Just call me Harry. (Everything Harry & Meghan)

[skatfan]

The Queen though is a rallying point as a symbol that someone like the Prime Minister could never be.

It doesn't seem to have made their politics any less polarized than democratic states.

Precisely because she is not political. So the people can celebrate here as symbol of the nation.

And this is needed because? To me, it's an anachronism given that we don't believe in the divine right of kings (and queens) anymore.

 

[JJH]

Harry's concerns for his children are not nonsense.

Harry and Meghan: White supremacists targeted Sussexes, court told

Two men from London deny using their podcast to encourage acts of extreme right-wing terrorism.

www.bbc.com

 

[becca]

It doesn't seem to have made their politics any less polarized than democratic states.


And this is needed because? To me, it's an anachronism given that we don't believe in the divine right of kings (and queens) anymore.

I don’t think it’s that the politics aren’t polarized but rather that they have a unifying figurehead

 

[skatfan]

I don’t think it’s that the politics aren’t polarized but rather that they have a unifying figurehead

It doesn’t seem to mean much in any practical sense. Northern Ireland may vote to go with Ireland now that the Unionists are in charge, Scotland still wants out, the Commonwealth continues to shrink. I don’t think a hereditary monarch is enough these days.

 

[antmanb]

I don’t think it’s that the politics aren’t polarized but rather that they have a unifying figurehead

Spoken like someone who has no actual idea what it is like living in the UK.

 

[millyskate]

Spoken like someone who has no actual idea what it is like living in the UK.

To be fair I think becca has a point there. As someone who has lived half of their life in monarchies and half of their life in republics, I feel definite benefits to monarchies that probably go unnoticed unless you've experienced the reverse.
I definitely don't think a republic would work in the UK - it's bad enough with a PM without given them even more clout by naming them president. The race for presidency in countries where it's a thing becomes a narcissistic obsession that IMO dwarfs anything we experience with general elections in the UK. The fact that no-confidence votes can happen, even if they are rarely successful, and the leader can be changed without calling a new general election is a massive benefit.

And while British FSUers are probably not the Royal Family's target audience they are a unifying force, despite themselves.
I totally understand commonwealth countries being done with well, the commonwealth though. I just suspect that if the British get rid of the monarchy they'll suddenly realise the grass is certainly not greener on the other side. In fact, I don't even want to think of the chaos it would cause.

 

[antmanb]

Hosting the Olympics were infinitely more unifying than having a Monarch.

Having a monarch didn't stop the bitter split that occurred in the country over the Brexit vote, nor has it healed it in any way.

Events like the jubilee may appear to unify the country but does it actually unify the country?

I'm not at all convinced.

 

[PRlady]

You selfish Brits need to understand that you have to keep your royals for the rest of the world to

The bicycle monarchs in the rest of Europe are boring, although Monaco punches above its weight in tabloid fare. Nothing comes close to the Brits, though.

 

[allezfred]

To be fair I think becca has a point there. As someone who has lived half of their life in monarchies and half of their life in republics, I feel definite benefits to monarchies that probably go unnoticed unless you've experienced the reverse.
I definitely don't think a republic would work in the UK - it's bad enough with a PM without given them even more clout by naming them president. The race for presidency in countries where it's a thing becomes a narcissistic obsession that IMO dwarfs anything we experience with general elections in the UK. The fact that no-confidence votes can happen, even if they are rarely successful, and the leader can be changed without calling a new general election is a massive benefit.

Not all republics operate in the same way as France. For example, in Ireland our President is the head of state, but has no role in forming government and setting government policy.

 

[MsZem]

The bicycle monarchs in the rest of Europe are boring, although Monaco punches above its weight in tabloid fare. Nothing comes close to the Brits, though.

Um, Princess Martha Louise of Norway just got engaged:

Princess Märtha Louise of Norway and Shaman Durek Are Engaged: 'The One Who Makes My Heart Skip'

Princess Märtha Louise of Norway and Shaman Durek have announced their engagement after confirming their relationship in May 2019

people.com

ETA: I also feel obliged to note that Crown Prince Haakon of Norway married a single mom with a partying past, Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden married her personal trainer, her brother married a former glamour model/reality TV contestant, and Queen Maxima of the Netherlands couldn't have her father at her wedding because he was a minister in Argentina's junta government. That's not at all boring!

 

[Wyliefan]

Hosting the Olympics were infinitely more unifying than having a Monarch.

Yes, I'm sure the Uyghurs in China felt a lot of warm fuzzy feelings about their country when it hosted the Olympics.

 

[PRlady]

Um, Princess Martha Louise of Norway just got engaged:

Princess Märtha Louise of Norway and Shaman Durek Are Engaged: 'The One Who Makes My Heart Skip'

Princess Märtha Louise of Norway and Shaman Durek have announced their engagement after confirming their relationship in May 2019

people.com

ETA: I also feel obliged to note that Crown Prince Haakon of Norway married a single mom with a partying past, Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden married her personal trainer, her brother married a former glamour model/reality TV contestant, and Queen Maxima of the Netherlands couldn't have her father at her wedding because he was a minister in Argentina's junta government. That's not at all boring!

And other than Victoria I couldn’t name one of them. You have to be, um, very attentive, to know these things. Whereas the average American knows who Megan Markle is!

 

[mella]

Yes, I'm sure the Uyghurs in China felt a lot of warm fuzzy feelings about their country when it hosted the Olympics.

I think @antmanb was making a specific UK comparison? And i tend to agree although I think it was more the success of the team at home than the Olympics themselves. And that too was shortlived.

I think the monarchy gives an illusion of unity that will be lost when the Queen is gone.

 

[MsZem]

And other than Victoria I couldn’t name one of them. You have to be, um, very attentive, to know these things. Whereas the average American knows who Megan Markle is!

That's true, I am only arguing that if anything, the European royals are more interesting than the British ones

 

[antmanb]

Yes, I'm sure the Uyghurs in China felt a lot of warm fuzzy feelings about their country when it hosted the Olympics.

I wasn't talking generally (nor does China have a monarch), i was talking specifically about the way this country really did unify for the Olympics having been very typically British and skeptical around the whole thing right up until the last minute, everyone pulled together by the opening ceremony and the absolute support for our Olympians at a home was genuinely unifying.

 

[millyskate]

I think @antmanb was making a specific UK comparison? And i tend to agree although I think it was more the success of the team at home than the Olympics themselves. And that too was shortlived.

I think the monarchy gives an illusion of unity that will be lost when the Queen is gone.

Well that is true - the monarchy can't achieve unity but I think there's something in having a monarch who is just there, not chosen by anyone, and the same for all.
Charles I think will benefit from having had to wait so long to be crowned as he was a walking disaster in his youth but appears to have gained in wisdom and character through adversity. He certainly doesn't have the Queen's charisma or sense of dedication but I'm giving him a better chance than I would have 15 years ago.

 

[Wyliefan]

I wasn't talking generally (nor does China have a monarch), i was talking specifically about the way this country really did unify for the Olympics having been very typically British and skeptical around the whole thing right up until the last minute, everyone pulled together by the opening ceremony and the absolute support for our Olympians at a home was genuinely unifying.

OK, sorry. I thought you were talking generally.

 

[clairecloutier]

Charles may be better now than he was in his youth. But is he ever going to inspire the fondness, respect, and warm feelings that the Queen seems to evoke? I doubt it. I see him as a figurehead, serving for a brief time.

William, to me, feels potentially more problematic. Reports of his actions behind the scenes IRT Harry and Meghan, along with his and Kate's relentlessly conformist approach to the management of their public image, plus certain vaguely colonialist comments on William's part, just leave me with the impression of a somewhat reactionary personality. He will likely have a long reign, like his grandmother. I wonder how it will play out.

 

[becca]

You selfish Brits need to understand that you have to keep your royals for the rest of the world to

The bicycle monarchs in the rest of Europe are boring, although Monaco punches above its weight in tabloid fare. Nothing comes close to the Brits, though.

I don’t really care what the British people chose to do. I think there are good and bad.

Yes of course I wouldn’t say Britain is unified but there is something about having a Head of State who is not elected and above the Frey.

This being said Queen Elizabeth is truly special.

The problem with monarchy is you don’t always get people like her.

 

[MacMadame]

And other than Victoria I couldn’t name one of them. You have to be, um, very attentive, to know these things. Whereas the average American knows who Megan Markle is!

Maybe if there was no BRF, we'd have more attention span for the others.

 

[skategal]

Charles may be better now than he was in his youth. But is he ever going to inspire the fondness, respect, and warm feelings that the Queen seems to evoke? I doubt it. I see him as a figurehead, serving for a brief time.

William, to me, feels potentially more problematic. Reports of his actions behind the scenes IRT Harry and Meghan, along with his and Kate's relentlessly conformist approach to the management of their public image, plus certain vaguely colonialist comments on William's part, just leave me with the impression of a somewhat reactionary personality. He will likely have a long reign, like his grandmother. I wonder how it will play out.

I’m hoping Charles sticks around for awhile to give William more of a chance to mellow out a bit before taking the throne.

I suspect William will be a lot more chill in his 50s than he is in his 30s (most people are.)

 

[JJH]

William will be 40 on June 21. I hope he starts to mellow.

 

[taf2002]

Harry's concerns for his children are not nonsense.

Harry and Meghan: White supremacists targeted Sussexes, court told

Two men from London deny using their podcast to encourage acts of extreme right-wing terrorism.

www.bbc.com

I've thought for a long time that it was a real thing so I wasn't surprised to read that article. There is so much senseless hate & evil in the world. But I don't understand how anyone could be so depraved as to make death threats against a 3 yr old & 1 yr old.

 

[MacMadame]

I've thought for a long time that it was a real thing so I wasn't surprised to read that article. There is so much senseless hate & evil in the world. But I don't understand how anyone could be so depraved as to make death threats against a 3 yr old & 1 yr old.

It makes his request for security if he came for the Jubilee more understandable too. I noticed his kids aren't attending the events I've seen so far. That is probably because of the security issue.

 

[shan]

It makes his request for security if he came for the Jubilee more understandable too. I noticed his kids aren't attending the events I've seen so far. That is probably because of the security issue.

Also, they're pretty young.

 

[overedge]

Charles may be better now than he was in his youth. But is he ever going to inspire the fondness, respect, and warm feelings that the Queen seems to evoke? I doubt it. I see him as a figurehead, serving for a brief time.

William, to me, feels potentially more problematic. Reports of his actions behind the scenes IRT Harry and Meghan, along with his and Kate's relentlessly conformist approach to the management of their public image, plus certain vaguely colonialist comments on William's part, just leave me with the impression of a somewhat reactionary personality. He will likely have a long reign, like his grandmother. I wonder how it will play out.

I think a really big difference between them and the Queen is that the Queen didn't spend all of her life with the expectation that she would be on the throne. She was "up there" in the line of succession, but it wasn't until Edward abdicated and her father unexpectedly became King that she became the heir presumptive.

IMO that has given her more of a sense of duty and service than Charles and William. It's hard to explain, because both of them are involved in lots of work on behalf of the monarchy. But both of them have been expected to be King someday, from the day they were born, and that seems to have given them more of a sense of entitlement than the Queen displays (at least in public).

CBC News network in Canada ran a special over the weekend that featured the Queen looking at, and commentating on, some of the footage from her coronation. I don't know where else it has aired. It was quite fascinating. The Queen wasn't having any of the prompts from the presenter - she shot him a steely glance or ignored him any time he tried to push her to talk about something she didn't want to talk about But she looked really uncomfortable doing it, like she wasn't sure what she was supposed to say. A younger commentator would probably be like, oh, my dress really pinched me here, or, boy, it was hot in the cathedral, but the Queen didn't reveal anything like that.

Maybe she thought no one would be interested in those kinds of details, but she really was raised in a different era when there was a mystery around the monarchy, and it wasn't "done" to talk about yourself or have the focus on yourself.

 

[MacMadame]

Also, they're pretty young.

That too. Maybe Louis should have been with them.

 

[once_upon]

William will be 40 on June 21. I hope he starts to mellow.

Is William all that wild or outrageous that he needs to mellow out?

 

[ballettmaus]

It makes his request for security if he came for the Jubilee more understandable too. I noticed his kids aren't attending the events I've seen so far. That is probably because of the security issue.

I thought he and his family would have been under the protection of the police for official events?

I have a hard time believing that other members of the royal family don't get threats. They're not racist in nature, of course but I'm sure anarchists/some nuts who believe it's their mission to rid the world of royals still exist today.

That isn't meant to discount or dismiss or minimize the threats to Harry's family. I'm just saying that I'm assuming that the police force tasked with protection has experience with all kinds of threats. If memory serves, protection was to be decided on a case by case basis and given that they've managed to keep everyone, the royal family, foreign dignitaries, Malala, the PM etc safe up until now, I would assume they have a pretty good handle on threat assessment and when their protection is required and when it's not.

Considering that what Harry went through, I do understand why he would have a hard time trusting that though and why he would feel more at ease if he knew they're always protected by police.

 

[MLIS]

Regardless of specific security threats, I never expected to see Harry and Meghan’s children at any of the Jubilee events. The BRF typically doesn’t bring children to official events until they’re older, even Prince Edward’s youngest, James, has only started regularly appearing in the last couple of years. I was surprised to see Louis as much as we did (and he was evidence of why they generally wait until the kids are older!). And the events that the younger children were at this time (the concert, the pageant), Harry and Meghan didn’t attend. If they had done a whole extended family balcony appearance that might have been the only time I would have anticipated seeing Archie and Lilli, but it was clear early on they weren’t going to do that.