoria was revered. She was certainly extremely popular. The unpopular years were the 1860s but from the 1870s on she was most certainly popular and by the end was almost 'goddess' like in statue - because she wasn't seen that much and was so 'old'. Her diamond jubilee was massive and the support for her kept on growing.

The feelings of loss when she died were also massive with people asking 'what will we do' 'how will we cope' etc etc.

Ok, I am not that knowledgeable about history so thanks for correcting me

 

[Curryong]

I can just imagine Queen Victoria's reaction if, in her old age, newspapers and biographers had openly speculated about the changes her son was contemplating in the new reign and how things would change!

 

[Dman]

I think a lot of the media hype and public reaction to Charles's future reign is due to a major case of anxiety. The majority of the population has known no other Monarch than, Elizabeth II. It's hard for some to see any light at the end of the tunnel after her reign.

Charles won't ruin the very institution that he was born to one day lead. He's made some mistakes that shook the House of Windsor a bit, but he won't bring the whole thing down once he's King.

 

[cepe]

I think it happens every time. Some senior MPs thought that George VI would be a bad king and wanted the Duke of Gloucester instead. When the Queen acceded some thought she was too young and there should be a period of "regency".

 

[Dman]

I think it happens every time. Some senior MPs thought that George VI would be a bad king and wanted the Duke of Gloucester instead. When the Queen acceded some thought she was too young and there should be a period of "regency".

Yeah, I guess these same feelings were expressed during and after Victoria's very long reign. Charles will be the King he was meant to be, and after a while, the world will get used to King Charles.

 

[HereditaryPrincess]

At the time of the Royal Wedding in 2011 journalists and television news reporters descended on London en masse. Invariably they claimed to have a fascinating new slant on the happy occasion, yet they always produced the same questions. The first concerned Prince William marrying a commoner (OK but in fact he was marrying the girl of his choice, who arrived on the scene “fully baked” and with a university degree and has not changed a jot since), the second suggested that Prince Charles would now be passed over in the succession in favour of his son. Well no, that is not how it is done and nor should it be.

What kind of monarch will Prince Charles be? - Telegraph

 

[CyrilVladisla]

What kind of monarch will Prince Charles be? - Telegraph

The Telegraph mentioned that Charles "and Diana were seen as a dream team."
A dream team is a splendid title.
However, in reality, the splendid married couple had differences. Charles and Diana divorced.
What if this dream team would have had an excellent marriage?
​