The Future of the British Monarchy 1: 2018 - 2022

[AC21091968]

I don't think Khalid Mahmood's (Labour MP) tweet is about Harry & Meghan, despite the phrase "Californian high society" was used. It's more got to do with how social media (particularly twitter) is not an accurate representation on the views of the British public. I supposed this could also applied to the support of the British Monarchy, especially the response (probably expressed by young republicans and socialists/progressives) after Prince Philip's death. At one point, the phrase "Socialism" was trending on twitter.

The phrase "Twitter is not real life" has definitely re-surfaced with great emphasis for the past couple of days.

 

[Denville]

I assume the original post was linking "Californian high society" to Harry and Meghan, but, no, I don't think there's any connection with the future of the monarchy!

I suppose Californian high society refers to Hollywood and rich types in California....

 

[valeas]

Charles will be making history because he will be the first of the male monarchs to succeed his mother. If nothing disrupts the succession, after King Charles III are King William V and King George VII.

funfact
but let's not shout it until he is to make history of this kind there is so much destiny left to happen.

 

[Denville]

funfact
but let's not shout it until he is to make history of this kind there is so much destiny left to happen.

but he's not making history. There have been many cases of a male monarch suceeding a female one..most recently Edward VII

 

[Mbruno]

I suppose Californian high society refers to Hollywood and rich types in California....

I don't think either that the Labour MP was referring to Harry and Meghan, but the Sussexes now are de facto part of or identified with that same urban, woke "Californian high society" he was referring to.

 

[Durham]

He was also probably referring to the fact that twitter like much other social media is based in California.

And that politically California is synonymous with progressive movements. And has been since at least the sixties.

 

[An Ard Ri]

Charles will make British royal history when he becomes King Charles III. He will be the first male monarch since King George VI.

How is that historical?

 

[CyrilVladisla]

How does that make history?

There has not been a King of England named Charles since Charles II, whose reign ended in 1685. Thus, it has been over 330 years since a sovereign in England was named Charles.

 

[Kataryn]

There has not been a King of England named Charles since Charles II, whose reign ended in 1685. Thus, it has been over 330 years since a sovereign in England was named Charles.

The two Charles' were both kings of England and Scotland and the next Charles will be king of the Uk. But, when we think of the wish of so many Scots people to become independant and the need of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to form at least some sort of unity, it might be possible that Charles at one point in his reign, is going to be "King of England" again.

 

[Curryong]

Yes, Cyril, but there have been two Kings of England and Scotland named Charles. Prince Charles won’t be the first monarch of the name. Therefore his accession as Charles III won’t be history-making.

 

[Durham]

The two Charles' were both kings of England and Scotland and the next Charles will be king of the Uk. But, when we think of the wish of so many Scots people to become independant and the need of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to form at least some sort of unity, it might be possible that Charles at one point in his reign, is going to be "King of England" again.

At present Scotland appears to be split down the middle on the independence issue. In the latest election the SNP didn't win a majority & more Scots voted for parties that support the union. Then again not everyone who votes SNP/Green is a nationalist & not everyone who votes Lab/Con/Lib Dem is a unionist. So that's all as clear as mud. What is clear is that there is no great groundswell of massive majority support for leaving the UK as there was in the Irish election of 1918. At least not yet. Whatever happens it's a shame that people have become so divided over this issue in Scotland.

Maybe things look different outside the UK? After all the foreign media, especially if anti British, love to spin tales of doom.

If Scotland ever did become independent then that would be the end of a British monarchy & the reemergence of the 1707 status quo ante. How long Scotland would remain a monarchy however would be an interesting question. I'd wager not long. If only because the Scots would want a resident head of state & the monarchy would be seen as fundamentally English. And moreover southern English to boot.

The status of NI was settled by the Good Friday Agreement. The present status of NI can only alter if there is a majority for change in both NI & the R of I. So I'm not sure what is meant by there being a "need...to form at least some sort of unity". Peace was hard fought for & can too easily be lost. There is a delicate balance that outsiders tamper with at their peril.

 

[lIlIlIlIl]

When Camilla is Queen

When she is Her Majesty Queen Camilla alongside His Majesty King Charles, will her children Tom and Laura then become HRH Prince Thomas and HRH Princess Laura? Why have her children, thus far, never appeared on the palace balcony at Trooping the Colour with all the rest of the royal family?

[...]

 

[Osipi]

Camilla's children will not ever be "royal" in any sense of the word nor will they participate in official occasions where the British royal family attend (such as Trooping the Color). Tom and Laura are Camilla's children from her first marriage to Andrew Parker-Bowles.

[...]

 

[Somebody]

When she is Her Majesty Queen Camilla alongside His Majesty King Charles, will her children Tom and Laura then become HRH Prince Thomas and HRH Princess Laura? Why have her children, thus far, never appeared on the palace balcony at Trooping the Colour with all the rest of the royal family?

[...]

Welcome!

You might want to look for existing topics before starting your own as on almost any topic there is already a thread available for you to pose your questions

And as Osipi said: NO her children will never by royal highnesses as they were not born in a 'royal marriage'. Moreover, they are not members of the royal family and as the queen invites her family members to attend, her daughter-in-law's adult children do not attend. Of course, they might attend family celebrations or even some (large scale) royal events as guests but never as 'members of the royal family'.

It will be interesting to see if a different pattern will be followed for Beatrice's stepson.

 

[Iluvbertie]

When she is Her Majesty Queen Camilla alongside His Majesty King Charles, will her children Tom and Laura then become HRH Prince Thomas and HRH Princess Laura? Why have her children, thus far, never appeared on the palace balcony at Trooping the Colour with all the rest of the royal family?

[...]

We do not know what title Camilla will have when Charles is King. She may be Queen Camilla but she may also be The Princess Consort.

Her children won't be royal as they don't have a royal parent.

Tom and Laura have never appeared on the balcony at Trooping the Colour because they aren't part of the extended royal family. They may appear when Charles is King but I doubt it. He would certainly not be supported by the public if he did attempt to bring them forward in such a way.

I would expect them to attend Charles' coronation but as guests and not official attendees like the rest of the royals.

[..]

 

[Iluvbertie]

It will be interesting to see if a different pattern will be followed for Beatrice's stepson.

I don't see Wolfie appearing at any royal event. I am not sure that Beatrice will attend that many going forward - a garden party and Trooping I suspect will be it unless there is a major family event such as a coronation, funeral or wedding.

 

[Nice Nofret]

As Camilla will never be THE Queen in her own right, but always just Queen Consort, (one day) her Children will never be royal.


Camilla will never be known as Camilla I, as much, as Queen Elisabeth - the Queen Mum be just one of the many Queen Consorts with the name Elisabeth who don't get counted.



There are only two Queen Elisabeth in their own right ... the well known E I and the now E II.

 

[Denville]

As Camilla will never be THE Queen in her own right, but always just Queen Consort, (one day) her Children will never be royal.


Camilla will never be known as Camilla I, as much, as Queen Elisabeth - the Queen Mum be just one of the many Queen Consorts with the name Elisabeth who don't get counted.



There are only two Queen Elisabeth in their own right ... the well known E I and the now E II.

They are both Elizabeths, not "Elisabeth"... and yes queen consorts do not get numerals....

 

[Kataryn]

So I'm not sure what is meant by there being a "need...to form at least some sort of unity". Peace was hard fought for & can too easily be lost. There is a delicate balance that outsiders tamper with at their peril.

The Good Friday agreement has already been changed for Brexit as it was meant to be an agreement of "partners in the EU" - which the Uk is no longer. As both parts of the UK and the Republic of Ireland inhabit the same island, it is difficult to organize a good solution for Northern Ireland and the Uk in the situation enforced by Brexit. A lot of the agreements in the Good Friday agreement was only possible because both the Uk and Ireland shared their outer frontiers, so in fact the Republic, Northern Ireland and the Uk were "as one" based on the EU regulations. Now they are not and there's a frontier right through Ireland again, which could (and probably will) lead to new violence. They need a solution here and it can't be complete seperation, I'm afraid.

 

[Mbruno]

The two Charles' were both kings of England and Scotland and the next Charles will be king of the Uk. But, when we think of the wish of so many Scots people to become independant and the need of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to form at least some sort of unity, it might be possible that Charles at one point in his reign, is going to be "King of England" again.

Interestingly, the German Constitutional Court has ruled, I think, that Bavaria cannot unilaterally secede from the Federal Republic of Germany. Likewise, the Spanish Constitutional Court has ruled that Catalonia cannot unilaterally secede from Spain and, of course, no American state can unilaterally secede from the United States (the last time they tried, there was a Civil War as you might recall).

Why do you think then that Scotland has the right to secede from the United Kingdom unilaterally?

 

[TLLK]

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate forum for this news but Republic is requesting that Prince Harry lead their mission to end the monarchy.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1392918420799344641

Anti-monarchy campaign group Republic has just called for Prince Harry to lead its mission to scrap the #Royal Family. Campaign manager @GrahamSmith_
says: “Harry's sentiments are democratic and republican at heart.” #winning

 

[Osipi]

Now I've heard it all. What's next?

 

[Betsypaige]

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate forum for this news but Republic is requesting that Prince Harry lead their mission to end the monarchy.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1392918420799344641

If I were that group, I’d probably have done the same thing....I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he accepts

 

[Blog Real]

It is obvious that Prince Harry will not accept. That would be to betray his family.

 

[Erin9]

It is obvious that Prince Harry will not accept. That would be to betray his family.

He’s been doing that on a pretty consistent basis lately already. Including today. And given that he’s said William and Charles are trapped, but aren’t intelligent enough to comprehend it- you could argue he already has advocated for the end of the monarchy. He just hasn’t made it official....yet.

I wouldn’t assume anything where Harry is concerned.

 

[TLLK]

If I were that group, I’d probably have done the same thing....I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he accepts

I would be curious to see if he makes a reply either accepting or declining to Republic.

 

[Osipi]

I would sincerely hope that if and when Harry catches wind of this, it would be a rather rude awakening that just perhaps he's gone too far in his criticism and his "woke" emotions and really see how the rest of the world is perceiving him treating his family.

Actions beget reactions and this is *not* a good reaction that reflects well on Harry at all.

 

[Blog Real]

He’s been doing that on a pretty consistent basis lately already. Including today. And given that he’s said William and Charles are trapped, but aren’t intelligent enough to comprehend it- you could argue he already has advocated for the end of the monarchy. He just hasn’t made it official....yet.

I wouldn’t assume anything where Harry is concerned.

Okay. But if he accepted, he would go against his family and what it represents. Your father and brother are going to be kings. Harry cannot (or should not) join a group that defends a republic.

I imagine Meghan accepting to do that. But Harry didn't ....

 

[PetticoatLane]

Now I've heard it all. What's next?

Even just 6 months ago I would've said pigs were far more likely to fly than Harry was to give Oprah a prime-time interview trashing his entire family and his nation while his grandfather lay dying in hospital. I would've said it was more likely for cows to swim the Channel than it was for Harry to essentially label his father and grandparents as child abusers on a podcast a mere few weeks after his grandfather was buried.

Harry appears to be on a mission to destroy his family and the monarchy. I never thought I would type that sentence. He's the Republic leader in all but name.

 

[Osipi]

Even just 6 months ago I would've said pigs were far more likely to fly than Harry was to give Oprah a prime-time interview trashing his entire family and his nation while his grandfather lay dying in hospital. I would've said it was more likely for cows to swim the Channel than it was for Harry to essentially label his father and grandparents as child abusers on a podcast a mere few weeks after his grandfather was buried.

You and me both, PetticoatLand, you and me both. I'm going to have to start using an umbrella every time I step outdoors now because we all know flying pigs are worse than pigeons.

Well.. there's one thing that could happen. Should Harry jump on the Republic bandwagon publicly, I guess that the Queen could consider that treason enough to ask Parliament to strip him of his ducal title. Hmmm... food for thought there.