What on earth does empire have to do with anything? We in the UK have a different set of relationships to most continental European countries. The links with the US, Canada, Australia, NZ, Ireland etc. etc. are so much deeper and more highly valued than those with other nations. The Spanish RF have a similar type of relationship with many South American nations. It's simply a result of our history.
I was merely quoting what is said at the coffee tables in other monarchies.
This isn't about logic this is about feelings.
I have the priviledge to know about the reasons you have presented as to why the BRF do as they do, because I read about them here on TRF and I can, admittedly with a little difficulty, understand them. The gossip magazines and the TV commentators don't say a word about this.
So when an event takes place in monarchy X, people hear the commentators say: "There is the King of Spain, followed by the Queen of the Netherlands and there is Prince Edward of the UK the third son of QEII, followed by the king of Sweden...".
And because people are proud of their monarchy, their country and their royal family, they feel snubbed on behalf of their royal family. Even though their royal family may not have any problems at all with Edward coming.
That's why this comes up again and again.
Equally, one could say the so-called 'family' connections between the BRF and the other royal families are now so distant as to be of little relevance. Those close relationships with the Kaiser and the Tsar didn't exactly bring much in the way of benefits to the British people. Those who wish to denigrate the BRF in the UK refer to them as German, even to this day, and the Windsors have been working to prove their Britishness for decades.
If anyone to this day is in doubt that the Windsors are British, they are hopeless cases and shouldn't be allowed outside without a guidedog.
There are lots of ifs, buts and maybes here. The Queen is monarch of 16 sovereign states and her children support her duties in that capacity. There would be something seriously wrong if the BRF didn't value those relationships more than any others. What might possibly happen at some vague date in the future is irrelevant.
Fair enough, but it was worth a try...
Why does it not hold water? Why on earth should I have to pay for a whole crew of police protection officers, ladies-in-waiting, equerries, valets, and whatever else to go to Copenhagen or Stockholm for the wedding of some royals I'd never heard of until I joined this forum? What possible benefit or advantage would the British people enjoy by sending the most senior royals to every royal event in the other European monarchies? We already have friendly relations with these countries.
Do you really not see how jetting off to the continent to hobnob with other royals as part of a super-exclusive club could be negative PR for the royals?
Honestly? No, I don't. Perhaps because I'm used to see the other royal families having gettogethers at regular intervals.
Those who complain about the cost will, no matter what.
As for security and housing, that's up to the host country. The BRF needs protection and service no matter what anyway.
We can argue about whether it's embarrassing or not, but that doesn't mean that it's not fact. I can't see how knowing that Sweden has a constitutional monarchy would be of any particular benefit to the average man on the street.
Well, it would be embarrassing for you. If you go on a holiday to say Portugal and you chat with some French, german and Swedish tourists and you show that you don't know the most basic things about other European countries you will not be considered the sharpest knife in the drawer.
And if you have the audacity to add you don't care, well, enjoy your drink - alone.
But the British people have shown in poll after poll over many years (not only during the current crisis) that they want looser ties with Europe, they certainly don't want to 'cement' further connections. Rightly or wrongly, the British are and have always been a Eurosceptic people.
To that I can retort: No man is an island and that goes for countries too in this globalized world.
All this may have been true in the days when royals had actual executive power and relationships between royal houses were all important as regards war and peace. The reality is that these people have no ability to shape or control foreign policy and so the relationships are of limited importance to anyone.
As much as Kate is like other commoner women marrying into royal families, there are also enormous differences. Unfortunately for the BRF, the press scrutiny in the UK is way beyond anything any other royal family is subjected to. As we've seen with the pregnancy announcement, William and Kate face a lifetime of media coverage (deserved or otherwise) on a scale that's pretty much unique among RFs in the world. They are going to have to learn to live with the fact that they'll be recognised just about anywhere on the planet, which is not a problem for most other royals. Kate has the best adviser and support in taking on her royal role - her husband, who had a front row seat during his parents' difficulties. I seriously doubt that there's much Mary, Maxima or Mathilde can offer Kate that's better than that.
I disagree with you. Royals may not have much political influence, but as living role models they certainly have a lot of influence. Why else follow the royals and discuss and imitate what they say and do?
You are basically saying that other royals cannot teach W&K anything. I believe you are very much wrong. You can
always learn something new.
Before I began to do what I do now, I instructed new people for a number of years. And even though I was damned good at my job, I learned something in return from every single one I trained. Even the most thick headed.