# Many people are not exactly distraught over Queen Elizabeth’s death.



## Paco Dennis (Sep 10, 2022)

I started exploring the hatful things a professor said about the Queens illness and death. I started researching and found a much broader contempt for what the Monarchy and the Queen have represented  in many countries. Though the Monarchy is a beautiful thing for many it seems it is very painful for others.

_"Many people are not exactly distraught over Queen Elizabeth’s death._​_You likely noticed this stark disparity in some regard if you’re an internet user with connections to netizens who have origins in formerly colonized nations—places like Ireland, India/Pakistan/Bangladesh, Barbados, Zambia, and far too many others to list. Maybe, after a bunch of earnest messages from politicians and celebrities, you found a lengthy thread pointing out all the war criminals the queen honored during her lifetime. Or you learned about one of the many imperial atrocities she never apologized for. Or you realized the staggering amount of wealth that Britain ripped from various countries over the course of centuries, with little to no reparations paid in turn. Perhaps, most painfully, you saw a video of a revolutionary inviting the queen to confront the harms Kenyans faced when fighting for their country’s freedom from the crown. Or you saw plenty of invocations of the iconic “RIP BOZO” meme.

The vibe of such tweets shifted dramatically over the course of the day. At first, when news arrived of the queen’s “medical care,” simple and snarky tweets abounded, anticipating the official announcement and ensuing fallout. Those upset at the prospect of losing their queen began Thursday directing their ire toward Americans mocking British grief, but then the bereaved moved on to targeting the much more widespread colonial diaspora. When the acclaimed academic and author Uju Anya referred to Elizabeth II as the “chief monarch of a thieving raping genocidal empire” and wished that “her pain be excruciating,” none other than Jeff Bezos called her out for it, eventually leading to Twitter suspending her account. Then, as the clock hit 1:30 p.m. and the royal family officially declared the queen’s death, anti-monarchy tweeters adopted an even more serious tone. They doubled down on their lack of grief and highlighted not only the bloody history of British rule, but the queen’s own role in perpetuating it—whether through history-obscuring initiatives, direct orders for violent military crackdowns on colonial dissent in Yemen, and her other efforts at halting the mass independence movements that took place, and succeeded, under her reign.

Plenty of white Britons and Europeans, along with monarchists, were still quick to condemn such unfettered celebration over the queen’s death, pointing to the mass, destabilizing grief overwhelming the United Kingdom. As author Hari Kunzru fairly pointed out, the ubiquitous and anchoring presence the royals hold in the U.K.—even for its anti-monarchists—is perhaps difficult for outsiders to understand. And when it comes to just basic etiquette, yes: It is insensitive to publicly gloat over any human being’s death, and cruel to wish any form of suffering on anyone. But there’s perhaps an exercise in perspective to be considered here.

Imagine that you, like me, have familial origins in any one of the hundreds of countries subjected to the arbitrary cruelty of British rule. Most likely, you didn’t grow up with the view of Buckingham Palace in the skyline, but you felt the presence of the British Crown in other, more insidious ways: the enduring injustices of the slave trade. Views of poverty and underdevelopment resulting from centuries-spanning exploitation. Displays of plundered objects from your own country as trinkets in museums. The very presence of an iconic Indian jewel on the crown Elizabeth donned (and that Camila will now wear). The whitewashed legacies of empire officials who were violent bigots. None of which was ever actually corrected, with apologies or trillion-dollar compensation or even basic acknowledgement. As the Kenyan cartoonist Patrick Gathara stated in June, referring to Elizabeth: “To this day, she has never publicly admitted, let alone apologized, for the oppression, torture, dehumanization and dispossession visited upon people in the colony of Kenya before and after she acceded to the throne.”

If Britons are feeling some sense of dislocation now regarding the queen, what do they think their former colonial subjects have felt all their lives? Especially after how the central palace freaked out when Prince Harry married Meghan Markle, a Black woman? Little wonder that residents of Barbados shunned William and Kate during their March visit, to the ire of royal subjects.
_


> _Brits: Someone has died! How can you be so cruel?
> 
> Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Jamaica, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, St Lucia, India, Botswana, Kenya, Gambia, Descendants of the TransAtlantic Slave Trade, Princess Diana Hive, etc.: pic.twitter.com/lYtAQObn3a
> — Who Got Da Bawdy? (@IvoryTheJunior) September 8, 2022_


_Perhaps it’s unfair to have expected one woman to make up for centuries of injustice. But the simple fact is that Queen Elizabeth II did less than nothing in that vein. In fact, she consistently papered over the crimes of the Commonwealth, through moves such as Operation Legacy, as she bathed in luxury afforded in large part by international theft. After 70 years of this, does anybody suspect that Britain’s succeeding monarchs will do any better?

At any rate, the memes, jokes, and gleeful tweets are not just a manifestation of the very contemporary desire to dunk on one’s online enemies as viciously and virally as possible. That is part of what’s fueling this response, sure; it’s a pillar of modern social media culture. But these reactions are also coming from a place of real, often deeply felt pain. If the queen, for many, was a symbol of grace, for many other people she was a symbol of something deeply ugly.

The queen is dead; long live her former subjects. Let them have this one."_

https://slate.com/technology/2022/0...-twitter-jokes-memes-british-colonialism.html


----------



## JustDave (Sep 10, 2022)

I bear no ill will toward the royal family.  But I view them more as a curiosity.


----------



## StarSong (Sep 10, 2022)

There are two sides to every story.  Colonization was an arrogance practiced by many countries, virtually always to the extreme detriment of the colonized.  Oftentimes to the eventual detriment of the colonizing countries, as well.


----------



## Alligatorob (Sep 10, 2022)

Paco Dennis said:


> Many people are not exactly distraught over Queen Elizabeth’s death.


I am not, however I do respect the feelings and belief of those who are.  

Many believe the British Monarchs to be appointed by God, they are the leaders of the Church of England.  Many more, I think, have reverence for the Monarchy for other reasons, and probably many more Queen Elizabeth herself.  Personally I don't really get this, but I think we need to respect what others believe.

I do think the British Monarchy has a remarkable history, transforming from brutal dictators and beneficiaries of the slave trade into quite respectable people mostly appreciated by their subjects, no other Monarchy has done it so well, think of Russia or France...  And of course none of the living Royal family today had any role in those abuses of the past.

I guess I just don't see the need for them, but I am not British so its not for me to say.  If King Charles invites me to the palace I'm on the next plane, dressed and acting however he would want!  Not waiting too anxiously for that invite, LOL.


----------



## Pepper (Sep 10, 2022)

Alligatorob said:


> .......but I think we need to respect what others believe..


You know that's not always true, or should be.  IOW, ok respect the person if you can but their beliefs are up for judgement.


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Sep 10, 2022)

The history of the colonial British Empire is somewhat checkered. Not all of her former colonies have fond memories of the colonial period. For Ireland, India and Pakistan the emotions are still very raw at best. The Queen, as the symbol of the UK, unfortunately was associated with this raw colonial period.


----------



## RadishRose (Sep 10, 2022)

I'm not a fan of Charles.


----------



## Paco Dennis (Sep 10, 2022)

It seems like all countries have a checkered history. We seem to get divided over how we feel about our self-identity as a country and/or people. It is time for healing not more division. I do think everyone needs to acknowledge their fantasy like images of stuff and acknowledge the history and context of things. If we did we would find out that we have way more in common than we do being enemies.


----------



## JustBonee (Sep 10, 2022)

JustDave said:


> I bear no ill will toward the royal family.  But I view them more as a curiosity.




I  think  the 'curiosity'   comes because we look on their way of life   as something from the past  ..   interesting, but something totally different from our own  way of life.


RadishRose said:


> I'm not a fan of Charles.



I have a hard time with him giving judgment  to    others.


----------



## JaniceM (Sep 10, 2022)

It's always been my opinion that people should not be blamed for what their ancestors did.


----------



## Alligatorob (Sep 10, 2022)

Pepper said:


> You know that's not always true, or should be. IOW, ok respect the person if you can but their beliefs are up for judgement.


I suppose I did overstate a bit.  What I think I meant is that you need to respect others and their right to believe.  

And even that has its exceptions like the Khmer Rouge or Nazis, no respect of any kind there...  No comparison to the Royal family intended.


----------



## Alligatorob (Sep 10, 2022)

Paco Dennis said:


> It seems like all countries have a checkered history


By today's standards, yes all do.  Sensibilities change as we become more affluent, civilized and experienced.  

I believe we should learn from the past, but be slow to be too critical of our forefathers.  I suspect most were doing the best they could, like most of us are today.


----------



## StarSong (Sep 10, 2022)

JaniceM said:


> It's always been my opinion that people should not be blamed for what their ancestors did.


Unless they're perpetuating the sins of their fathers...


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 10, 2022)

Alligatorob said:


> I am not, however I do respect the feelings and belief of those who are.
> 
> Many believe the British Monarchs to be appointed by God, they are the leaders of the Church of England.  Many more, I think, have reverence for the Monarchy for other reasons, and probably many more Queen Elizabeth herself.  Personally I don't really get this, but I think we need to respect what others believe.
> 
> ...


I really don’t think the idea of divine right of British sovereigns is a thing any longer, regardless of them being head of the Church of England.


----------



## deaver (Sep 10, 2022)

well to begin with you need to research the british monarchy and learn what it really is....you will be suprised!!


----------



## chic (Sep 10, 2022)

I thought there was talk of abolishing the monarchy after Elizabeth II's death? Must have been a rumor but rumors start from something.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 10, 2022)

*There are always rumours. Fervent anti monarchists yearn for the abolition of the monarchy. 
Doubt it will happen any time soon, although some countries may choose to leave the Commonwealth. *


----------



## Alligatorob (Sep 10, 2022)

Shalimar said:


> I don’t really think the idea of divine right of British sovereigns is a thing any longer, regardless of them being head of the Church of England.


Times are changing.

However in a tread a few months back when I said I didn't get the Monarchy thing one of the members here, don't remember who, replied they believed the Monarch was appointed or selected by God.  So not all dead yet.


chic said:


> I thought there was talk of abolishing the monarchy after Elizabeth II's death? Must have been a rumor but rumors start from something.


Yep, there has long been talk, but no action.  I think the majority of UK citizens still support the Monarchy, Charles and all.  This is a young Liz Truss, current British Prime Minister, she has changed her mind on the Monarchy.


----------



## Grampa Don (Sep 10, 2022)

The British Empire was basically evil, as most empires are.  It was essentially one country overpowering and taking advantage of other countries. And yet, there is much nostalgia for it.  The sun never sets, and all that.  It was a source of pride.  Other countries have tried it, but Great Britain did it best.

The royal family is a reminder of this success.  They are a link to the past.  And the past is often viewed through rose colored glasses.  That's as true in the U.S. as it is in the UK.

It's also true that many justified their actions as bringing civilization to these "primitive peoples."  Kipling's "The white man's burden"


----------



## Judycat (Sep 10, 2022)

The woman lived to be 96. Let her rest in peace. Other than, mainstream media can knock it off any time now, 24/7 coverage is something more to dread the day "king 45" buys the farm, that's all I'm going to say.


----------



## RadishRose (Sep 10, 2022)

I was surprised at the look on Andrew's face as they were before the crowd.....


----------



## jimintoronto (Sep 10, 2022)

Here in Canada there is minority who will be bleating about "abolishing the Monarchy in Canada ". What most of these  people don't know is how VERY difficult that would be to accomplish. To alter our Constitution REQUIRES that a majority of the Members of our Federal Parliament PLUS the majority of the Members of all ten Provincial Legislators, vote in favour of such an amendment to our Constitution. That would be a impossible task, given the contrary nature of the Government of the Province of Quebec in past Constitutional debates. It isn't going to happen. JimB.


----------



## Colleen (Sep 10, 2022)

Paco Dennis said:


> It seems like all countries have a checkered history. We seem to get divided over how we feel about our self-identity as a country and/or people. It is time for healing not more division. I do think everyone needs to acknowledge their fantasy like images of stuff and acknowledge the history and context of things. If we did we would find out that we have way more in common than we do being enemies.


You are so right, but, unfortunately, there are (and always will be) those who do not want peace because it's more profitable to have division and war.


----------



## JustBonee (Sep 10, 2022)

Heartwarming  picture from last night   ...whatever it means.


----------



## JustBonee (Sep 10, 2022)




----------



## Colleen (Sep 10, 2022)

My personal feeling is...the Royals and their Monarchy are no worse than our government here in the US and the people that are trying their damnest to kill democracy. We shouldn't be pointing fingers at anyone else.


----------



## Murrmurr (Sep 10, 2022)

Grampa Don said:


> It's also true that many justified their actions as bringing civilization to these "primitive peoples."  Kipling's "The white man's burden"


You can't argue that invading countries did bring civilization to parts of the world that wouldn't have advanced much if not for being conquered by an advanced civilization. Throughout history, along with oppression and death, conquering nations brought industry, trade, and organization to the places they conquered. And in more recent history, they also brought medical advancements, political organization, and even civil rights to parts of the world where those things didn't exist.

Way back in the time of swords and longboats, no one bothered to justify invading and conquering; it's just what you did if you wanted more real estate. And I'm not justifying it either - I highly doubt the motto "Making the World a Better Place" was carved onto the sides of invader's boats, or that they wore MWBP hats while slaughtering villagers - I'm just pointing out a common residual effect. 

Justifying an invasion is a fairly modern thing.


----------



## Grampa Don (Sep 10, 2022)

@Murrmurr   You're right, colonization was sometimes a mixed bag.  Places like Hong Kong would not have been as prosperous without the British setting up a trading post there.  And, if the British hadn't done it, other countries would have.  It was a victory of superior technology.

I'm reminded of the scene from Monty Python's Life of Brian.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 10, 2022)

deaver said:


> well to begin with you need to research the british monarchy and learn what it really is....you will be suprised!!


I doubt many Canadians would be surprised. Our own history is chequered, as the residential school burial sites clearly indicate. Hopefully, humanity learns from its mistakes without tossing out all that is good. I have flinched at the anti Indigenous racism I have heard right here on this forum. Our beloved Queen is dead, and Canada mourns. Only a Creator is perfect.


----------



## Paco Dennis (Sep 10, 2022)

According to all knowing GOOGLE:

How did colonization affect countries?









Colonialism's impacts include *environmental degradation, the spread of disease, economic instability, ethnic rivalries, and human rights violations*—issues that can long outlast one group's colonial rule.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 10, 2022)

*My goodness. The Queen hasn‘t even been laid to rest, and many of us are in mourning. It is less than sensitive to bring up this stuff so soon after her passing. I wonder how some might feel if those of us from Britain or the Commonwealth  dissected their late revered leaders in such a manner?  *


----------



## Grampa Don (Sep 10, 2022)

I might add that if the British hadn't colonized North America, we'd all be speaking Spanish.  Oh wait!  Ay, caramba!

I apologize for the above.  My evil twin wrote it.


----------



## Packerjohn (Sep 10, 2022)

It's laughable and rather silly that whenever someone dies, the stories come out how strange or evil those people were.  I remember when country singer, Buck Owens died.  Shortly after there were stories of how abusive Buck to his wife.  Apparently, he tried to hit his wife with a golf club?  Then when Liberace and Rock Hudson died we found out that both of them prefered "boys" to girls.  What a "shocker" for fans of Rock Hudson, the handsome man from Hollywood and the heart trob of many a lady.

Stop blaming the poor Queenie as having ruled an "empire of evil."  Remember, the Belgians, the Germans, the Italians and even Spain and Portugal had empires.  If you care to study history, this period of time was called the "Age of Empires."

You can't change history but you certainly can learn from it.


----------



## SeniorBen (Sep 10, 2022)

Colleen said:


> My personal feeling is...the Royals and their Monarchy are no worse than our government here in the US and the people that are trying their damnest to kill democracy. We shouldn't be pointing fingers at anyone else.


That's a pretty low bar.


----------



## Shalimar (Sep 10, 2022)

Grampa Don said:


> I might add that if the British hadn't colonized North America, we'd all be speaking Spanish.  Oh wait!  Ay, caramba!
> 
> I apologize for the above.  My evil twin wrote it.


Somehow, I doubt you are very sorry at all.


----------



## chic (Sep 10, 2022)

Dissolution of the monarchy was the term I had read. Not abolition though it means the same thing pretty much. My error.


----------



## Lara (Sep 10, 2022)

The thing that makes me uncomfortable is that, with all the attention and riches bestowed on royalty, can it be described as idol worship?
Britannia's definition of idolatry includes "Gross or overt idolatry consisting of explicit acts of reverence addressed to a person or object, the Sun, the King, an animal, a statue."

But we have that here too with Hollywood stars, Rock Stars, Sports stars, Fashion industry, etc...all overpaid, all enjoying the attention and riches. But who's to say that these idols aren't giving a lot of their riches away and just not boasting about it? Who can judge because many of us have "things" that take up too much of our attention.


----------



## jimintoronto (Sep 10, 2022)

It will come as a shock to some that the British Royal family support (with their OWN money ) over 2,400 charities in the UK and around the world, each year. JimB.


----------



## WhatInThe (Sep 10, 2022)

The queen came as the empire/UK was unloading territory.

History is not clean and when analyzed using current day standards, knowledge and experience of course in hind sight how dare those historical figures make such decisions.

As a person she lived about a century doing a job for 3/4 of century with more scrutiny and pressure daily than most could not handle in a life time. I don't care about royalty and one doesn't even have to praise her but does she really need to be smeared with things she isn't responsible for other than some problem children.


----------



## Lara (Sep 10, 2022)

None of Royalty has asked for the job. They're just born or married into it. I guess I'm just saying we can't totally blame them for "stuff"


----------



## Lara (Sep 10, 2022)

I don't understand why Camilla is disliked more than Charles by many. They both cheated behind Diana's back and the family unit equally.


----------



## Grampa Don (Sep 10, 2022)

Shalimar said:


> Somehow, I doubt you are very sorry at all.


Well, I sort of am.  The population of Los Angeles county is 49% Hispanic.  We are becoming bilingual.  I'm actually OK with that.


----------



## Paco Dennis (Sep 10, 2022)

I guess some people BLAME the Queen and/or the Monarchy for the colonization of poor countries. Looking at the history of Apartheid though gives us a glimpse of how terrible conditions got under British rule.  It is not their fault but throughout our history conquering invaders have taken over countries and slaughtered the indigenous people. The feudal system should be scrapped now. No more symbolic rulers, and no more empires.


----------



## Pepper (Sep 10, 2022)

Lara said:


> I don't understand why Camilla is disliked more than Charles by many. They both cheated behind Diana's back and the family unit equally.


It is part of the 'Eve Complex' where the woman in most acts is at fault for any wrongdoing based on her sexuality & her seductive, not to be trusted, ways.

As part of our culture for thousands of years I think it's become a hard habit to break.


----------



## JaniceM (Sep 10, 2022)

StarSong said:


> Unless they're perpetuating the sins of their fathers...


Agreed.


----------



## JustBonee (Sep 10, 2022)

Lara said:


> I don't understand why Camilla is disliked more than Charles by many. They both cheated behind Diana's back and the family unit equally.




I guess because she existed,  and was *always* in the picture with Charles.   
 Lacking in morals  is a sad trait for both of them.       

And  from _Readers Digest_ - 
 the story sounds worse than I remember  .... https://www.rd.com/article/how-prince-charles-hid-affair-from-princess-diana/


----------



## Della (Sep 10, 2022)

'


----------



## mrstime (Sep 10, 2022)

I m sorry to see the Queen gone, because I can't stand ole Charlie since I once saw him admit that he was tired of waiting to be king. So seems to me he was wishing his mother dead!


----------



## RadishRose (Sep 10, 2022)

I read about Charles the Second.... What an adulterer he was! I think he had about 20 illegitimate children and made the people furious spending their tax money on the keeping of their mothers and the children's titles and appointments.


----------



## Della (Sep 10, 2022)

That Readers Digest story is just quoting the Andrew Morton book which was entirely Diana's words telling her side of the story.  At the time that's all anyone heard because Charles was hardly in a position to go on TV like she did and have a tit for tat fight.  The royals just don't air their dirty laundry in public.

Diana cheated on Charles first and he just turned to his long time best friend for comfort.  Diana is the one who had endless affairs, some with married men, and was such a pain in the palace she fired over forty servants.
https://www.newsweek.com/princess-d...rry-mannakee-royal-protection-officer-1639903
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9703/05/britain.diana/


----------



## JustDave (Sep 10, 2022)

mrstime said:


> I m sorry to see the Queen gone, because I can't stand ole Charlie since I once saw him admit that he was tired of waiting to be king. So seems to me he was wishing his mother dead!


I don't have any particular feelings for him one way or the other, but I have often wondered if he would ever see the throne.


----------



## Senenity (Sep 10, 2022)

The royal family is governed by the  "firm".

Its wicked to point out at this time,  but there is a lot of revenue gained by publicizing royalty.

The royals are part of the charade  and the brits will have it no other way.  

This family just happened to be at the right place and time and have to live by it.
This is my understanding,  i could be wrong.


----------



## AnnieA (Sep 10, 2022)

Della said:


> That Readers Digest story is just quoting the Andrew Morton book which was entirely Diana's words telling her side of the story.  At the time that's all anyone heard because Charles was hardly in a position to go on TV like she did and have a tit for tat fight.  The royals just don't air their dirty laundry in public.
> 
> Diana cheated on Charles first and he just turned to his long time best friend for comfort.  Diana is the one who had endless affairs, some with married men, and was such a pain in the palace she fired over forty servants.
> https://www.newsweek.com/princess-d...rry-mannakee-royal-protection-officer-1639903
> http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9703/05/britain.diana/



I've always seen them as two selfish people who married for the wrong reasons.


----------



## Pecos (Sep 10, 2022)

I don't understand the reasoning/timing behind this thread. It seems like it could have waited a few weeks. It is a whole lot like people demonstrating within earshot of a memorial service for someone's beloved grandmother. It just seems disrespectful of the queen and all of the people who are mourning for her.


----------



## Been There (Sep 11, 2022)

Bonnie said:


> Heartwarming  picture from last night   ...whatever it means.


I understand that _William extended an olive branch to Harry_ and he graciously accepted it. He was absent from his Grandmother's death and was kind of left out of a lot of the commentary we have been hearing the past few days. From that, I take it that Harry is still kind of an outsider to many of those in the U.K. If you have ever listened to Harry on any of the U.S. talk shows, you can tell that he is not sincere or is very gracious for the life that he has lived. I think someday he will have a heavy price to pay for his indifference that he has portrayed to others.  

Myself, I really don't like Harry or his wife. I think they have a lot of baggage to carry around. OTOH, I think William is a true Brit that stands by his family no matter what others say or write about them. As we would say here in America, William is a true Patriot to his country and family. 

I never studied anything about the British monarchy or for that matter, even the  present day. All that I studied was during the Churchill days during WWII. But, I really like William. He has proven himself time and time again. not only to be a true British patriot, but a real decent and sincere person. He's the type of man that I would enjoy spending an afternoon with picking his brain. I never realized how much I thought of this young man, but now I need to learn more.


----------



## horseless carriage (Sep 11, 2022)

Pecos said:


> I don't understand the reasoning/timing behind this thread. It seems like it could have waited a few weeks. It is a whole lot like people demonstrating within earshot of a memorial service for someone's beloved grandmother. It just seems disrespectful of the queen and all of the people who are mourning for her.


As a republican I admit feel pressured into supporting something they don’t believe in. It's to express an opinion without being branded disrespectful, so therefore I’ve been silent while the country grieves. As someone who believes the monarchy is an outdated concept that compromises our democratic right and signifies colonialism, I am suddenly being turned into the bad guy for deciding not to celebrate that aspect of the Queen’s life. People blur the line between her as a person, who did a lot of amazing things, and her as a Monarch.

Admiration for the Queen has largely repressed republicanism, with the issue likely to be imbued with renewed energy. The Queen was the monarchy for most people and has been all our lives. Charles will not inherit that level of deference and respect, and this really does change the whole dynamic.

 Polls have consistently shown that the vast majority of Britons back the monarchy, republicans have long accepted they had no chance of changing the system while the Queen was alive. Charles though, is a very different kettle of fish. 

What I do find distasteful is any sort of derogatory remarks, as my mother always said: "If you can't speak kindly of someone, then saying nothing can often speak volumes."


----------



## StarSong (Sep 11, 2022)

During a gathering with my children and their spouses last evening, this subject came up.  One of my sons works in sports television so that's one of the prisms through which he sees the world.

He said the monarchy is basically a cross between being UK's team mascot and one of the lesser Kardashians.

Think about it. Like royalty, mascots have virtually no role with what's happening on the field of play, most people in the stands occasionally enjoy their antics but mostly tolerate them unless they get crazy obnoxious, little kids love them, they get trotted out for PR and social events, and when one moves on from the job a replacement is swiftly appointed and is expected to don the ridiculous costumes and behave very much the same way as his/her predecessor.

Like Kardashians, they receive a tremendous amount of money for reasons mostly unknown, are famous for being famous, are controversial, and the rest of the world is a little mystified by their popularity.

Edited to add: I'm not for or against the monarchy, nor do I hold strong feelings about the Queen. My heart goes out to those who mourn her passing - their loss is real.


----------



## Pepper (Sep 11, 2022)

Your son is brilliant! @StarSong


----------



## JustDave (Sep 11, 2022)

StarSong said:


> During a gathering with my children and their spouses last evening, this subject came up.  One of my sons works in sports television so that's one of the prisms through which he sees the world.
> 
> He said the monarchy is basically a cross between being UK's team mascot and one of the lesser Kardashians.
> 
> ...


Well said.  And you say awkward is your superpower??!


----------



## RadishRose (Sep 11, 2022)

StarSong said:


> During a gathering with my children and their spouses last evening, this subject came up.  One of my sons works in sports television so that's one of the prisms through which he sees the world.
> 
> He said the monarchy is basically a cross between being UK's team mascot and one of the lesser Kardashians.
> 
> ...


Very insightful. In a humorous way, that about sums it all up!


----------



## JustBonee (Sep 11, 2022)

Oh those Kardashians!   ...  they want to have a time capsule made of their  importance to society and  modern life ...lol
Lucky space aliens who find it!  ....


_The reality television series revolving around the Kardashian-Jenner family, Keeping Up With the Kardashians aired on E! for over two decades. With the show coming to an end, the KUWTK finale went on air on June 10, 2021, in which Khloe Kardashian was seen wanting to do a ‘time capsule’ for the members to look back at, years from now. Ever since the last episode of Keeping Up With the Kardashians final season aired, fans have been sharing their thoughts about Khloe’s time capsule idea and while some have been adoring the concept, a few others have found elements of humor in it already._


----------



## StarSong (Sep 11, 2022)

Pepper said:


> Your son is brilliant! @StarSong


I know, right?


----------



## StarSong (Sep 11, 2022)

Bonnie said:


> Oh those Kardashians!   ...  they want to have a time capsule made of their  importance to society and  modern life ...lol
> Lucky space aliens who find it!  ....
> 
> 
> _The reality television series revolving around the Kardashian-Jenner family, Keeping Up With the Kardashians aired on E! for over two decades. With the show coming to an end, the KUWTK finale went on air on June 10, 2021, in which Khloe Kardashian was seen wanting to do a ‘time capsule’ for the members to look back at, years from now. Ever since the last episode of Keeping Up With the Kardashians final season aired, fans have been sharing their thoughts about Khloe’s time capsule idea and while some have been adoring the concept, a few others have found elements of humor in it already._


I've always thought the Kardashians were little more that a modern version of the Gabor sisters, Dahling.


----------



## JustBonee (Sep 11, 2022)

StarSong said:


> I've always thought the Kardashians were little more that a modern version of the Gabor sisters, Dahling.


----------



## Gary O' (Sep 11, 2022)

Grampa Don said:


> I might add that if the British hadn't colonized North America, we'd all be speaking Spanish. Oh wait! Ay, caramba!


Reminds me of yet another old poster of mine


----------



## WhatInThe (Sep 11, 2022)

Senenity said:


> The royal family is governed by the  "firm".
> 
> Its wicked to point out at this time,  but there is a lot of revenue gained by publicizing royalty.
> 
> ...


Exactly about image which is used to protect the institution. In the meantime while everyone is paying attention to the royals the actual UK government can do a lot stuff that doesn't get the scrutiny it deserves. The royals are best publicity agents money can buy.


----------



## Sunny (Sep 11, 2022)

When it comes down to how Americans view the royal family, probably a lot of our "knowledge" comes from the movies or series about them. What do we really know?

In the movie "The Queen," Elizabeth was portrayed as being rigid and pretty much uncaring about Diana's death, until she realized the grief and love for Diana from her subjects. She finally did her best to make amends. From what I have read about it, that story was probably basically true.
One news article called her reaction to Diana's death her biggest mistake.

As for King Charles, he is treated as a very unsympathetic character in the series "The Crown." When his beautiful, loving wife, brimming with youthful enthusiasm, performs a surprise (and very lovely) dance for Charles on his birthday, when they are attending a performance at a theatre, I think it was an opera, don't really remember, he sat there stiffly, looking horrified, and afterward they had a big fight about it He told her he had never been so humiliated.  She was trying to please him, and demonstrate her love!

But... who knows how true that awful portrayal of Charles was?  It was a movie, after all. It may have never happened. And yet, it did color my opinion of him. Makes me wonder how much we really do know about anything.


----------



## Hollow (Sep 11, 2022)

I'm on the fence about the queen and royal family. On one hand, they haven't fed my family or paid my bills, and frankly, they wouldn't spit on you if you were on fire. They have no say in the running of this country (they aren't allowed to intervene politically - Boris Johnson, the ex prime minister even lied to the queen and nothing was done) They would be the first to be protected if the shtf...not us, the people.

On the other hand I do see how they attract tourism, which is good I suppose.  I don't _hate_ them...they just don't feature in my life. But I wouldn't disrepect them if they walked into my house.


----------



## Gary O' (Sep 11, 2022)

Shalimar said:


> I really don’t think the idea of divine right of British sovereigns is a thing any longer, regardless of them being head of the Church of England.


Ah, but know this




Maybe not now, though


----------



## chic (Sep 11, 2022)

Senenity said:


> The royal family is governed by the  "firm".
> 
> Its wicked to point out at this time,  but there is a lot of revenue gained by publicizing royalty.
> 
> ...


I think they wish they could reduce us all to serfdom again and keep us forever silent.


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Sep 11, 2022)

StarSong said:


> During a gathering with my children and their spouses last evening, this subject came up.  One of my sons works in sports television so that's one of the prisms through which he sees the world.
> 
> He said the monarchy is basically a cross between being UK's team mascot and one of the lesser Kardashians.
> 
> ...


Starsong, that is the best explanation of a constitutional monarchy.


----------



## StarSong (Sep 11, 2022)

fuzzybuddy said:


> Starsong, that is the best explanation of a constitutional monarchy.


Thanks.  When my son made that offhand remark about UK royalty being akin to a sports mascot I stashed it in my brain.  Upon reading what was new in this thread today, I pondered it further and fleshed it out, then added the Kardashian bit.  It's obviously a little simplistic but not too far from the truth, at least from where I sit.


----------



## Della (Sep 11, 2022)

Sunny said:


> I think it was an opera, don't really remember, he sat there stiffly, looking horrified, and afterward they had a big fight about it He told her he had never been so humiliated. She was trying to please him, and demonstrate her love!


It was a ballet.  Diana had called the company and asked to dance a part in their production.  The dance company could hardly refuse so they paired her with their best male dancer and gave her a simple dance to do.  Even so she looked awkward and towered over her partner.  Charles was embarrassed because royals do not "perform" amateur theatrics  in public, ever, so I doubt if she really thought that would please him. To most people it was just Diana showing off again.


----------



## jet (Sep 11, 2022)

as a Brit,i gotta laugh at all this rubbish you have been fed,,,,spanish,wasent it the french who helped you get independance,,,
thanks to those who mourn with us,,,,,


----------



## Happy Heart (Sep 11, 2022)

Packerjohn said:


> It's laughable and rather silly that whenever someone dies, the stories come out how strange or evil those people were.  I remember when country singer, Buck Owens died.  Shortly after there were stories of how abusive Buck to his wife.  Apparently, he tried to hit his wife with a golf club?  Then when Liberace and Rock Hudson died we found out that both of them prefered "boys" to girls.  What a "shocker" for fans of Rock Hudson, the handsome man from Hollywood and the heart trob of many a lady.
> 
> Stop blaming the poor Queenie as having ruled an "empire of evil."  Remember, the Belgians, the Germans, the Italians and even Spain and Portugal had empires.  If you care to study history, this period of time was called the "Age of Empires."
> 
> You can't change history but you certainly can learn from it.


Some will learn from it, others use it as an excuse for even worse behavior in the present, and a reason to blame others for their own short comings.


----------



## StarSong (Sep 11, 2022)

jet said:


> as a Brit,i gotta laugh at all this rubbish you have been fed,,,,spanish,wasent it the french who helped you get independance,,,
> thanks to those who mourn with us,,,,,


I believe he's alluding to the possibility that Spain would have attempted to colonize what is now the US if England hadn't, and also that Spanish is now spoken by nearly all our neighbors to the south.  

Yes, the French were extremely helpful to the American side during the American Revolution. Lafayette's name is well known as an early French volunteer in the American army.


----------



## Della (Sep 11, 2022)

Paco Dennis said:


> According to all knowing GOOGLE:
> 
> How did colonization affect countries?
> 
> ...


Oh for the good old days before colonialism when we all watched the elephants walk through the sunset at the end of a full day.  Everyone comfortably tired from  doing female circumcisions on all the young virgins, at least  those who  hadn't already been sacrificed to the crocodiles to make for better fishing.

On a good night, a lost member of another tribe might drop by and we could have him for dinner.


----------



## StarSong (Sep 11, 2022)

Della said:


> Oh for the good old days before colonialism when we all watched the elephants walk through the sunset at the end of a full day.  Everyone comfortably tired from  doing female circumcisions on all the young virgins, at least  those who  hadn't already been sacrificed to the crocodiles to make for better fishing.
> 
> On a good night, a lost member of another might drop by and we could have him for dinner.


Your perspective is highly skewed, mostly inaccurate, and deeply insulting to indigenous people.  Colonists killed, maimed, raped, pillaged and exploited far more people than indigenous people ever did to their own groups or nearby tribes.  

I can't think of a single exception.


----------



## Della (Sep 11, 2022)

We are_ all _African descendants.  That's why I wrote my little bit about "we" and not they.

I don't know where you get your facts and figures about who killed who the most or which group had it the worst.  I have no idea myself.

  I only meant to point out that as people around the globe were colonized or merged by other groups, some good came along  with the bad.  The post I was responding to only pointed out the bad.


----------



## Packerjohn (Sep 11, 2022)

jimintoronto said:


> Here in Canada there is minority who will be bleating about "abolishing the Monarchy in Canada ". What most of these  people don't know is how VERY difficult that would be to accomplish. To alter our Constitution REQUIRES that a majority of the Members of our Federal Parliament PLUS the majority of the Members of all ten Provincial Legislators, vote in favour of such an amendment to our Constitution. That would be a impossible task, given the contrary nature of the Government of the Province of Quebec in past Constitutional debates. It isn't going to happen. JimB.


Bleating is about right.  In Canada, there are a lot of "sheep" bleating about almost anything.  You have to live here to keep track of all the complaining.  They bleat about everyone in politics, about the history, about the mistreatment of the "First" Nations (whatever that means), Western Canada bleats about Ontario, Ontario bleats about Western Canada, most bleat about that "ArriveCan" app, the high price of gas for their monster trucks and they bleat about high price of groceries while they are driving from the cities to their cottages every weekend.

I am not surprised that they are bleating about the royal family because they just love to bleat all the time.

For my 2 cents worth, I am proud of our history, our ties with the French Canadians, the friendly relationships with the USA and our long history with the British.  I would rather have things in common with Great Britain then to have strong connects with the Russian Empire or the Chinese connection.  

Sure things could be a lot better but they could be a lot worse.  Remember the Doomsday Clock says we are only 2 minutes to midnight.


----------



## StarSong (Sep 11, 2022)

Della said:


> We are_ all _African descendants.  That's why I wrote my little bit about "we" and not they.
> 
> I* don't know where you get your facts and figures about who killed who the most or which group had it the worst. * I have no idea myself.
> 
> I only meant to point out that as people around the globe were colonized or merged by other groups, some good came along  with the bad.  The post I was responding to only pointed out the bad.



"By 1900, the indigenous population in the Americas declined by more than 80%, and by as much as 98% in some areas.  The effects of diseases such as smallpox, measles and cholera during the first century of colonialism contributed greatly to the death toll, while violence, displacement and warfare against the Indians by colonizers contributed to the death toll in subsequent centuries.[36] As detailed in _American Philosophy: From Wounded Knee to the Present_ (2015):
_ It is also apparent that the shared history of the hemisphere is one which is framed by the dual tragedies of genocide and slavery, both of which are part of the legacy of the European invasions of the past 500 years. Indigenous people both north and south were displaced, died of disease, and were killed by Europeans through slavery, rape, and war. In 1491, about 145 million people lived in the western hemisphere. By 1691, the population of indigenous Americans had declined by 90–95 percent, or by around 130 million people.__[37]__"_

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples


There's plenty of data detailing the horrific rate of death and destruction of indigenous people themselves along with their habitats, belief systems (rather emphatic missionaries who offered conversion opportunities or dire consequences to those who refused, for instance), and imposition of "civilization", all in the name of "Manifest Destiny" and other self-serving mantras.


----------



## Furryanimal (Sep 11, 2022)

Including me.....and, I suspect,the vast majority of the country.
As we aren’t whenever someone we don’t know dies.
The Royal Family however have to to grieve in the eye of the public and will attend a funeral that will be broadcast to the world.
Not easy for them.
I won‘t be watching.
Won’t watch the Coronation either.


----------



## Happy Heart (Sep 11, 2022)

Packerjohn said:


> Bleating is about right.  In Canada, there are a lot of "sheep" bleating about almost anything.  You have to live here to keep track of all the complaining.  They bleat about everyone in politics, about the history, about the mistreatment of the "First" Nations (whatever that means), Western Canada bleats about Ontario, Ontario bleats about Western Canada, most bleat about that "ArriveCan" app, the high price of gas for their monster trucks and they bleat about high price of groceries while they are driving from the cities to their cottages every weekend.
> 
> I am not surprised that they are bleating about the royal family because they just love to bleat all the time.
> 
> ...


Not much different than the U.S. and it has paid well for the professional bleaters who make a living off it.  We are free to bleat or get moving and change what doesn't work.  We are Free to chose our life!
I'm not sure distraught is the word I would use to describe my feeling about the Royals since they don't give a hoot, but do respect her life of service which so rare in the world today.  Camilla is like a rock in your shoes, but I don't think she plans on going away.


----------



## Happy Heart (Sep 11, 2022)

StarSong said:


> "By 1900, the indigenous population in the Americas declined by more than 80%, and by as much as 98% in some areas.  The effects of diseases such as smallpox, measles and cholera during the first century of colonialism contributed greatly to the death toll, while violence, displacement and warfare against the Indians by colonizers contributed to the death toll in subsequent centuries.[36] As detailed in _American Philosophy: From Wounded Knee to the Present_ (2015):
> _ It is also apparent that the shared history of the hemisphere is one which is framed by the dual tragedies of genocide and slavery, both of which are part of the legacy of the European invasions of the past 500 years. Indigenous people both north and south were displaced, died of disease, and were killed by Europeans through slavery, rape, and war. In 1491, about 145 million people lived in the western hemisphere. By 1691, the population of indigenous Americans had declined by 90–95 percent, or by around 130 million people.__[37]__"_
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples
> ...


Way off topic!


----------



## Grampa Don (Sep 11, 2022)

jet said:


> as a Brit,i gotta laugh at all this rubbish you have been fed,,,,spanish,wasent it the french who helped you get independance,,,
> thanks to those who mourn with us,,,,,


Yep, thanks to help from the French, we kicked the British out.  However, the Spanish were here long before the British colonies.  If the Brits hadn't shown up, Spain would have claimed the whole thing, just like they did in Mexico and much of South America.


----------



## senior chef (Sep 11, 2022)

I don't get the concept of a king/queen.  Perhaps in the old days, but today it is a strange concept. I mean, really, why should the general population financially support a monarchy , who have hundreds and hundreds of servants/misc support staff, while so many live at the bottom?
In any event, I have zero feelings about Elizabeth's death.
Moreover, I have negative thoughts about Charles as king. Seriously, he not only cheated on Diana, with Camilla Parker Boles, but he rubbed Diana's nose in it.

In any event, it should be remembered that the British sweated and oppressed a billion people around the globe. Those under British rule were little better than slaves.


----------



## Michael Z (Sep 11, 2022)

She was somebodies daughter. For that alone she deserves respect.


----------



## Warrigal (Sep 11, 2022)

chic said:


> I think they wish they could reduce us all to serfdom again and keep us forever silent.


And I am equally sure they wonder why Australia has not yet made the move to become a republic. It is on the agenda for the current federal government but we will have to wait until the next term, if they happen to get one. We had a referendum about becoming a republic several decades ago but it did not get the necessary majority to pass. In fact it was roundly defeated. The agenda for this current government is to hold a referendum to change the constitution to allow for provision of an indigenous  voice to parliament. That will face a lot of opposition but will probably become law.

Both the late Queen and the now King Charles have been encouraging of Australia becoming a republic. Neither has ever done anything to suggest they wished to be absolute monarchs. Instead they have been staunch in living out their roles as part of a constitutional monarchy, including fulfilling the symbolic role as head of state for countries that were formerly colonies of Great Britain. 

I know it is hard for countries like US, India and Kenya to understand the Australian mindset but we are not unhappy with the current constitutional arrangement. Seems the Queen was not too unhappy with her Aussie subjects either.


----------



## Warrigal (Sep 11, 2022)

StarSong said:


> "By 1900, the indigenous population in the Americas declined by more than 80%, and by as much as 98% in some areas.  The effects of diseases such as smallpox, measles and cholera during the first century of colonialism contributed greatly to the death toll, while violence, displacement and warfare against the Indians by colonizers contributed to the death toll in subsequent centuries.[36] As detailed in _American Philosophy: From Wounded Knee to the Present_ (2015):
> _ It is also apparent that the shared history of the hemisphere is one which is framed by the dual tragedies of genocide and slavery, both of which are part of the legacy of the European invasions of the past 500 years. Indigenous people both north and south were displaced, died of disease, and were killed by Europeans through slavery, rape, and war. In 1491, about 145 million people lived in the western hemisphere. By 1691, the population of indigenous Americans had declined by 90–95 percent, or by around 130 million people.__[37]__"_
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples
> ...


And that is why the Voice to Parliament referendum will take place before we consider becoming a republic. If I live long enough I will vote YES to both issues. It is the right time to change the way we do things and neither the British monarchy nor the UK government will have any say in these matters.


----------



## Warrigal (Sep 11, 2022)

Michael Z said:


> She was somebodies daughter. For that alone she deserves respect.


And her father never wanted to be the King. However he shouldered his responsibility and was invaluable to the people of Great Britain during the dark days when Hitler threw everything at the British Isles. 

I remember the passing of George VI. He was deeply mourned in Australia as our King, especially by the men who served in WW II.


----------



## StarSong (Sep 11, 2022)

Happy Heart said:


> Way off topic!


Threads meander just as natural conversations do.  I was responding to a previous post.


----------



## Paco Dennis (Sep 11, 2022)

Della said:


> Oh for the good old days before colonialism when we all watched the elephants walk through the sunset at the end of a full day.  Everyone comfortably tired from  doing female circumcisions on all the young virgins, at least  those who  hadn't already been sacrificed to the crocodiles to make for better fishing.
> 
> On a good night, a lost member of another tribe might drop by and we could have him for dinner.


Oh, but now we have to look to the future. It will be a time when all people of all the nations will cooperate with each other and live in harmony and peace. All of those awful days of the past are completely gone, when empires dominated the world.  ( I don't believe this story either)


----------



## Nathan (Sep 11, 2022)

Paco Dennis said:


> Oh, but now we have to look to the future. It will be a time when all people of all the nations will cooperate with each other and live in harmony and peace. All of those awful days of the past are completely gone, when empires dominated the world.  ( I don't believe this story either)


This will only come to pass when some AI gains control over the entire world, and forces DNA modifications to change human behavior.

Wait! This will make a great scifi story, I better get to writing!   I can whip this out quickly with my AI writing app.


----------



## chic (Sep 11, 2022)

I'm sorry for all her subjects who loved her and to whom she represented stability and dignity during their entire lifetimes. As an American, it's hard for me to wrap my head around the concept of a monarchy or why 21st century people would tolerate one. We're nothing to these people. They don't even like us. We carry no weight at all in their world.


----------



## Alligatorob (Sep 11, 2022)

Grampa Don said:


> The British Empire was basically evil, as most empires are


Gave this some thought.  I agree many things done by the British and other empires were evil when judged by todays standards.  However I believe the age of empires was probably a necessary and natural part of our evolving civilization.

There are some good things done by the British empire for their former colonies, a few examples:

Abolition of Slavery, the international slave trade in 1807 and outlawed in its overseas territories in 1833.  Well before it was ended in places like the US or Brazil.
Banning of Suttee in India.  Suttee was the practice whereby Hindu widows were burned alive atop the funeral pyres of their deceased husbands.
The English language has become worldwide and the most accepted language of trade and commerce.  Nothing special about English, but the world benefits from having one widespread language.
The list could go on.
And importantly without the combined strength of the British Empire and its colonies WWII would probably have been lost to Hitler before the US became involved.

Not all good or bad, empires are an important part of our History, none more so than the British.


----------



## Buckeye (Sep 11, 2022)

"The whole history of the world is summed up in the fact that, when nations are strong, they are not always just, and when they wish to be just, they are no longer strong."

Winston Churchill


----------



## Senenity (Sep 12, 2022)

chic said:


> I think they wish they could reduce us all to serfdom again and keep us forever silent.


I have been following the media coverage,  it does not seem likely that would happen in this day and age.    Not sure if the mindset of eons ago would be  the same. Or if what is written will be done.


----------



## Brummie (Sep 12, 2022)

I am sorry to read above negatives about th QUEEN.
If ENGLAND gets rid of the ROYAL FAMILY, it will be a BIG mistake.
The ROYAL FAMILY brings in thousands of  pounds each year from visitors abroad, that is the draw.


----------



## JimBob1952 (Sep 12, 2022)

StarSong said:


> Your perspective is highly skewed, mostly inaccurate, and deeply insulting to indigenous people.  Colonists killed, maimed, raped, pillaged and exploited far more people than indigenous people ever did to their own groups or nearby tribes.
> 
> I can't think of a single exception.



No apologies for colonialism. But how about the Aztecs, who sacrificed an estimated 250,000 people each year?  Is it an insult to indigenous people to say that the Aztecs were bloodthirsty?  The Spanish were only able to conquer them because the other groups enslaved or dominated by the Aztecs rose up against them.  

Many native Americans waged constant warfare, took slaves, and tortured prisoners.  They would have done so on a much larger scale if they had had access to European technology in the form of gunpowder and steel.  Of course the most effective European "weapons" were bacteria and viruses to which the natives had no resistance.


----------



## JimBob1952 (Sep 12, 2022)

Brummie said:


> I am sorry to read above negatives about th QUEEN.
> If ENGLAND gets rid of the ROYAL FAMILY, it will be a BIG mistake.
> The ROYAL FAMILY brings in thousands of  pounds each year from visitors abroad, that is the draw.



It's much more than that.  The UK uses the royal family to assist in diplomatic and trade negotiations all around the world.  Having the Queen or Prince Charles show up at a meeting can mean that a UK company wins an important contract to supply another country with a valuable product.  The value of that kind of thing is hard to estimate, but it's huge.


----------



## chic (Sep 12, 2022)

Brummie said:


> I am sorry to read above negatives about the QUEEN.
> If ENGLAND gets rid of the ROYAL FAMILY, it will be a BIG mistake.
> The ROYAL FAMILY brings in thousands of  pounds each year from visitors abroad, that is the draw.


How much is paid by taxpayers to facilitate their lavish lifestyles?


----------



## RadishRose (Sep 12, 2022)

chic said:


> How much is paid by taxpayers to facilitate their lavish lifestyles?


Here you are, Chic-
https://britishheritage.com/royals/royal-family-cost-british-taxpayer


----------



## Della (Sep 12, 2022)

Those figures state that most of the money goes to keep up the palaces and pay all the people involved. Unless they're planning on leveling Buckingham palace and putting up a Tesco, getting rid of the monarchy won't save that much.

It's not like the Queen was flying off to Dubai on the weekends to party with rock stars.  How much could matching hats and coats in pastel colors really have cost?


----------



## Geezer Garage (Sep 12, 2022)

As I understand it, she was for some time the richest woman in the world.


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2022)

RadishRose said:


> Here you are, Chic-
> https://britishheritage.com/royals/royal-family-cost-british-taxpayer


"*A financial report revealed that the royal family cost the British people £102.4 million during the previous year."*

That ain't much, especially what they bring in.


----------



## JimBob1952 (Sep 12, 2022)

Pepper said:


> "*A financial report revealed that the royal family cost the British people £102.4 million during the previous year."*
> 
> That ain't much, especially what they bring in.


  I agree.  You can talk all day about the monarchy and whether it's right or wrong to have a royal family.  But in terms of value for money spent, it's an incredible bargain (tourism, trade deals, plus an incalculable positive effect on the morale of the British people).


----------



## Packerjohn (Sep 12, 2022)

Happy Heart said:


> Not much different than the U.S. and it has paid well for the professional bleaters who make a living off it.  We are free to bleat or get moving and change what doesn't work.  We are Free to chose our life!
> I'm not sure distraught is the word I would use to describe my feeling about the Royals since they don't give a hoot, but do respect her life of service which so rare in the world today.  Camilla is like a rock in your shoes, but I don't think she plans on going away.


Interesting point here about being able to "bleat."  I think that living in a country and there are many where you are not allowed to "bleat" at all would be a lot worse.  Think Stalin's Russia or Mao's China and dozens of other countries where if you "bleat", you get a knock on your door at midnight and disappear so that your family never hears from you again.


----------



## Pepper (Sep 12, 2022)

Packerjohn said:


> Interesting point here about being able to "bleat."  I think that living in a country and there are many where you are not allowed to "bleat" at all would be a lot worse.  Think Stalin's Russia or Mao's China and dozens of other countries where if you "bleat", you get a knock on your door at midnight and disappear so that your family never hears from you again.


It's Putin's Russia and Xi's China.  No real difference and that's the sad part.


----------



## Brookswood (Sep 12, 2022)

I have no great love for monarchies.   We booted them out nearly 250 years ago and that is fine with me.

I do wonder about people who have to wait until somebody dies , and then start spewing vitriol  and hate about that person.  They seem pathetic unhinged miserable people to me.    Besides the British monarchy has had no real power since before WW2.  Whatever nasty stuff George III did to the colonists, it was not done by Elizabeth or Charles. In WW2 the King stayed in London with his people while it was being bombed. And the Queen stayed with her King.   I think that’s about all they had the power to do and they did it well.


----------



## Remy (Sep 14, 2022)

@Brookswood Some people literally enjoy it and if they have any sense of their own power to do so, they will spew away. Makes me wonder what these people could do in another time or place if that's what lurking inside their minds.


----------



## Lewkat (Sep 14, 2022)

Della said:


> That Readers Digest story is just quoting the Andrew Morton book which was entirely Diana's words telling her side of the story.  At the time that's all anyone heard because Charles was hardly in a position to go on TV like she did and have a tit for tat fight.  The royals just don't air their dirty laundry in public.
> 
> Diana cheated on Charles first and he just turned to his long time best friend for comfort.  Diana is the one who had endless affairs, some with married men, and was such a pain in the palace she fired over forty servants.
> https://www.newsweek.com/princess-d...rry-mannakee-royal-protection-officer-1639903
> http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9703/05/britain.diana/


Don't believe one word of that rubbish.  Charles and Camilla were a big thing long before Diana came along and wanted to marry her.  Due to her checkered past, she was not deemed appropriate for the heir to the throne.  Thus, he married Diana who actually was in love with him, or so she thought.  She was young, troubled child, and just in love with love.  The realities of life after they were married were more than she could handle.

Diana found out that Charles and Camilla were involved right after Camilla's divorce, and the rest is history.

That the Queen gave into Charles after Diana died, and allowed him to marry Camilla is still a mystery to me.  She'd have remained his mistress for life if it were my son.  

Read about Camilla and her past.  She was a real player, that babe.


----------



## Lewkat (Sep 14, 2022)

The monarchy has nothing to do with the Constitutional running of the government.  That's the Prime Minister's and Parliament's job.

The Royals are examples of what is expected of the citizens of the UK.  They uphold the Constitution, conduct diplomatic events among the Empire, and serve to see that various charities, etc. are attended to.  The Monarch receives a box from Parliament daily, which contains all the doings of that august body.  He/she reads each one and places his/her signature on every piece of paper in that box.  The King or Queen may offer a suggestion on those items, but that is as far as any involvement in law making or other government activities goes.

Also, tourism brings in countless dollars to the Crown.  Which is why they carry out all the pomp and circumstance, because that's what we go to see. 

Money pours into their charities big time as well.  So, it isn't a matter of the old-timey oppressive reigns of the past.

Watching how Charles emerged from his car when he first arrived at Buckingham Palace from Windsor, was like watching a rock star or big time politician, immediately go over and work the crowds, shaking hands and receiving condolences on the loss of his mom.  This is a 21st century monarchy, and I doubt anyone has one thing to worry about.

I admire what Queen Elizabeth has gone through for so many years, and yes, she was very old-fashioned in so many ways, but then again, she was raised in a very different era.  She withstood the passage of time very well, and the entire world should honor that lady.


----------



## SeniorBen (Sep 14, 2022)

Personally, I'm sick of hearing about the queen. She was just a person, not inherently better than anyone else. She did have power and money to do things, and that's great if she used those advantages to better society, but she didn't earn that money and power. It was just an accident of birth.


----------



## Lavinia (Sep 14, 2022)

I wonder why  there are so many who are quick to condemn the British but seem to forget all the other countries which also had empires. Slavery has been a way of life for centuries among all nations, yet it is only the British who are vilified for it. The Jews were held captive in Babylon and Egypt. Yes, it is a very long time ago but I'm just using that as an example to show that such things are nothing new. 
Britain itself has been invaded and occupied by different factions...Romans, Saxons, Normans....and ruled over by the Pope. The Catholic church has had control over Christian countries and is responsible for horrific atrocities.
So, if you wish to condemn, include all not just the one which suits you.


----------



## fuzzybuddy (Sep 15, 2022)

StarSong said:


> During a gathering with my children and their spouses last evening, this s


StarSong, I keep thinking about your post. That has to be the most concise, right-on take of the British Monarchy. You nailed it.


----------



## Warrigal (Sep 15, 2022)

Geezer Garage said:


> As I understand it, she was for some time the richest woman in the world.


She owns property but is hardly in a position to sell any of it. Revenue from those properties goes to the government in return for a portion of it being used for upkeep and other expenses. 

That is as I understand it but Holly would be able to give a clearer picture.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Sep 15, 2022)

StarSong said:


> During a gathering with my children and their spouses last evening, this subject came up.  One of my sons works in sports television so that's one of the prisms through which he sees the world.
> 
> He said the monarchy is basically a cross between being UK's team mascot and one of the lesser Kardashians.
> 
> ...


Love the analogy Star!


----------



## Geezer Garage (Sep 15, 2022)

Her personal fortune appears to be around 500 million. More details here. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...nd-the-british-monarchys-finances/ar-AA11SNVM


----------



## jujube (Sep 16, 2022)

Lewkat said:


> Don't believe one word of that rubbish.  Charles and Camilla were a big thing long before Diana came along and wanted to marry her.  Due to her checkered past, she was not deemed appropriate for the heir to the throne.  Thus, he married Diana who actually was in love with him, or so she thought.  She was young, troubled child, and just in love with love.  The realities of life after they were married were more than she could handle.
> 
> Diana found out that Charles and Camilla were involved right after Camilla's divorce, and the rest is history.
> 
> ...


Charles should have been made to marry some horsey lady of the nobility who understood her duty was to produce an heir and a spare as soon as possible, and then settle down to a life of opening hospitals and christening ships while leaving Charles to continue his peccadillos without any complaints from her.  I mean, wasn't that "tradition"?


----------



## Beezer (Sep 19, 2022)

Americans don't have a monarchy. Their default monarchy is Hollywood...Brad Pitt...et al. 

Celebrity worship to replace the lack of royal worship.


----------



## Lavinia (Sep 19, 2022)

Shalimar said:


> *My goodness. The Queen hasn‘t even been laid to rest, and many of us are in mourning. It is less than sensitive to bring up this stuff so soon after her passing. I wonder how some might feel if those of us from Britain or the Commonwealth  dissected their late revered leaders in such a manner?  *


Yes, it just shows the churlishness of some people.


----------



## Lavinia (Sep 19, 2022)

Beezer said:


> Americans don't have a monarchy. Their default monarchy is Hollywood...Brad Pitt...et al.
> 
> Celebrity worship to replace the lack of royal worship.


Yes, I'm sure a lot of this criticism is based on envy.


----------



## Della (Sep 20, 2022)

jujube said:


> Charles should have been made to marry some horsey lady of the nobility who understood her duty was to produce an heir and a spare as soon as possible, and then settle down to a life of opening hospitals and christening ships while leaving Charles to continue his peccadillos without any complaints from her.  I mean, wasn't that "tradition"?


Somebody should have told Diana that after she stole her sister's boyfriend, got the prize, and had the fab wedding, she would be expected to do some un-fun stuff and people wouldn't like it if she had a series of sports stars in and out of her bedroom. 

It's well documented that she had many affairs before Camilla and Charles started up again.  Camilla might have been a player while she was young, but Diana was a player after she got married.  That and firing 40 servants during her first 2 years says it all to me.  Not a nice person, even if she did tell us she wanted to be known as the caring princess.

I don't know why people want to idolize Diana (and hate Camilla and Charles because they "hurt" her.). So many clear facts about her are ignored.  Did you know she purposely pushed Raine, her stepmother, down a flight of stairs?  If it had been anyone else she would have been arrested for attempted murder.


----------



## Pepper (Sep 20, 2022)

Where are you getting your Diana info @Della


----------



## Been There (Sep 20, 2022)

It wouldn't be the same England without the monarchy. It would be like another piece of history has been removed. What happened in the past is over and done with. During my lifetime, I have enjoyed watching the King and Queen when they were shown together on TV. Like I stated earlier, my Grandmother adored the Queen and her colorful outfits, especially on the one St. Patrick's Day when she was shown wearing an all green outfit. She looked so beautiful. When I looked at the Queen, she looked and acted like royalty.


----------



## JimBob1952 (Sep 20, 2022)

Beezer said:


> Americans don't have a monarchy. Their default monarchy is Hollywood...Brad Pitt...et al.
> 
> Celebrity worship to replace the lack of royal worship.



Tired old cliche without much truth behind it.  Besides, the Brits have a monarchy and still worship celebrities, just slightly different ones.  What's your explanation for that?  


Lavinia said:


> I wonder why  there are so many who are quick to condemn the British but seem to forget all the other countries which also had empires. Slavery has been a way of life for centuries among all nations, yet it is only the British who are vilified for it. The Jews were held captive in Babylon and Egypt. Yes, it is a very long time ago but I'm just using that as an example to show that such things are nothing new.
> Britain itself has been invaded and occupied by different factions...Romans, Saxons, Normans....and ruled over by the Pope. The Catholic church has had control over Christian countries and is responsible for horrific atrocities.
> So, if you wish to condemn, include all not just the one which suits you.



"Only the British who are vilified for it?" You obviously have never spent any time in the US, where just about all we talk about is the impact of slavery (when we are not talking about gender fluidity).  But you're right, slavery was a widespread practice, especially in Islamic countries, where up to a million white slaves were held in countries such as Morocco.  

Many native American tribes held slaves from other tribes, and the Cherokee tribe (which adapted to "civilization" quite adeptly) held black slaves.


----------



## Della (Sep 20, 2022)

Pepper said:


> Where are you getting your Diana info @Della


I first read a lot of this in Kitty Kelley's book about the royals but much of it is available online from various newspaper articles and books by people who were there at the time. 
Just Google:
Did Princes Diana have affairs before Charles?
Did Diana push Raine down the stairs?
Did Diana fire 40 servants?
I linked some of them a few pages back, but people just prefer the fantasy version she made up of herself (with help from Andrew Morton,)

I was living in England when the break up happened and the Times published her side of the story and then gave her that TV special to tell it to everyone.  Just the fact that she did that made me very suspicious of her. She knew Charles would not be able to defend himself.


----------



## Lewkat (Sep 20, 2022)

I just did some fact checking on Diana's alleged pre-marital affairs.  I was all over the internet and just grabbed some comments from such people as the Palace physician who was required to determine Diana was a virgin before she became Charles' wife.  She was only 19 at the time, newly engaged, and embarrassed out of her mind at being prodded by this doctor.  He affirmed that she was indeed a virgin.  I recall at that time there was something in the news about it all, but I wasn't too interested back then.

It was during her marriage that she fell for her police body guard and they did have something of an affair.  It was deemed by most, after that, she seemed to fall in love with every good looking guy who came her way, but not necessarily ending in a full blown affair.  Many guys were wary of her, being Charles' wife, and knowing what a flake she was.  

So, aside from gossip rags, no one really knows the actual involvement she is supposed to have had.

She met James Hewitt 2 years after the birth of Harry.  Look beyond Harry's beard.  He is the image of Charles.


----------



## Della (Sep 20, 2022)

Yes, I know Diana was a virgin when she got married.  I meant she is said to have had many affairs after she married Charles, but  before Charles had an affair with Camilla.  I never suspected that anyone but Charles was Harry's father, either.  Diana was the same age when she got married as I was, I don't see how that excuses her bad behavior forever.  she didn't stay nineteen.  She went on TV and told everyone, in her soft poor little me voice that her marriage didn't work "because there were three people in the marriage."  She just wasn't honest about exactly which three people and to this day people believe Charles and Camilla were having an affair while she sat innocently in her rooms.

I really don't care how often she cheated on Charles, I just think, after all this time, it might be time to quit hating on Camilla.  The world is full of people who got divorced and then married someone else.  All the nasty remarks I've heard about Camilla over the years are just uncalled for as far as I'm concerned and even now Charles is hated for being mean to Diana when we have no evidence of that.

https://www.newsweek.com/princess-d...rry-mannakee-royal-protection-officer-1639903
Newsweek is not a gossip rag.

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9703/05/britain.diana/
Neither is CNN


----------

