The Future of the British Monarchy 1: 2018 - 2022

[AC21091968]

Should this go here?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ortrait-oxford-gavin-williamson-b1862076.html

This does not surprise me. As I've said on another thread recently the monarchy has now become part the culture wars & to mix my metaphors it's not rocket science to work out who's poisoned the well.

It's no longer just the (usually) reasonable discussion about the merits of monarchy vs republic.

I agree with you that the British Monarchy and Royal Family are now part of the cultural world, not just about the head of state constitution debate.

I'm not surprised by this incident of Oxford University students removing the portrait of The Queen from the Middle Common Room of Magdalen College, given that many guest speakers (e.g. Germaine Greer, John McDonnell, Selina Todd) have been no-platformed due to "bigoted, offensive and hurtful views" or even just appearing in a panel with a "controversial figure".

As for King's College London apologising for sending an email with photos of the late Prince Philip, this is the same university that was hiring "safe space marshals" (paid £12 an hour), so that the guest speaker does not perpetrate "safe space breach", as of October 2017. Some students including those from the King's College's Conservative Association and Libertarian Society were strongly oppose to the "safe space marshal" calling it a threat to freedom of speech.
https://thetab.com/uk/kings/2017/10...y-and-national-press-only-found-out-now-17139
https://thetab.com/uk/kings/2017/10...ts-that-could-violate-safe-space-policy-17105
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5013379/Students-bring-12-hour-safe-space-marshals.html

As a person who recently graduated from university and is under the aged of 30, I think these behaviours (getting triggered by photos of Prince Philip and portrait of the Head of State) tarnish the reputation of higher education, graduates and even young people in general. If these students cannot handle portrait/pictures or robust discussion without "safe space", "trigger warning" or "de-platforming", how are they going to interact with people with opposing view in the workplace or just outside university? Or how are they going to survive if they go into government offices/buildings? As mentioned earlier, most people I met in university (with more progressive/left-leaning views) do not behave this way. The student activist who lobbied for these "removal of historical artwork" or "de-platforming speakers" are truely the minority who made the largest noises.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I agree with you that the British Monarchy and Royal Family are now part of the cultural world, not just about the head of state constitution debate.

I'm not surprised by this incident of Oxford University students removing the portrait of The Queen from the Middle Common Room of Magdalen College, given that many guest speakers (e.g. Germaine Greer, John McDonnell, Selina Todd) have been no-platformed due to "bigoted, offensive and hurtful views" or even just appearing in a panel with a "controversial figure".

As for King's College London apologising for sending an email with photos of the late Prince Philip, this is the same university that was hiring "safe space marshals" (paid £12 an hour), so that the guest speaker does not perpetrate "safe space breach", as of October 2017. Some students including those from the King's College's Conservative Association and Libertarian Society were strongly oppose to the "safe space marshal" calling it a threat to freedom of speech.
https://thetab.com/uk/kings/2017/10...y-and-national-press-only-found-out-now-17139
https://thetab.com/uk/kings/2017/10...ts-that-could-violate-safe-space-policy-17105
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5013379/Students-bring-12-hour-safe-space-marshals.html

As a person who recently graduated from university and is under the aged of 30, I think these behaviours (getting triggered by photos of Prince Philip and portrait of the Head of State) tarnish the reputation of higher education, graduates and even young people in general. If these students cannot handle portrait/pictures or robust discussion without "safe space", "trigger warning" or "de-platforming", how are they going to interact with people with opposing view in the workplace or just outside university? Or how are they going to survive if they go into government offices/buildings? As mentioned earlier, most people I met in university (with more progressive/left-leaning views) do not behave this way. The student activist who lobbied for these "removal of historical artwork" or "de-platforming speakers" are truely the minority who made the largest noises.

This was so totally jawdropping. And then to realize that this is the future fine fleur of British society...

 

[Alison H]

It isn't even republicanism - it's just this crazy culture war thing going on at universities. One university recently banned the Armed Forces from a careers fair, on the grounds that they promoted war and colonialism. A student who objected was threatened with suspension from her course. It's getting like Chairman Mao's Culture Wars. I'm glad that my university days are over, but it's very worrying that this sort of thing is going on.

 

[Osipi]

I just can't help but feel that with seeing everywhere I look that the culture wars going on all over the place seems to be leading towards people becoming a "cookie cutter" society.

Especially for the British monarchy. You take away the institution of the monarchy which has encompassed British history for so very long and all its traditions and ceremonies and it's reminders of a constant continuation through the many years, and you end up with taking away a nation's sense of pride and belonging and even a sense of community, if you will.

If a group of people cannot look back and be reminded of the past that got them to where they are today in solidarity in wartime and in peacetime, how can we expect the people to pull together as a community to go forward with a sense of belonging to each other?

And here I thought that political correctness was taking things a bit too far sometimes.

 

[Moran]

If a group of people cannot look back and be reminded of the past that got them to where they are today in solidarity in wartime and in peacetime, how can we expect the people to pull together as a community to go forward with a sense of belonging to each other?

We can't. Take it from someone who had to live to their 30s to find out the full extent of the programme meant to deprive us from such a past after the local Communists established their bloodied regime supported by the Soviet army almost 80 years ago. They literally rewrote the words of poems, songs and hymns inspiring something of a national pride, including feats of arms so we could be all love and peace with our neighbours who, by the laws of history, happened to be the enemy at the battlefield. Just like literally everywhere, at every time in the history of this broad world.

The effects are still felt today and they ain't pretty.

 

[Blog Real]

I agree, this political correctness thing is going too far. We cannot whitewash history, history is what it is and we have to accept it.
In Portugal, there have also been controversial situations because of these cultural wars.
It's very sad these things that happen.

 

[ACO]

I don't think we need to erase history but I completely get why some don't understand why some aspects seem to still be celebrated. Like with the statues being removed. I got why people wanted them gone.

There are feelings about the monarchy and many of youth question why in 2021 we still have one, Why are you paying for a extremely wealthy family to continue living in their extreme privilege while you can see many struggling to survive? That is a legit question and it will be asked more and more now.

So things like the email and the portrait seem small now... it can turn into much bigger things and they need to be prepared for it.

 

[Durham]

I think it would have happened without the Sussexes but they've certainly thrown jet engine on the fire.

I think that's entirely fair comment.

From the BBC:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-57409743


‘Members of Magdalen College Middle Common Room (MCR) deemed the image a symbol of "recent colonial history".’

The question is why do they view it this way? Why not as a symbol of the class system? Or as a lack of legitimate democratic choice in picking the head of state? What has recent colonial history got to with anything?

In the grand scheme of things it doesn’t matter what a few students do. It’s very interesting though that traditional criticisms of the monarchy have now be joined by these new ones. I seem to remember a certain couple making ill-informed remarks about the Commonwealth not that long ago. To blame them for this particular incident would of course be absurd but their unhelpful contributions to the public forum are definitely seized on by certain groups here in Britain. The have undoubtedly muddied the waters.

If the “young” want a republic then they’re welcome to one. They’ll have to wait for the rest of us to go first though. And in the meantime perhaps these sort of people could start by being less abusive.

 

[Mbruno]

I think that's entirely fair comment.

From the BBC:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-57409743


‘Members of Magdalen College Middle Common Room (MCR) deemed the image a symbol of "recent colonial history".’

The question is why do they view it this way? Why not as a symbol of the class system? Or as a lack of legitimate democratic choice in picking the head of state? What has recent colonial history got to with anything?

In the grand scheme of things it doesn’t matter what a few students do. It’s very interesting though that traditional criticisms of the monarchy have now be joined by these new ones. I seem to remember a certain couple making ill-informed remarks about the Commonwealth not that long ago. To blame them for this particular incident would of course be absurd but their unhelpful contributions to the public forum are definitely seized on by certain groups here in Britain. The have undoubtedly muddied the waters.

If the “young” want a republic then they’re welcome to one. They’ll have to wait for the rest of us to go first though. And in the meantime perhaps these sort of people could start by being less abusive.

From what I understand, the decision to remove the Queen's portrait from the Common Room was not due to republicanism, but rather to cater for students from former British colonies who felt uncomfortable with the Queen's image, which they associate with their countries' colonial past. That is fair to a certain extent as in many countries in Africa for example, which were still colonies during part of the Queen's reign, portraits of the Queen were likely common as symbols of British sovereignty over those territories.



I imagine the same association will not be made with future portraits of King Charles III, King William V, or King George VII, so there will be no reason to remove them from the college (at least not based on the same reasoning).

 

[Tatiana Maria]

From what I understand, the decision to remove the Queen's portrait from the Common Room was not due to republicanism, but rather to cater for students from former British colonies who felt uncomfortable with the Queen's image, which they associate with their countries' colonial past. That is fair to a certain extent as in many countries in Africa for example, which were still colonies during part of the Queen's reign, portraits of the Queen were likely common as symbols of British sovereignty over those territories.

The BBC's version is more ambiguous, but the Telegraph report gives the impression that the vote was called out of concern that someone "might" object to the portrait in the future rather than because of existing objections from foreign students: "The vote was called in the interest of domestic and international students who might object to the imagery."

 

[Durham]

From what I understand, the decision to remove the Queen's portrait from the Common Room was not due to republicanism, but rather to cater for students from former British colonies who felt uncomfortable with the Queen's image, which they associate with their countries' colonial past. That is fair to a certain extent as in many countries in Africa for example, which were still colonies during part of the Queen's reign, portraits of the Queen were likely common as symbols of British sovereignty over those territories.

I'm not aware of that & it's not mentioned by the BBC. Although it may be elsewhere?

If that is the case I find it quite peculiar. Being uncomfortable doesn't give anyone special rights. The absurdities of modern academia.

 

[Prinsara]

Aren't many if not most of those "countries in Africa" and former British colonies part of the Commonwealth, anyway? If someone really has a problem with the Queen, perhaps they should not be studying in the UK? She is a bit ubiquitous.

 

[Durham]

She is a bit ubiquitous.

Stamps & money for a start.?

 

[Prinsara]

Stamps & money for a start.?

To quote Tracey Ullman as Camilla: "How many 'mother-in-laws' is it?"

But this seems to be a case of ivory-tower sensibility ultimately clashing with... reality?

 

[Roslyn]

More proof that the world's gone crazy. I reckon that if students from former British colonies have a real issue with the British Queen's image being in the common room of a university in Britain, they should choose to study at a university in another country.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The person who actually moved the motion is a 25 year old American lecturer.

 

[AC21091968]

The Future of the British Monarchy

The incident in Magdalen College, Oxford has made it into the House of Commons debate. On Business of the House (10th June) in HoC chamber, Tom Hunt (Conservative MP for Ipswich) asked his colleague Jacob Rees-Mogg, Leader of The House on finding a time to discuss "was to prevent woke-ification of Oxbridge colleges" and university campuses. Tom Hunt also mentioned about 150 academia refusing to teach unless the Rhodes' statue is taken down and the plans to changed the name of "Churchill College" in Cambridge University to be more inclusive.

To which, Jacob Rees-Mogg labelled the students who tried to remove the portrait of Her Majesty "pimply adolescents" though he did say he "not get too excited about that". He then tried to flip the coin and "speculate" what would have happen if a Brit studying in America suggested taking down the American flag. He also labelled the academics who refused to teach "a useless bunch" and "feeble". He then jokingly suggested that Parliament should pass a Bill to change the name of Cambridge University to Churchill University. In context, Jacob Rees-Mogg went to Oxford and has made digs at Cambridge before (Like some students at rival (often top) universities often do, e.g. University of Sydney and University of New South Wales).

Tom Hunt (Ipswich) (Con)
On Oxbridge colleges, I was very pleased to see the Prime Minister intervene and object to the appalling news that Magdalen College, Oxford had taken down a portrait of the Queen, but of course, this is not an isolated incident. Today I hear that 150 academics at Oriel College, Oxford are refusing to teach because the Rhodes statue has not been taken down. This week we also heard the disturbing news that Churchill College, Cambridge is considering changing the name of the college, to make it seem more inclusive. I know that, historically, there have been lots of eccentric, left-wing academics at Oxford and Cambridge, but given the sheer frequency with which these events are cropping up, will my right hon. Friend provide time for us to discuss what we can do to prevent the woke-ification of Oxbridge colleges?

Mr Rees-Mogg
As for Magdalen College, it is not exactly 1687-88. It is a few pimply adolescents getting excited and taking down a picture of Her Majesty. It makes Magdalen look pretty wet, but it is not the end of the world. I would not get too excited about that, although it amuses me to speculate as to what would happen if one of Her Majesty’s subjects suggested taking down the stars and stripes in an American university. It might not be enormously well received. As the pimply adolescent in question is, I think, an American citizen, he might like to think about that. He might think that taking down the US flag in an American university was a bridge too far even for the most patriotic Briton.

As regards the academics’ refusing to teach, I am half tempted to say that one should be lucky not to be taught by such a useless bunch. If they are that feeble, what are you missing and what are they doing there? Why do they not have any pride in their country, in our marvellous history and in our success? Rhodes is not a black and white figure. Perhaps they are not learned enough to have bothered to look up the history of Rhodes, which has been written about quite extensively now, in any detail. As I say, he is a figure of importance, interest and enormous generosity to Oxford. Do they want to give the money back to the descendants of Cecil Rhodes, or are they intending to keep it to themselves? We must not allow this wokeness to happen. As for the idea of changing Churchill College, perhaps we should introduce a Bill to rename Cambridge Churchill and call it Churchill University. That would be one in the eye for the lefties.

Business of the House
Volume 696: debated on Thursday 10 June 2021
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commo...16E-4CF1-A0DF-631CB921C039/BusinessOfTheHouse

Jacob Rees-Mogg has also tweeted out the video

Jacob Rees-Mogg @Jacob_Rees_Mogg
The woke brigade at Oxford and Cambridge are determined to prove Cicero’s point “There is nothing so absurd but some philosopher [academic] has said it”.
6:42 PM · Jun 11, 2021·Twitter Web App​

https://twitter.com/x/status/1403271320100655105

 

[ACO]

Didn't students vote to put it up? Then students voted to take it down.

What is the issue? That is their right.

 

[duchessrachel]

More proof that the world's gone crazy. I reckon that if students from former British colonies have a real issue with the British Queen's image being in the common room of a university in Britain, they should choose to study at a university in another country.

I totally agree. I am an American and this embarrasses me. The royal family should let it be known through an "anonymous" palace source that if the Queen's picture is not put back up, no organization associated with Oxford University will enjoy their patronage anymore. I bet that would get their attention.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Didn't students vote to put it up? Then students voted to take it down.

What is the issue? That is their right.

I don't understand your point. No one has disputed that the students had the legal right to put it up or take it down.

 

[Alison H]

Several newspapers have questioned whether the American student concerned, an old boy of a $48,000 per year school, also objects to spending sterling, on the grounds that it has pictures of the Queen on it. One assumes not.

 

[ACO]

I don't understand your point. No one has disputed that the students had the legal right to put it up or take it down.

So what exactly is the outrage?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I'm not sure I follow. Most "outrage" does not involve illegal activity, so it is nothing unusual for perfectly legal actions to draw criticism.

 

[ACO]

My confusion is if students voted to put it up (as it wasn’t there before) then why the fuss others students voted to remove it to how it was before?

Nothing really about legality except we got people (even in this thread) saying these students should maybe leave the county. Bit extreme, no?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

It seems clear from the posted articles that the "fuss" is about the statements made by the spokesperson in explaining the removal.

 

[Muhler]

Well, they aren't exactly helping the cause! No matter what it might be.

Militants rarely win over Joe and Jolene Average, on the contrary.
Because if there is anything that is very touchy it's national and historical symbols!

And if you are a guest, who have been treated, wined and dined as a guest, and you start to criticize the way the host decorate their home, it's perhaps time to leave...

So in my eyes, this is an example of people who have been educated above their intelligence.

 

[Osipi]

It's strange but reading all this about an outrage of a Queen's portrait hanging in a student communal setting at an university in the UK makes me seriously wonder if we're heading for a situation where, in the future, it will be a sensitive issue to wear a certain color such as orange as orange may symbolize something that isn't universal to all human beings. Or that hair styles conform to being uniform so that individuality is not expressed. Burn down or erase the history of what was so as not to mar the present with dissention?

Are we reaching a point where we're so afraid of offending someone else that we will give up our own individuality, our own cultures and our own thoughts so as to preserve the status quo so to speak?

Is this where we're heading:

"Beam me up, Scotty, there ain't no intelligent humanity left here. Just clones."

 

[Muhler]

It's strange but reading all this about an outrage of a Queen's portrait hanging in a student communal setting at an university in the UK makes me seriously wonder if we're heading for a situation where, in the future, it will be a sensitive issue to wear a certain color such as orange as orange may symbolize something that isn't universal to all human beings. Or that hair styles conform to being uniform so that individuality is not expressed. Burn down or erase the history of what was so as not to mar the present with dissention?

Are we reaching a point where we're so afraid of offending someone else that we will give up our own individuality, our own cultures and our own thoughts so as to preserve the status quo so to speak?

Is this where we're heading:

"Beam me up, Scotty, there ain't no intelligent humanity left here. Just clones."

Exactly!

The greatest threat to freedom today is not dictators, religious fanatics or terrorists. It's the fear not being politically correct, of having prejudices, of not offending anyone - even those who are not offended...
Because we are only humans and as such politically incorrect in so many ways in our daily lives.
We all have prejudices. Hundreds of them. - That's down to ignorance and in most cases we are proven wrong by learning about whoever it might be. And in some cases we are proven right...
I'm offended every single day. Several times a day in fact, just by reading a paper.
Sometimes I'm offended for several minutes and if it really bad I'm offended for several hours.
But life moves on despite me being offended - and I no doubt offend other people as well.
That's life.

So instead of making a song and dance act about how righteous these people think they are, perhaps they should simply join the most of us, and grow some tolerance and overbearing.

Because if we don't stand up to these self-appointed censors, we will lose our freedom. And what is just as bad, there will come a backlash.
Because the brown shirts, who Joe and Jolene Average voted for in their frustration, don't care about being called racists or nationalists. They'll beat you up, rather than apologizing for a colonial past.

 

[travelguy]

When Charles has his coronation do we think it will be a big massive event like the queens with decorations around london

 

[Kataryn]

When Charles has his coronation do we think it will be a big massive event like the queens with decorations around london

I would think so. Because the Tory-government needs a big, prestigious event to show the world that Britain is still an important country in the world. At the moment the papers don't ask for it yet, out of respect for the still living queen, but it will the coronation or both the Platinum Jubilee and the Coronation to be celebrated in full. It shows the victory over Covid as well, don't forget.