The Royals

I'm indifferent. On one hand, the privilege is absurd. On the other, it's a nice apolitical set of figureheads that, on the whole, are mostly harmless. I think most people like the Queen herself.

This seems to be a subject where people will cling to whatever set of facts supports their preference. I'm never convinced with the whole 'but tourism and other revenue!' argument, as it infers that all income and tourism would just evaporate in the replacement, which is a bit silly. It's not as if Buckingham Palace would sprout rocket boosters and blast off into space.

I sense that a change in public perception will come when the Queen dies, as we don't really think of the Queen as an actual queen - more of a nice old lady. When Charles takes her place and we have a king, that will seem a bit dissonant. A king?! WTF is this Game of Thrones BS!!! Particularly with our new national anthem... which will presumably be God Save the King.

I do think that it would be convenient for the Royal Family if Charles abdicates and it goes to William. The idea of a 'younger' king is more appealing.
 
Last edited:
maybe schools need to accentuate a UK history component, or govt subsidise a netflix production for us to binge watch after the crown;
yes, I think there has been a lull in royal involvement in the nations life over the past 20 years, maybe due to their ageing;
not sure Meghan hasn't caused irreparable damage, but, at least, that, experiment, has been curtailed.


flag - ok I see wouldn't have guessed ... and the BBC had chosen not to commentate much during the cortege procession ( probably best )
  • The first quarter represents the Duke’s Danish roots, showing three blue lions and nine red hearts on a yellow field.
  • The second quarter reflects his Greek background, consisting of a white cross on a blue field.
  • The third shows five black and white vertical stripes and represents his family surname, Mountbatten.
  • The final and fourth quarter reflects his position as Duke of Edinburgh, showing a black and red castle. The castle is also part of the arms of the city of Edinburgh.

Edit: nice to see the bbc is now trolling the queen, "she will be adopting business as usual ..."
maybe part of their progressive remit.
 
Last edited:
BowdonUK said:
I was the opposite. I preferred the ITV coverage over the BBC. I couldn't stand Huw Edwards yapping on. He seemed to be talking just to fill the air. I'm not a fan of Tom Bradby either on ITV. But they seemed to be more active in having different interviews and let the cameras follow the ceremonies leading up to the funeral.
Click to expand...

Sky was best, they literary shut up and let the whole thing roll out without any commentary, which is what's best.
 
Nitefly said:
I'm indifferent. On one hand, the privilege is absurd. On the other, it's a nice apolitical set of figureheads that, on the whole, are mostly harmless. I think most people like the Queen herself.

.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Could you imagine if our general public were left to their own devices to elect their own head of state? :cry: it would be a circus, just like our current state of government and politics. Look at the US. At least with the Queen we have somone who can exercise a degree of decorum and decency, which is exactly what is needed.
 
I have every right to express it, which is the royals were pushed and told to keep out of it. Thing is they haven't. The recent guardian articles show how much meddling is being done buy people with nothing but luck to put them in a position of utter privilege and power. One rule for one etc etc.
 
So what haven't the royal family kept out of ?
seem to have kept out of brexit, maybe less so the illegal prorogue, they remain pro commonwealth, environmental issues, british car makers,
... obviously got pulled into racism, maybe you are going to say no commenting on Andrew , devolution ?
I'd admonish Charles branding on the Duchy originals, though.
 
SPG said:
I have every right to express it, which is the royals were pushed and told to keep out of it. Thing is they haven't. The recent guardian articles show how much meddling is being done buy people with nothing but luck to put them in a position of utter privilege and power. One rule for one etc etc.
Click to expand...

You're talking out of your backside.
 
SPG said:
I have every right to express it, which is the royals were pushed and told to keep out of it. Thing is they haven't. The recent guardian articles show how much meddling is being done buy people with nothing but luck to put them in a position of utter privilege and power. One rule for one etc etc.
Click to expand...
You just sound bitter :cry:
 
13 million people watching the funeral doesn't sound very healthy for monarchists and some of that is likely to be just celebrity interest at best.
 
Last edited:
Feek said:
I’d love to know how you draw that conclusion.
Click to expand...

Just going off of the BBC article.

I accept that it's actually views being registered and not individual people as there's no actual way to measure how many are watching the same screens, this would have course be better measured against households which stand at ~30 million. This would also not account for how many instances in a single household there might be, so that would push the numbers down some unknown amount as well. I still think that's somewhat low considering the polled support of the monarchy.

The point I want to make is that that those that fervently support the monarchy and those that oppose it are probably about the same in terms of numbers, it's those in the middle who prefer normalcy to what may currently be unnecessary change that will decide what happens in the future. Will those people feel the same way about Charles or William that they did with Elizabeth? I'm of the opinion that support will wane after a temporary rallying effect caused by her passing, especially in the midst of multiple scandals in recent years battering the image of the institution. There's also potential that some of the support is partly based on the monarch being a Queen rather than a King, insofar that women may be a driver of that waning support, though it will be resisted by feminine risk aversion to some degree (perhaps totally?).

If nothing else, it'll be interesting to see how public opinion evolves from all the changes that are coming, whether the Monarchy will act upon or preempt this potential drop in support (power sharing between Charles and William, reducing the number of the court on the payroll) and whether there will be more scandals to come that sharply changes the country's mood rather than just being tolerated. Don't particularly care either way as I'm fine with the current situation even if slightly agitated by attempts to meddle and certain persons acting in ways they shouldn't, but my ability to tolerate inappropriate behaviour will disappear once the Queen passes.
 
Last edited:
Im not for or against the monarchy but some of the headlines in recent weeks highlight how much of a farce the main stream media really are, completely fabricated headlines, quotes from unknown sources and even statements from ‘body language experts’.

I think its an institution that does no harm existing, if anything it adds a sub conscious national pride alongside the other benefits, charities, tourism(as is always mentioned), whatever else. The proceeds generated will far outweigh costs of upkeep. There will always be ‘haters’.

Charles isn't what he’s made out to be, watch any footage(old and new) of him interacting with his peers and children.

Harry is a lost cause.
 
StriderX said:
Just going off of the BBC article.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what relevance the viewing figures have to do in relation to being healthy for the monarchy. I'm all in favour of the royal family but had absolutely zero interest in watching the funeral. I've been to two this year and that's only because I had to. I don't think anyone actually wants to go to a funeral.
 
Feek said:
I'm not sure what relevance the viewing figures have to do in relation to being healthy for the monarchy. I'm all in favour of the royal family but had absolutely zero interest in watching the funeral. I've been to two this year and that's only because I had to. I don't think anyone actually wants to go to a funeral.
Click to expand...

I guess i'm just that I'm trying to see it through the modern lens of parasocial relationships with celebrities (like the oddity of witnessing an American practically worshiping the family), probably doesn't matter considering British attitudes, but still.
 
StriderX said:
Just going off of the BBC article.
Click to expand...

another bbc article
The UK's TV audience for the Olympic opening ceremony peaked at 26.9m, the BBC has said.
The average viewing figure for Friday's four-hour show was 22.4m, making it the UK's 13th most watched programme ever
.....
Highlights of the ceremony, shown on BBC One and BBC HD, included a meeting between the Queen and James Bond.
....
The biggest audience ever in the UK for a single programme remains the 30.5m for EastEnders on 25 December 1986 - but the figures were compiled differently at the time.
Click to expand...
Maybe we should install the eastenders in Buckingham palace.
 
Felt for the queen. Am a bit of a royalist and just see it as ongoing history. I think the alternative would be what the US has with celebrities and couldnt think of anything worse
 
jimjamuk said:
Felt for the queen. Am a bit of a royalist and just see it as ongoing history. I think the alternative would be what the US has with celebrities and couldnt think of anything worse
Click to expand...
Well, the UK already has plenty of celebrities, and you could legitimately include many of the royals under that umbrella.

So not quite sure what you're point is :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom