The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #741  
Old 02-29-2020, 12:15 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
They do pretty well, really. Princess Alexandra's 83 and still working with charities, and the Duke of Kent's not much younger. Long may they continue! But I'm sure no-one would expect them to keep going if it was getting too much.

I don't think now's the time for Beatrice and Eugenie to become full time working royals, especially if they're hoping to have children. No-one really wants a job involving a lot of travel if they've got babies or toddlers. But Edward and Sophie can only pick up so much, so I don't know what the answer is.
The answer is: think out-of-the-box, re-think the concept and the workings of the monarchy, make it agile, cost efficient and ready for the 2020's and onward.

Today's type of monarchy, with royals operating in the periphery and being awaited by Her Majesty's Lord-Lieutenant for the Town of Berwick-upon-Tweed for visiting a dog shelter, barely noticed in media (even on this board with royalty addicts) needs a rethink.

When one reads the Court Circular, one would be surprised by the amount of engagements by the Gloucesters, the Kents or even the Wessexes which were not even mentioned on this board.

The way the monarchy works is largely unchanged since 1952. In all other monarchies at least one or even two new Sovereigns have taken over during HM's Reign. Every new Sovereign sets his/her own priorities and organizes his/her own Household. These major resets have not taken place in the UK.

It will -without doubt- change under King Charles. And what many fellow posters do is thinking in the same box: "But isn't Princess Alexandra getting old? We must need Beatrice or Eugenie to do her duties!"

But out-of-the-box thinking is: "Do we need to continue a Princess Alexandra at all, in the monarchy anno 2025?"
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #742  
Old 02-29-2020, 12:27 PM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 2,930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post

The way the monarchy works is largely unchanged since 1952.
I'd say since the reign of George V. When the 68-year old Gustav VI Adolf ascended the Swedish throne in 1950 he reformed the court and the monarchy to the core, laying the foundations for an increasing modernisation and a largely efficient court during of his grandson the current king. The result is a court that's both modern and one of the most pompous courts of Europe. Two years later the 26-year old Elizabeth II ascended the British throne and didn't change much at all although Prince Philip was dying to air out the Edwardian Court they found themselves the centre off. I've always imagined that what kept them from reforming and changing much was a question of her cautious personality, her young age and the fact that her mother lived for as long as she did. Like Queen Ingrid in Denmark, although much more domineering and conservative the Queen Mother made sure that the old ways remained in place.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #743  
Old 02-29-2020, 12:43 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Woodbury, United States
Posts: 964
I'm just not worried about it. I think the monarchy is in very good hands with Charles, then William...
Reply With Quote
  #744  
Old 02-29-2020, 12:47 PM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 10,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR76 View Post
I'd say since the reign of George V. When the 68-year old Gustav VI Adolf ascended the Swedish throne in 1950 he reformed the court and the monarchy to the core, laying the foundations for an increasing modernisation and a largely efficient court during of his grandson the current king. The result is a court that's both modern and one of the most pompous courts of Europe. Two years later the 26-year old Elizabeth II ascended the British throne and didn't change much at all although Prince Philip was dying to air out the Edwardian Court they found themselves the centre off. I've always imagined that what kept them from reforming and changing much was a question of her cautious personality, her young age and the fact that her mother lived for as long as she did. Like Queen Ingrid in Denmark, although much more domineering and conservative the Queen Mother made sure that the old ways remained in place.
The same did happen in the Netherlands. Princess Beatrix made trips to other Households and was very charmed by the Household as set up by the young Queen Margrethe of Denmark. When she took over in 1980, she remodelled the old bloated stuffy Dutch Court to the more modern Danish model.

In Belgium we can see how the inerted to standstill monarchy under Baudouin and Albert (same generation as Elizabeth) changed for the better under Philippe. It is natural. Any new chief sets his/her tone.

The Queen is blessed with an unbelievably long Reign. Paradoxically the same Reign probably "stalls" an update to a monarchy fit for 2025. We can see with Harry and Meghan how difficult it is for the Firm to rethink positions. Result: a promising and fabulous asset to the monarchy has become a potentially damaging out of control satellite in the royal orbit.
Reply With Quote
  #745  
Old 04-11-2020, 01:49 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 4,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Sicne they are going to be King nad his consort, their popularity does matter...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
Let me ask a question then. Will having low popularity ratings in any way prevent Charles from being King or is it really a given that due to the Act of Succession of 1701 that as Charles is the present monarch's heir apparent, he will succeed his mother as monarch on her death. Do they take a poll at the time of the Queen's death to determine if he's "popular" enough to be King? How does that work? I'm curious.

Its also been the case where once upon a time there was a very popular Prince of Wales that was disastrous as a king. We know that story well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
Charles will be king regardless of any polls done. Popularity isn't a factor in who succeeds the monarch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
He will become king assuming that the monarchy lasts. however, if there are further problems.. his general popularity may be a factor in ending his reign or the monarchy as a whole...
Let's establish that we all agree that Charles will become king (if he survives his mother). The question at hand seems to be whether Charles' popularity is in any way relevant for the continuity of the monarchy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
That’s how I see it. I wish he had the public’s support, but.......it doesn’t matter. Charles is going to be King, and that’s that. Popularity matters with regards to the government, but not hereditary monarchy, and like you said, the public often likes the wrong people, lol.

Assuming? When HM dies, Charles will become King....and his popularity will have nothing to do with ending his reign unless there is another English Civil War and he becomes the second King named Charles to have his head lopped off. As to ending the monarchy, I don’t think so, lol - it’s lasted 1000 years.
I don't think it is likely in the UK but rather likely that one or more of the other realms decides to become a republic and ditch Charles as king. There are several that have a republic-leaning population that won't take that step as long as the queen is on the throne but are quite likely to do so when she is no longer their monarch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Plenty of monarchies have ended.. just because it has lasted 1000 years does not mean that it will last forever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betsypaige View Post
You haven’t made a good argument why Charles’ lack of popularity could end a 1000 year old monarchy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I didn't say that, I said that just because the monarchy lasted 1000 years does not mean that it will last indefintely. Its problably safe for now, as the queen is respected.. but in these dangerous times, with a less popular respected monarch, that might be the tipping point...
I'd say that being hugely popular is not a pre-requisite to being a good monarch (for example, former queen Beatrix was not really populair but well-respected); a lack of popularity and respect; and especially a negative opinion of a monarch (for example, what if Andrew had been the first son instead of Charles?!) can indeed be a tipping point/proof fatal in certain circumstances.
Reply With Quote
  #746  
Old 04-11-2020, 02:13 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
Let's establish that we all agree that Charles will become king (if he survives his mother). The question at hand seems to be whether Charles' popularity is in any way relevant for the continuity of the monarchy.

I don't think it is likely in the UK but rather likely that one or more of the other realms decides to become a republic and ditch Charles as king. There are several that have a republic-leaning population that won't take that step as long as the queen is on the throne but are quite likely to do so when she is no longer their monarch.



I'd say that being hugely popular is not a pre-requisite to being a good monarch (for example, former queen Beatrix was not really populair but well-respected); a lack of popularity and respect; and especially a negative opinion of a monarch (for example, what if Andrew had been the first son instead of Charles?!) can indeed be a tipping point/proof fatal in certain circumstances.
Preciseley. If Andrew had been the heir, do you think he'd be accepted as King when the queen goes, after the events of the past few years?
Reply With Quote
  #747  
Old 04-11-2020, 02:21 PM
Jacknch's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,964
It's so difficult to imagine how things will be when the Queen dies and Charles comes to the throne. I'm not sure popularity will, in the end, come into it. People don't like change, but nor do they like instability.

People, I think, will rally round to the idea of a new monarch eventually after the initial shock of losing the Queen.
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #748  
Old 04-11-2020, 02:25 PM
Blog Real's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 3,962
I think people will join the idea of having a new monarch after the shock of losing the queen.
The monarchy will continue, there is at this time no reason to change reg
__________________
My blogs about monarchies
Reply With Quote
  #749  
Old 04-11-2020, 02:40 PM
Nico's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 2,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Preciseley. If Andrew had been the heir, do you think he'd be accepted as King when the queen goes, after the events of the past few years?
If Andrew had been the heir, he would'nt have been in position to do what he allegedly did ...
Spares have too much spare time so to speak.

Charles is not a controversial figure. He has still enough gravitas to be a respected sovereign. Then the Cambridges are hugely popular so i guess the Monarchy in UK is in good hands.

But indeed some apparently popular sovereigns were kicked out as well (Constantine of Greece for exemple). So if the Monarchy has to end in the UK, i presume it would be more from a political coup that a popular outburst against the soveraign and his family.
Reply With Quote
  #750  
Old 04-11-2020, 03:10 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 414
It is all good and understandable with this reformist thingy...

but what is with the Commonwealth? I mean, probably will be more effcient, especially eco-efficent, forms of travelling invented - solar powered air ships or something. And then you can't really compare the Danish, Dutch or Swedish monarchies with the British anymore!

And the Commonwealth will become much more important now after Brexit. That will need some serious man- and womanpower!
Reply With Quote
  #751  
Old 04-11-2020, 04:39 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 4,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nico View Post
If Andrew had been the heir, he would'nt have been in position to do what he allegedly did ...
Spares have too much spare time so to speak.

Charles is not a controversial figure. He has still enough gravitas to be a respected sovereign. Then the Cambridges are hugely popular so i guess the Monarchy in UK is in good hands.

But indeed some apparently popular sovereigns were kicked out as well (Constantine of Greece for exemple). So if the Monarchy has to end in the UK, i presume it would be more from a political coup that a popular outburst against the soveraign and his family.
For the UK, yes, but what about the other realms. Currently, in several of those realms there is already a significant group advocating for a republic and while already a possibility (even with a popular monarch such as the queen), it seems even more likely with a less popular monarch.

Possibility to become a republic in the foreseeable future:
Australia:
Quote:
In December 2016, News.com.au found that a majority of members of both houses of Parliament supported Australia becoming a republic (54% in the House and 53% in the Senate).
Barbados:
Quote:
On 22 March 2015, Prime Minister Freundel Stuart announced that Barbados will move towards a republican form of government "in the very near future".
Jamaica:
Quote:
Both major political parties – the Jamaica Labour Party and the People's National Party – subscribe to the position, and the current Prime Minister of Jamaica, Andrew Holness, has announced that transitioning to a republic will be a priority of his government.
Unclear (as the referendum was about many other issues as well) - but movement trying to establish republic:
St Vincent & the Grenaldines:
Quote:
The proposal [i.e. a new constitution] was supported by only 43.13% of voters in the referendum, well short of the required two-thirds threshold. If approved, the proposed constitution would have abolished the monarchy of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, headed by Queen Elizabeth II,[3] and would have given more power to the opposition.
Unclear - but little indication that a republic is actively sought after:
Antigua and Barbados

The Bahamas

Belize

Grenada

Papua New Guinea

St Kitts and Nevis

St Lucia

Solomon Islands

Likely to remain a monarchy in the foreseeable future:
Canada:
Quote:
the Canadian populace remains largely indifferent to the issue
New Zealand:
Quote:
Public opinion polls have generally found that a majority of the population favour retaining the monarchy.
Tuvalu:
Quote:
The referendum failed, with 679 votes in favour of establishing a republic and 1,260 votes to retain the monarchy. Turnout for the referendum was low.
Reply With Quote
  #752  
Old 04-11-2020, 05:00 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Northamptonshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 553
To an observer in this realm it's interesting that attitudes seem to be different in the two next largest realms. Different histories & cultures play a part of course but I get the impression that in Canada the crown is seen as a Canadian institution whereas in Australia it is seen as the "British monarchy".

Just as impression of course but not being a citizen of either country I may be wrong. In the context of the UK only some type of cataclysmic black swan type event could lead to a republic. Not impossible but if the constitution were to be in that much crises I would think the monarchy would be the least of our problems.
Reply With Quote
  #753  
Old 04-11-2020, 06:30 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,048
Below is an article showing poll results with reference to the monarchy in Canada. Not good news for monarchists who believe Canada will stick with the Crown no matter what.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6496234/i...nada-monarchy/

The main problem in removing the Queen constitutionally in both Canada and Australia (I'm an Aussie) is the actual mechanics of doing so, the hoops that have to be jumped through, not challenging monarchical sentiment. That becomes less every few years. And once Australia goes IMO New Zealand won't be too far behind, or may even precede us.
Reply With Quote
  #754  
Old 04-12-2020, 01:41 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 31
This discussion about the relation between popularity and the survival of the monarchy is surely interesting.

This article for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Below is an article showing poll results with reference to the monarchy in Canada. Not good news for monarchists who believe Canada will stick with the Crown no matter what.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6496234/i...nada-monarchy/
As I understand, the article is from Feb and poll was conducted not long after the Sussexes stepping down from their royal role. Public opinion was divided and there's noticeable "public outrage" towards BRF as reported by media (especially media in north America and Australia).

But this Covid crisis happens then we have the Queen's speech and it seems BRF is popular again.

It would be interesting to see how it be if the same survey has been conducted now for comparison (I know it's not the time though as we have more important to deal right now). But who know, maybe it would be similiar to the time around Diana's death (how the so called BRF's "popularity" bounced back). Or remember the pessimism in media over HM Golden Jubilee in 2002 and the reality of the celebration?

I'm not saying that the monarchy will remain forever, but the problem with popularity poll is how public opinion can change and be easily swayed by an event. On the other hand, the process to remove the monarchy will take longer than than how fast the public opinion can change. So unless the monarchy does something so bad that its popularity slump drastically for years or ignite a civil war or constitutional crisis, it will remain safe for another decades.
Reply With Quote
  #755  
Old 04-12-2020, 04:12 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,688
If popularity of the BRF was judged by comments in the media they are on their last legs but ... how representative of the situation are comments in the DM etc (I read a number of British media outlets across the political spectrum and ALL of them have a majority of very negative comments about the royals and especially the Queen's comments as being irrelevant and how would she know or understand what the people are suffering).
Reply With Quote
  #756  
Old Today, 10:36 AM
Claire's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,052
So what now

I have wanted to rekindle this thread for a while - but I am unsure if it actually fits here. I was told about two months ago that the Royal family reaction to Corona and their actions immediately after Meghan and Harry's departure - would make or break them. Understandable I saw this as very fickle and narrow sighted as well as forgetting well unresolved issues about the Duke of York, but okay.

How do you think they did ? Any suggestions for the uncertain future?

With the Queen under understandable house quarantine for the foreseeable future - is it a Regency in everything but name. Can there be a 3-way split regency?
Do you think the resurgence of the minor royals will continue going forward - must admit it is nice seeing the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexander getting top billing. I also like that Edward and Sophie are taking on a larger role, but I am concerned that it will bring about intense media pressure on the family, which they luckily have eluded so far. I do think we will see more collaborations.

I also would like them to bring Harry and Meghan back under the wing. Maybe they can do joint international or American engagements. Harry can hand out the DOE awards or Red Cross events in the Americas. As we haven't had the royal wedding, or the regular June social scene this would have been sorely missed.

What do you think ?
Reply With Quote
  #757  
Old Today, 10:54 AM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 4,287
I'd say it's best everyone accepts that Harry and Meghan made their decision and decided they are out; so no reason at all to include them in future engagements - that will just muddle the waters.

There was a reason the queen asked them to be either in or out and not try to have the best of both worlds.
Reply With Quote
  #758  
Old Today, 10:57 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 5,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
I'd say it's best everyone accepts that Harry and Meghan made their decision and decided they are out; so no reason at all to include them in future engagements - that will just muddle the waters.

There was a reason the queen asked them to be either in or out and not try to have the best of both worlds.
yes I would say an absolute NO, to the idea of them being involved. The RF will manage, they did not want to stay, they are gone. There is no monarchy in the USA...
Reply With Quote
  #759  
Old Today, 11:19 AM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire View Post
How do you think they did ? Any suggestions for the uncertain future?

With the Queen under understandable house quarantine for the foreseeable future - is it a Regency in everything but name. Can there be a 3-way split regency?
3 way split regency to whom? The Queen is still undertaking the largest part of her role, from her home. She’s have daily meetings with the PM, she’s have phone calls and making connections with her prime ministers across the globe as well as her patronages.

The Queen is not doing, what all other royals aren’t capable of and that is seeing the public. No regency to speak of in my eyes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire View Post
Do you think the resurgence of the minor royals will continue going forward - must admit it is nice seeing the Duke of Kent and Princess Alexander getting top billing. I also like that Edward and Sophie are taking on a larger role, but I am concerned that it will bring about intense media pressure on the family, which they luckily have eluded so far. I do think we will see more collaborations.
Resurgence? I see a whole royal family doing what they always do, consistently. But now it’s being done by telephone and video calls instead of in person. I’ll have to check iluvberties figures but I bet there’s no significant uptick in any “minor royals” engagement tally.

Edward and Sophie especially are doing the role, they’ve been doing for decades. It just wasn’t being reported on.

Just so it doesn’t look like I’ve edited the post, I’ve deleted any of the H&M stuff as no doubt the speculation around then will cause another thread to be closed.
__________________

__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 47 (4 members and 43 guests)
Biset, Denville, Minister of Court, Nico
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 of the Belgian monarchy Marengo Royal Family of Belgium 120 05-18-2020 10:03 AM
The Future of the Danish Monarchy Empress Royal House of Denmark 771 04-18-2020 12:48 PM
Future and Popularity of the Spanish Monarchy TODOI Royal Family of Spain 1530 03-22-2020 02:01 PM
Future of the Dutch Monarchy Marengo Dutch Royals 39 11-29-2017 09:53 AM




Popular Tags
abdication alqasimi anastasia 2020 belgian royal belgian royal family bridal gown canada chittagong coronavirus crusades current events danish royalty dna duke of cambridge dutch royal family dutch royals facts family tree fantasy movie future genealogy hill historical drama house of bernadotte house of grimaldi israel jerusalem jumma kent list of rulers lithuania lithuanian palaces mail monaco royal mountbatten netflix nobel prize northern ireland norway norway history official visit popularity potential areas prince charles prince daniel princely family of monaco prince of wales pronunciation queen mathilde queen paola random facts rown royal dress-ups royal re-enactments. royal wedding royal wedding gown settings south korea spanish royal state visit state visit to denmark sweden swedish history thailand tips tracts united kingdom visit from sweden von hofmannsthal working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:23 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×