The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #601  
Old 02-03-2020, 02:53 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durham View Post
Yes indeed. Always strikes me as weird that some republicans(who often consider themselves so modern& progressive) make such blatantly xenophobic comments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
I think it's just an argument they exploit, rather than one they care about themselves.
But for whom would the argument be intended, if not themselves?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayal View Post
....am I in the wrong place?
What are you looking to find?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #602  
Old 02-03-2020, 02:58 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,471
I was watching something last night which made the very valid point that the biggest threat to the monarchy is irrelevance - but I think many people still feel that the monarchy is relevant. Maybe younger people don't so much, but older people probably didn't when *they* younger: people tend to have less appetite for change as they grow older. There's also the issue of an alternative - which would presumably be an elected president representing one of the two main parties. One thing pretty much everyone agrees on, after the shenanigans of the last three years, is having a very low opinion of politicians - I'm not sure people would be so keen on a republic when they stopped to think that it would mean having a politician as head of state.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #603  
Old 02-03-2020, 04:18 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
But for whom would the argument be intended, if not themselves?
Republican groups mainly use economic & democratic arguments but the casting of the BRF as German by some republicans is aimed at those people whose notion of Britishness is linked to the monarch so the purpose is to erode their loyalty to the crown by diluting the family's Britishness.

As to the general enquiry about the future of the monarchy, I think it'll be OK because we don't do revolution here (not recently anyway!) so it would have to be part of a democratic process whereby the government held a referendum. That's not going to happen until one of the leading parties decides it's in their own best interest to do that (eg they're under pressure from noisy republicans within their own party). It would also require some popular newspapers to promote anti-monarchy propaganda, which is possible as at least one proprietor is a republican. Polling shows it's possible to whip the public up on a single issue eg for decades, a tiny minority cited membership of the EU as an important issue but once the government decided to have a referendum, it became one of people's top concerns. So overall, abolishing the monarchy is unlikely to happen until there's a political will, backed by the popular press & funded by billionaires.
Reply With Quote
  #604  
Old 02-03-2020, 04:33 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
Republican groups mainly use economic & democratic arguments but the casting of the BRF as German by some republicans is aimed at those people whose notion of Britishness is linked to the monarch so the purpose is to erode their loyalty to the crown by diluting the family's Britishness.
I can understand the strategy of challenging the "Britishness" of the monarchy, but the argument that their German descent dilutes the family's Britishness would only be effective with people whose notion of Britishness also excludes people of foreign descent - even partial foreign descent from a fellow Western European country. Given the diversity of the general population it seems unlikely that many British people, apart from those making the argument themselves, would share those sentiments.
Reply With Quote
  #605  
Old 02-03-2020, 04:40 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
Quote:
Given the diversity of the general population it seems unlikely that many British people, apart from those making the argument themselves, would share those sentiments.
Absolutely correct - it is so funny that the people making this argument 'pride themselves' on their *woke* credentials, yet are prepared to use an absolutely xenophobic/racist trope against an institution they seek [by ANY means possible] to undermine..
THeir argument [as you say] has very little traction in a multi-cultural Nation such as Britain..
Reply With Quote
  #606  
Old 02-03-2020, 04:41 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
I can understand the strategy of challenging the "Britishness" of the monarchy, but the argument that their German descent dilutes the family's Britishness would only be effective with people whose notion of Britishness also excludes people of foreign descent - even partial foreign descent from a fellow Western European country.
Those are the people it's aimed at. Like I said, it's not the main argument used but if you want a political change, you'll use every angle to cover every demographic.
Reply With Quote
  #607  
Old 02-03-2020, 04:49 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by wyevale View Post
Absolutely correct - it is so funny that the people making this argument 'pride themselves' on their *woke* credentials, yet are prepared to use an absolutely xenophobic/racist trope against an institution they seek [by ANY means possible] to undermine..
THeir argument [as you say] has very little traction in a multi-cultural Nation such as Britain..
As we've seen recently, there are politicians who are very willing to use arguments, dog whistles & tropes they don't believe themselves in order to achieve the change they want. Yes, we're a multi-cultural nation but we also have bigots, xenophobes and racists upon whom such propaganda can be effective.
Reply With Quote
  #608  
Old 02-03-2020, 05:06 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
I was watching something last night which made the very valid point that the biggest threat to the monarchy is irrelevance - but I think many people still feel that the monarchy is relevant. Maybe younger people don't so much, but older people probably didn't when *they* younger: people tend to have less appetite for change as they grow older. There's also the issue of an alternative - which would presumably be an elected president representing one of the two main parties. One thing pretty much everyone agrees on, after the shenanigans of the last three years, is having a very low opinion of politicians - I'm not sure people would be so keen on a republic when they stopped to think that it would mean having a politician as head of state.
To be relevant people have to be able to relate and young people will struggle as the years go by.

In two years time there won't be a working royal under 40. Even worse, in 22 years time there won't be any full time royals under 60 (George will still be doing his military training and they can't expect him to step up at a younger age than William did himself.).

That will be the big problem - only two working royals in William's generation not that Harry and Meghan have quit.

The Queen's generation had 8 at the maximum and still has 5 over a 20 year age range (93 - 73 - The Queen to the Duchess of Gloucester). Charles' generation at its maximum had 6 and now 5 with a 17 year range (72 - 55 - Duchess of Cornwall to Countess of Wessex - but only two under 60 now and soon three over 70). In William's generation there are two - aged 38 and 37 - turning 38 this year.

To 'young people' today a person in their late 30s isn't 'young'.

When Harry was getting married I had a Year 8 class and when they asked me who the 'young royals were and I said William, Catherine, Harry and Meghan the reply back was 'they aren't 'young' ... they are older than my parents'. These kids are now 16 and they see anyone over 30 as 'old' but a 6 year old is a 'baby'. This is the generation for whom the royal family will lack relevance as there is no one doing the things they are doing.
Reply With Quote
  #609  
Old 02-03-2020, 05:23 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,970


But in 22 years' time, the now 16-year-old, who will then be age 38, will probably no longer view a 28-year-old Prince George as a "baby".

In any case, the often called for "slimming down" of the royal family is irreconciliable with the aim of representing a range of ages among the working royals. A gap between successive generations is unavoidable unless multiple lines of the family are included (as an example, the York princesses and Wessex children would bridge the age gap between the Cambridges and their children) or royal couples revert to marrying and having children in their teens as they did historically.

Edited to add: It would also be avoidable if royal couples had large gaps in between having children: for example, if the Duke of Cambridge had become father to Prince George at the age of 20, Princess Charlotte at the age of 30, and Prince Louis at the age of 40, and Prince George did the same in his turn.
Reply With Quote
  #610  
Old 02-03-2020, 06:32 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 1,187
I've always been dubious of the slimmed down monarchy (limiting working royals to the monarch, heirs apparent and their children) due to me thinking that the monarchy will naturally be slimmed down due to the lower birth rate and the possibility that one of those from the designated pool would temporarily or permanently opt out which is what happened recently.

I do think it matters that the younger generations be visible, but they do not need to be working royals to be visible. If George, Charlotte and Louis are willing to show up at Trooping the Colour, Sandringham Christmas walks, balcony appearances, etc., allow photos to be released of milestones like birthdays, and as a bonus have a pet cause that they want to promote, then IMO that will suffice if they are not working royals until their late twenties or thirties.
Reply With Quote
  #611  
Old 02-03-2020, 07:32 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
I do hope it changes ..I asked in another thread if it was worrying that Charles would not have public support once he becomes king, and everyone who responded said “no”. Still....for all the good he’s done, for all the burst of goodwill he received after walking Meghan down the aisle, he’ll never be able to overcome the Diana years; it almost seems he’s hated. I don’t worry at all for the future of the monarchy - it’s in good hands with Charles and William - but I do worry that Charles, being generally unpopular, will have a hard time.
He may not be much loved but he'll be OK. he's a wealthy privileged man who has a role that means a lot ot him and he will go on doing his job. He went through bad times during the Diana years and I daresay tahtt he knows now that he may not be very popular but he has come through those bad times and survivied. He has a busy life, a wife that he's contented with.. and I think he's a reasonably happy man these days. Of course the monarchy may not last but nothing lasts forever and if it ended when William was king I don't tink it would break Will's heart..
Reply With Quote
  #612  
Old 02-03-2020, 07:47 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
He may not be much loved but he'll be OK. he's a wealthy privileged man who has a role that means a lot ot him and he will go on doing his job. He went through bad times during the Diana years and I daresay tahtt he knows now that he may not be very popular but he has come through those bad times and survivied. He has a busy life, a wife that he's contented with.. and I think he's a reasonably happy man these days. Of course the monarchy may not last but nothing lasts forever and if it ended when William was king I don't tink it would break Will's heart..
Oh, I know Charles will get in with it, that being unpopular hasn’t stopped him, but it will make things harder on him. He won’t get credit for any good thing he does - or, even if he’s just doing what his mother does, he’ll very likely somehow be criticized. This isn’t me judging the British, but it’s more a commentary on people in general, who tend to be rough on those in “power” (I put that word in quotes because I understand that the monarch has no real power’ who they don’t like


I can’t imagine William being so blasé as to not care if the monarchy ended with his reign ...I don’t think he’d be happy, actually; he’s been raised to be king. I seriously doubt he’d want to go down in history as the last ever king of England
Reply With Quote
  #613  
Old 02-03-2020, 10:02 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
William won't be the last King of England - unless the UK breaks up. That honour belongs to William III.

There hasn't been a King/Queen of England since 1707.
Reply With Quote
  #614  
Old 02-03-2020, 11:48 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
William won't be the last King of England - unless the UK breaks up. That honour belongs to William III.

There hasn't been a King/Queen of England since 1707.
Ok, so King of England, Scotland, etc...My point was that William would not be happy if he were the last of a thousand years of monarchs
Reply With Quote
  #615  
Old 02-04-2020, 12:01 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 13,218
The title of the monarch does not include the places - England, Scotland or Wales. The title is 'of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland'. Using the term England for the UK is the same as using Texas for the USA.
Reply With Quote
  #616  
Old 02-04-2020, 03:43 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayal View Post
Seems to be several proud of their knowledge of the past, but have no opinion of the future? I picked this thread to try and learn what you all think about the future of the British monarchy....am I in the wrong place?

You only read a few posts. A common criticism of the current royal family is that they were somehow "German" and therefore foreign. We were saying that previous royalty was also from other countries.
Reply With Quote
  #617  
Old 02-04-2020, 04:53 AM
Helen.CH's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Chambery, France
Posts: 302
I only read a couple of posts here, what surprises me when talking about the end of monarchy is that the British hardly seem to reflect on the current political system they got.
The monarch himself has no power, Britain has no constitution only laws...but there is still the house of Lords.....
a democracy yes but somehow weird because not the people has the power but the parliament which is a big difference to other european democracies.
In Britain only a few are really elected, still others appointed, some by heritage, some.....
if things would change this would not only mean to get the monarch away but to find a constitution......nothing is impossible but in Britain this would mean a real big deal.
I won't live it but am sure that monarchies are out in a few generations because mankind will change so much.
Reply With Quote
  #618  
Old 02-04-2020, 04:58 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helen.CH View Post
I only read a couple of posts here, what surprises me when talking about the end of monarchy is that the British hardly seem to reflect on the current political system they got.
The monarch himself has no power, Britain has no constitution only laws...but there is still the house of Lords.....
a democracy yes but somehow weird because not the people has the power but the parliament which is a big difference to other european democracies.
In Britain only a few are really elected, still others appointed, some by heritage, some.....
if things would change this would not only mean to get the monarch away but to find a constitution......nothing is impossible but in Britain this would mean a real big deal.
I won't live it but am sure that monarchies are out in a few generations because mankind will change so much.
? what do You mean only a few are really elected? Parliament is elected by the people. the House of Lords has only been an "adjusting and revision of laws chamber" for about 100 years, and has had no power. It is no different to other democracies.
Reply With Quote
  #619  
Old 02-04-2020, 05:01 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Helen.CH View Post
I only read a couple of posts here, what surprises me when talking about the end of monarchy is that the British hardly seem to reflect on the current political system they got.
The monarch himself has no power, Britain has no constitution only laws...but there is still the house of Lords.....
a democracy yes but somehow weird because not the people has the power but the parliament which is a big difference to other european democracies.
In Britain only a few are really elected, still others appointed, some by heritage, some.....
if things would change this would not only mean to get the monarch away but to find a constitution......nothing is impossible but in Britain this would mean a real big deal.
I won't live it but am sure that monarchies are out in a few generations because mankind will change so much.

Well the monarchy has survived for a thousand years (more if you're going back further than William the Conqueror). So I wouldn't count it out now.


I only mentioned that the previous poster hadn't read very far back is because she said we were discussing the history of the monarchy not about whether the monarchy would survive. I was telling her (or maybe him) why we were talking about that.



You don't have to read the whole long thread.


And the Monarch has much more power than you'd think. She's not just a figurehead.


On a side note this popped up on my youtube feed - apparently Sky News released it two weeks ago. Thought people might be interested - it is short.


Reply With Quote
  #620  
Old 02-04-2020, 05:30 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,471
I think most people would be quite glad to see the back of the House of Lords, especially at the moment, when opinions of Parliament generally are not very high, and especially given that the unelected "Lords" can get an expenses allowance of around £300 per day just for turning up for 5 minutes. However, there's only so much parliamentary time, and there are other, far more pressing, matters, to take that up. Abolishing the Lords is like mending the shed door or the side gate, or looking to see if you could get your gas and electricity cheaper from a different supplier … you know that you should really get round to doing it, but you've got a million more pressing things to do and there are only 24 hours in a day!
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
camilla parker bowles, camilla parker-bowles, camilla's family


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
Future and Popularity of the Spanish Monarchy TODOI Royal Family of Spain 1678 08-15-2021 08:22 AM
The Future of the Danish Monarchy Empress Royal House of Denmark 797 05-31-2021 02:27 PM
Future of the Belgian monarchy Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 122 09-27-2020 08:03 AM
Future of the Dutch Monarchy Marengo Dutch Royals 42 09-25-2020 03:53 AM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian british british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii family tree genetics george vi gradenigo harry and meghan hello! highgrove history hochberg hypothetical monarchs japan japanese imperial family japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos książ castle liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers meghan markle monarchists monarchy mongolia names plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince harry queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry solomon j solomon spanish royal family st edward sussex suthida thai royal family unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:03 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×