King Juan Carlos - Fiscal Investigations, Inheritance and Exile : 2018-2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
WreathOfLaurels said:
That just makes the “us vs them” mindset worse. Frankly, I’m convinced that Catalan independence is a case of “when’ not “if” and that the present course of action By both the government and the crown is simply delaying the inevitable. Indeed that speech might well earn F his place in the history books as the man who lost Catalonia, something far worse than embezzlement and sexual promiscuity.

For all his poor decisions, JC would never have said something like that and at least tried to understand the Non Castilian regions - something F seems unable or unwilling to do.



I suspect the real reason is a generation gap. Younger people are less tolerant of all this as they grew up after Franco died and have higher expectations than their elders.

Its also about class too. Spain’s political/business elite and high society are willing to tolerate stuff like that as they are the ones who benefit, but the man and woman on the street never have - they’re in a better position than in the past to make their displeasure known and plush back than in the past.

On top of that attitudes to sex and relationships have changed dramatically as well - this is one of the major reasons behind all the criticism of JC’s behavior and the way its been treated - its not just anachronistic, its an embarrassing throwback to A past many in Spain want to leave behind.

Letizia falls into both the post Franco generational band and was from a very middle class background (actual middle class, not nouveau riche social climbers like the Duchess of Cambridge’s family) So her views and Actions make total sense with all this taken into account. And if she stood up to JC about his actions, good on her! Somebody had to. Also avoiding Christina and her husband was also just common sense.
Click to expand...

The King would seem to be entirely in the hands of the Prime Minister at the moment. I fear repeated calls for a change to the Constitution and the Estatut of Catalonia might see the King lose ground and Sanchez tone down his support for the Monarchy. Remember he is in a coalition with rabid republicans who just may look to do deals with the separatists. I don't think the Spanish Crown is at all stable. One more scandal could see the first fall of a Monarchy in Europe since WWII.
 
Darius1 said:
The King would seem to be entirely in the hands of the Prime Minister at the moment. I fear repeated calls for a change to the Constitution and the Estatut of Catalonia might see the King lose ground and Sanchez tone down his support for the Monarchy. Remember he is in a coalition with rabid republicans who just may look to do deals with the separatists. I don't think the Spanish Crown is at all stable. One more scandal could see the first fall of a Monarchy in Europe since WWII.
Click to expand...


There has already a Monarchy fallen since WWII. The greek Monarchy.
I think for a change of the spanish Constituion a bipartisan majoritiy is necessary as the present coalition is far from the Majority needed for it and so will probably bne also future coalitions.
 
Stefan said:
There has already a Monarchy fallen since WWII. The greek Monarchy.
Click to expand...

There have been a few Italy,Romania and so on after WWII but Greece was the most recent.
 
Darius1 said:
The King would seem to be entirely in the hands of the Prime Minister at the moment. I fear repeated calls for a change to the Constitution and the Estatut of Catalonia might see the King lose ground and Sanchez tone down his support for the Monarchy. Remember he is in a coalition with rabid republicans who just may look to do deals with the separatists. I don't think the Spanish Crown is at all stable. One more scandal could see the first fall of a Monarchy in Europe since WWII.
Click to expand...

However they were also the only restored monarchy in Europe since WWII (ignoring the Greeks in 1947 who have since departed again). It's not quite "easy come, easy go", but it doesn't make it any more stable.
 
General Franco proclaimed Spain a Monarchy in 1947 but he was in no hurry to invite the Borbón back and was more or less Regent for life ,General Franco and his family lived at the El Pardo Palace.
 
An Ard Ri said:
General Franco proclaimed Spain a Monarchy in 1947 but he was in no hurry to invite the Borbón back and was more or less Regent for life ,General Franco and his family lived at the El Pardo Palace.
Click to expand...

Yes on March 31, 1947, Franco announced a "Law of Succession" in which after his death, the country would return to being a monarchy. The Spanish Courts approved the law on 7 June, which was submitted to a referendum and passed on 6 July of that year.
 
All the monarchies that fell after the Second World War are related to communism, in some cases because communism was imposed, and in the other case due to the so-called Cold War, the communist bloc, which formed the USSR, always trying to ingest in these countries, and in an anti-communist bloc, led by the USA, and NATO .

Franco is an intermediate point, he won a civil war against the communist bloc, the Franco regime was perpetuated in power, for being clearly anti-communist, due to the Cold War it went from being a boycotted country (due to the support that Franco provides to Hilter) to being the friend of the United States, and the NATO countries. The Spanish and Portuguese dictatorships, enjoyed the support of the United States, received a lot of money and investment from the USA.

The succession law,1947, is a guarantee that the Spanish state would not be communist. Why?
In the Spanish civil war, the republicans created a bloc with the communists.
The Spanish state was declared a kingdom without a king with Franco as Head of State, this law was made which is summarized as: Spain does not have a King, but has to Franco as Head of state, however , although it does not have a King, it is a Kingdom, because Franco compromises in the future to name like his successor a person with the title of King.

This law is important for that reason, because the Spanish republicans fought on the communist side, they acted in coordination with the communists.

This is true that this law is the one that allowed Spain to be a monarchy in 1975, in 1969 Franco elected his successor, Juan Carlos, and in 1975, King Juan Carlos was proclaimed King upon the death of Franco. The Spanish state continued to be a Kingdom.
To understand this structure, it is necessary to understand with who were the Republicans in the war.

Currently the context in Spain is obviously different, we are not talking about the Cold War, the communist bloc, the civil war, we are not in the context of Franco.

Our current context is the constitution of 1978, democratic, the European Union, the left populist political parties, the pro-independence political parties, the economic crisis .....

But with something similar, if in the civil war the Republicans joined the Communists, now the Republicans are the political parties of the radical left, defenders of an obsolete communism, similar to Venezuela, Cuba or Iran, and they have also joined the Catalan and Basque independentists.

Currently, the monarchy is not in danger in Spain, because the republic, or the republican discourse is led by these radical political formations.

I believe that the matter of King Juan Carlos does not affect the monarchy for this reason, but it must be resolved because otherwise it will always be used against King Felipe in the future.
If the discourse of the republic, as it happened in the 80s and 90s, was led branches of the socialist party, there were even branches on the Spanish right that described themselves as republicans, who were opposed to the independentist....., if this would be today, the scandal of King Juan Carlos , I think the monarchy would be on the verge of its end.
But this is not the case, the republican discourse in Spain is led by radicalism.
King Felipe should seek to clarify the case that affects his father, because if the Republicans change of position and moderate the discourse and separating of independentisits it could be in dangerous to monarchy in future
 
Last edited:
More trouble ahead, Jimenez is back on stage and hopes to profit from JC sinking reputation. Just seen him on television.
As all these posts above do not mention fiscal stuff, I posted this here, too, any discussion maybe better somewhere else.
 
ladongas said:
...includes speculation about the possible demise of various royal houses...

https://www.newyorker.com/news/dail...he-precarious-future-of-the-worlds-monarchies
Click to expand...

Well, it only really discusses the British and the Spanish monarchies - anything else is apparently to small to be considered relevant from the US-perspective.

It doesn't seem as if the writer is very much into royal houses in general or has much knowledge about them: stating that the Monegasque monarchy is inconsequential 'as to beg credulity' is rather farfetched when Grimaldi family is the sole reason that Monaco is still an independent country... Another example: Belgium: While the Belgian royal family might not be that popular they do contribute to Belgium's unity and in that way have 'modern relevance' - and Luxembourg's position on the world stage imho is larger than expected partly because they retain their own grand ducal family.
 
Somebody said:
Well, it only really discusses the British and the Spanish monarchies - anything else is apparently to small to be considered relevant from the US-perspective.

It doesn't seem as if the writer is very much into royal houses in general or has much knowledge about them: stating that the Monegasque monarchy is inconsequential 'as to beg credulity' is rather farfetched when Grimaldi family is the sole reason that Monaco is still an independent country... Another example: Belgium: While the Belgian royal family might not be that popular they do contribute to Belgium's unity and in that way have 'modern relevance' - and Luxembourg's position on the world stage imho is larger than expected partly because they retain their own grand ducal family.
Click to expand...

Aside from apparently not knowing the Scandinavian monarchies exist, he isn't entirely wrong...

JC was "brainwashed by Franco as a child" — almost certainly true. Then it's fair to ask, how much of the attitude did he retain? He's clearly comfortable with the Middle East autocrats and always has been.

It remains to be seen if and how much more damage to the Spanish monarchy JC scuttling will do.
 
Last edited:
Blog Real said:
What this man wrote is an exaggeration. Monarchies are doing well and are popular in their countries.
Only the monarchies of Spain and Thailand are in crisis, but they are not close to the end.
Click to expand...

I think the article is written very well and not so unlikely. Though only Spain and Thailand are detailed mentioned the development of social structures and man will compulsarily challenge the future of constitutional monarchies.
Like it or not it is an anachromism to give special admiration towards persons who only happened to be born accidently to a "royal" family. The younger generation will more and more reject this.
and the monarchs know well, that's the reason they searched for shoulder to shoulder with it's citizens. maybe those whose citizens think the monarchy costs not more or less than a president may survive.
interesting to me is the question in the UK, I agree their monarchy was spared a lot because E2 is still there, once she is gone things will change a lot.
 
cathy50 said:
I think the article is written very well and not so unlikely. Though only Spain and Thailand are detailed mentioned the development of social structures and man will compulsarily challenge the future of constitutional monarchies.
Like it or not it is an anachromism to give special admiration towards persons who only happened to be born accidently to a "royal" family. The younger generation will more and more reject this.
and the monarchs know well, that's the reason they searched for shoulder to shoulder with it's citizens. maybe those whose citizens think the monarchy costs not more or less than a president may survive.
interesting to me is the question in the UK, I agree their monarchy was spared a lot because E2 is still there, once she is gone things will change a lot.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is true. The monarchy is not an anachromism. The truth is that many countries exist as we know them because of their kings. Portugal is one such case. Monarchies are part of the history of their countries and the world and give identity to their countries. The republic has almost nothing to offer these countries.
And many young people also identify with monarchies and are monarchists, as is my case.
 
Blog Real said:
I don't think this is true. The monarchy is not an anachromism. The truth is that many countries exist as we know them because of their kings. Portugal is one such case. Monarchies are part of the history of their countries and the world and give identity to their countries. The republic has almost nothing to offer these countries.
And many young people also identify with monarchies and are monarchists, as is my case.
Click to expand...

there is no truth but different opinions.
i said the behaviour towards royals is a anachronism and i mentioned the future like the article , not talking about the history and just luke you? i cannot predict future.
please read carefully before producing false stuff!
 
Blog Real said:
I don't think this is true. The monarchy is not an anachromism. The truth is that many countries exist as we know them because of their kings. Portugal is one such case. Monarchies are part of the history of their countries and the world and give identity to their countries. The republic has almost nothing to offer these countries.
And many young people also identify with monarchies and are monarchists, as is my case.
Click to expand...




The author is clearly anti-monarchist and, based on his references to a post-Brexit "diminished Little Britain", his political leanings are clear too. His opinion is biased and should be read in that context.
 
cathy50 said:
there is no truth but different opinions.
i said the behaviour towards royals is a anachronism and i mentioned the future like the article , not talking about the history and just luke you? i cannot predict future.
please read carefully before producing false stuff!
Click to expand...

But I just gave my opinion. Just like you gave yours. Sorry if I offended you. :flowers:
 
Spain and Thailand are both the 2 monarchies making the wrong headlines!
 
Blog Real said:
But I just gave my opinion. Just like you gave yours. Sorry if I offended you. :flowers:
Click to expand...

no no, sorry, my language is not so good in english. am nit offended.
it's opinions, and at least we here will remain positive for the royals.

I' ve read there are investigations in england because one of the houses corinna larsen(she is not entitled to use the princesstitle or surname anymore) bought after receiving the money from JC. is this a big thing in the british media, too or only in spanish (which i consume more for its my mother tongue)? thank you.
 
cathy50 said:
no no, sorry, my language is not so good in english. am nit offended.
it's opinions, and at least we here will remain positive for the royals.

I' ve read there are investigations in england because one of the houses corinna larsen(she is not entitled to use the princesstitle or surname anymore) bought after receiving the money from JC. is this a big thing in the british media, too or only in spanish (which i consume more for its my mother tongue)? thank you.
Click to expand...

But I didn't offend you. I just gave my opinion. That's what I'm here for. I've been at the TRF since 2013 and I've never had any problems with anyone.
 
Blog Real said:
But I didn't offend you. I just gave my opinion. That's what I'm here for. I've been at the TRF since 2013 and I've never had any problems with anyone.
Click to expand...

no, no, no, but i said, i am not feeling offended by you. it is our opinions only.
you excused before, but I do not feel offended.
everything is ok.
hope you understand now? thank you. sorry my english is not good to understand always yet.
 
How many years have he and Queen Sofia (supposedly been) estranged?
 
acdc1 said:
How many years have he and Queen Sofia (supposedly been) estranged?
Click to expand...

Since there's no explanation for how long it's been, or why, other than gossip, a rough estimate is anything from the past twenty-five years (at a bare minimum) to before Felipe was born. The truth is probably somewhere in that middle.
 
The male heir was imperative to secure the monarchy at that time, maybe it started to become a full business marriage after that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

lula
King Juan Carlos of Spain's Visit to the UAE, Kuwait & Saudi Arabia: May 24-28, 2008
Replies
9
Views
16K
lula
lula

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom