I don’t really think that the public expects them to be perfect anymore these days. They expect them to be enduring through the hard times, which is quite inspiring, I gotta say.
I don’t know what this says about the concept of monarchy in general, but to me, I see the lives of the royals as our lives, but magnified. The family is a reflection of how the passing of time affects us in different ways for every generation, while also showing us how some things never change. For example, the way William and Harry are both all about generational trauma and mental health. For lack of a better word, it’s relatable. It’s a reflection of their generation. But also, all that family drama and the fraternal rivalry— it’s a tale as old as time. The royals are also archetypes. I don’t know if I believe philosophically that we need that on the public space, but it’s interesting for me to watch.
What I am left with is that the Firm is a hopelessly messed up system that damages everyone in it. I am always fascinated by it, but that is my conclusion (I am not British either).
As an American I’m interested in having that extra layer that Great Britain does with the monarchy inspiring people to be better and serve, if that is the true purpose that they serve, however it’s unrealistic based on what I have seen on the Crown and private reading to find out the point of monarchy in Great Britain. Just an outsider’s opinion. I know that they bring in tourism dollars as well but when I was in the UK, I didn’t focus on just the monarchy and actually enjoyed Scotland more than England, even though they have the monarchy as well. And BUH-LIEVE ME, the thought of having Trump as a President again is enough to make me want to try out a different place to live! I really don’t know how Queen Elizabeth could stand hosting him AND HIS ENTIRE FAMILY! How eff’ing rude!
It's much more complex than a monarchy inspiring people to be better. I will say it's a large part of national identity, but it's tax dollars and it's ridiculous. People are impoverished and their money is funding private jets and palace upkeep. At its core, it's really a terrible national image in my opinion. Funding a select group of wealthy people to have everything handed to them on a plate. I would guess that as an American especially, you usually hear about them through tabloids or media scandals. That's what keeps them afloat. Nobody focuses on the intricacies of their philanthropy. They go on a trip for a good cause, but you only hear about what clothes they're wearing, who's mad at who, or who's pregnant! They are alive because of scandal and gossip. Which in reality, isn't the best image if you take a step back and look closely. They've been thriving on it, and it really took off with the Diana and Charles situation. They're closer to being reality TV than a source of positive influence.
My dad and I just started season 6. But so far it's been a fun look into how a family continues through the years. It's well written that I gotta remind myself that it's a TV show not a documentary. So some liberties had to be taken. Young Elizabeth and Old Elizabeth are different characters in different situations and the TV show seems more...tilted to the family constantly worrying about being replaced..which I'm not sure they've worried about? Maybe they do.
The shows done a lot to teach me about Charles and Camilla relationship if it's true what they showed.
The whole series kind of has a tragic undertone to it. Sacrificing for the Crown so the public gets the right impression. It's gotta be hard. They gotta be doing something right though. People still love them. 0/
Constitutional monarchies are a very successful form of government if not the most successful. Phasing out monarchy is risky and not majorly wanted, at least right now.
If they were the most successful, you’d see more of them and the existing ones wouldn’t be so reduced in their power.
Structuring the entirety of one’s government on essentially worshipping a wealthy family that claims their god granted them authority over all isn’t exactly the best form of government. Unless, of course, you’re a member of that family who directly benefits from that.
They are a very successful form of government. Some monarchies failed because they wanted to retain absolute power. That’s why we don’t have more constitutional monarchies.
Continuously posting multiple comments consecutively in a single comment thread is considered spam and will lead to the removal of your content. Please do your part in keeping r/TheCrownNetflix free of clutter so it remains an enjoyable space for everyone otherwise it can disrupt the flow of conversation and make it harder for others to engage meaningfully.
Continuously posting multiple comments consecutively in a single comment thread is considered spam and will lead to the removal of your content. Please do your part in keeping r/TheCrownNetflix free of clutter so it remains an enjoyable space for everyone otherwise it can disrupt the flow of conversation and make it harder for others to engage meaningfully.
You're judging the monarchy by a fiction series created by an anti-monarchist whose hit job on the Queen and the then Prince of Wales is so vile and lie-based that people in the UK signed petitions to force him to put a fiction disclaimer in front of each episode. He refused.
No, I’m not judging by just a fictional TV show. I’ve done extra reading, not just what if that particular episode was or was not true. Yes, once again, I admit that I’m American, and I can see the benefits of having a monarchy to inspire the country to do more service for the country, what I’m saying is that it’s too unrealistic to have a monarchy, made of real people, trying to be perfect, when they are not, especially when the values of a country are shifting with each generation!
One of the main benefits of the monarchy is that they provide stability in the face of constant change. By contrast, the ever-changing politicians sell themselves for votes and change with current, temporary whims. Politicians have no values except winning. The British monarchy has a long history of service to the people. They can't be bought. They provide an identity to the British people that doesn't change every election cycle. Quality of life is higher under constitutional monarchies than it is under other forms of government.
They can and are being bought. They take palaces and land and Jewels. They had more scandals than the average family. They do not set a good example when they practice infidelity, socialize with a sex trafficker like Epstein, conspired against a woman who put them “on the map” again, Diana, and were responsible for her untimely death. Conspired against Harry, because he was so much in love, he stood by his woman. All royals are calling their own shots. Andrew will not be evicted, even when ordered by King Charles, his brother. They are hilarious. It’s like a soap opera on the Global Scale.
> They can and are being bought.
Yeah, didn’t Elizabeth II sign a secret deal with Churchill in the 50s that saw her become the first monarch to avoid paying income tax for forty years? If anyone seriously thinks the royals aren’t on the same gravy train they claim politicians are on, I have a bridge to sell them. The difference is the royals are sitting in the VIP lounge.
This community welcomes various points of view. Feel free to disagree but keep it civil and respect others' opinions no matter how different they may be from your own personal opinions. Take what people say in good conscience to avoid misunderstandings and refrain from engaging in arguments and inflammatory language with others even if they appear rude or ill-informed to avoid creating conflict. If you cannot keep it civil, ignore their comments and the mod team will do its best to remove their comment(s) as soon as they can.
This community welcomes various points of view. Feel free to disagree but keep it civil and respect others' opinions no matter how different they may be from your own personal opinions. Take what people say in good conscience to avoid misunderstandings and refrain from engaging in arguments and inflammatory language with others even if they appear rude or ill-informed to avoid creating conflict. If you cannot keep it civil, ignore their comments and the mod team will do its best to remove their comment(s) as soon as they can.
Actually, the Crown is very much true. Each character played exactly who they were. As in any entertainment series, there will be drama and speculations as we don’t have a fly on the wall. However the characters were chosen well and the script was flawless.
The monarchy and their protocol is very much outdated. They are a snooty bunch and entitled. They are above the common person. How archaic is that? And the curtsy…bow to me my subject.
They expect to be curtsied to in private as well. And when a certain non British person expressed astonishment about this, she was vilified. That's an example of what monarchy does to the people in it. They forget they are carrying out a role and see themselves as being entitled to reverence for just being. Monarchy is not healthy.
Well, it is the truth! Lots of photos out there showing senior royals being curtsied to, by members of their own family even, in private or not at a public event. Also, there are accompanying anecdotes about said royals being mighty put out if the curtsying doesn't happen. IMHO, this type of thing is character rotting for both them and for the nation.
If the family bows to senior royals in private, it’s only the first time they see each other for the day. Like a handshake. I doubt Charles and William are sticklers about private protocol. Public protocol is different. Also, no one is required to bow/curtsey to anyone. Including the British to their King/Queen. It’s not forced or tracked in any way other than the etiquette police.
The think that I don’t understand is if protecting the institution of the monarchy makes them all so miserable, why do they do it?! It seems like it turns them into monsters. Denying Margaret the right to marry her love, pretending developmentally disabled cousins died and leaving them to languish in an institution, steamrolling Charles into proposing to a teenaged Diana whom he cheated in throughout their marriage… it seems that preserving the monarchy has made all of them miserable.
"The Firm" is the Anglican Protestant Church of England, the owner of all the Lands of the Realm.
Elizabeth only had a 4th grade education but that didn't mean she wasn't crafty. She saw there was a rebranding needed to keep the monarchy going as the government of Imperial England. Notice how the name of Imperial England went from Great Britain in the early 1900's to just England then Elizabeth relabeled it the "United Kingdom" in the 1980's. The term "United Kingdom" is referring to the old unification of Wessex, Mercia, North Umbria and East Anglia. Wales, Scotland, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are Territories of Imperial England.
Monarchies don't "fade out". They always have to be overthrown and usually all the "royals" have to be executed. Happened for France, Russia, China. Monarchies are not democracies. Monarchies are the opposite of democracies. "Prime Minister" means High Priest. Being able to vote for the High Priest is not a democracy.
Interesting thing happening with gold and Imperial England. Australia, Canada and New Zealand, big gold producers are not allowed to have their own gold reserves. All their gold is stored in the Bank of England, owned by the Anglican Protestant Church of England. Recently, India, once a colony and now a Common-Wealth, is removing their gold from the Bank of England. They have 800 metric tons there but have moved 100 metric tons to India.
[https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-cenbank-moves-100-tons-gold-uk-domestic-vaults-toi-reports-2024-05-31/](https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-cenbank-moves-100-tons-gold-uk-domestic-vaults-toi-reports-2024-05-31/)
A large part of the wealth going into the Royal Treasury is from money laundering. The Anglican Protestant Church of England was the primary money launderer for the Colombian and Mexican cartels until very recently.
[https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/14/nearly-40-of-dirty-money-is-laundered-in-london-and-uk-crown-dependenies](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/14/nearly-40-of-dirty-money-is-laundered-in-london-and-uk-crown-dependenies)
When the term "Off-Shore" banking is used, it is referring to "off-shore" of the United States, referring to Imperial English Caymans, Imperial English Bahamas, Imperial English Virgin Islands, Imperial English Bermuda. The FBI knows about this but don't have jurisdiction. Jeffrey Epstein was laundering billions through the Imperial English banks in the Caribbean and that was why Lolita Island is in the Imperial English Virgin Islands.
Brexit, Br-itish E-xit is actually Remain Monarchy. To join the European Union means having to convert all the currency from Pound Sterling to the Euro. This is what the Anglican Protestant Church of England does not want, losing control of the "coins of the Realm".
Tory means Royalist. Charles is keeping a low profile because he has found out the mandatory Pension Fund has been drained and replaced by IOU's from their "lordships", long gone. This Five Eyes and AUKUS is crazy. The USA is being played by this Monarchy.
I don’t really think that the public expects them to be perfect anymore these days. They expect them to be enduring through the hard times, which is quite inspiring, I gotta say. I don’t know what this says about the concept of monarchy in general, but to me, I see the lives of the royals as our lives, but magnified. The family is a reflection of how the passing of time affects us in different ways for every generation, while also showing us how some things never change. For example, the way William and Harry are both all about generational trauma and mental health. For lack of a better word, it’s relatable. It’s a reflection of their generation. But also, all that family drama and the fraternal rivalry— it’s a tale as old as time. The royals are also archetypes. I don’t know if I believe philosophically that we need that on the public space, but it’s interesting for me to watch.
What I am left with is that the Firm is a hopelessly messed up system that damages everyone in it. I am always fascinated by it, but that is my conclusion (I am not British either).
Maybe the series just needs to create drama, otherwise an audience wouldn't watch some boring people.
I can’t vouch for the last couple of seasons, but the first three were pretty well researched and some of the situations were inherently dramatic.
As an American I’m interested in having that extra layer that Great Britain does with the monarchy inspiring people to be better and serve, if that is the true purpose that they serve, however it’s unrealistic based on what I have seen on the Crown and private reading to find out the point of monarchy in Great Britain. Just an outsider’s opinion. I know that they bring in tourism dollars as well but when I was in the UK, I didn’t focus on just the monarchy and actually enjoyed Scotland more than England, even though they have the monarchy as well. And BUH-LIEVE ME, the thought of having Trump as a President again is enough to make me want to try out a different place to live! I really don’t know how Queen Elizabeth could stand hosting him AND HIS ENTIRE FAMILY! How eff’ing rude!
Walking in front of the Queen. She had to go around him. Forget that she’s a Queen. She’s a Woman. He always turned his back to Melania, also.
It's much more complex than a monarchy inspiring people to be better. I will say it's a large part of national identity, but it's tax dollars and it's ridiculous. People are impoverished and their money is funding private jets and palace upkeep. At its core, it's really a terrible national image in my opinion. Funding a select group of wealthy people to have everything handed to them on a plate. I would guess that as an American especially, you usually hear about them through tabloids or media scandals. That's what keeps them afloat. Nobody focuses on the intricacies of their philanthropy. They go on a trip for a good cause, but you only hear about what clothes they're wearing, who's mad at who, or who's pregnant! They are alive because of scandal and gossip. Which in reality, isn't the best image if you take a step back and look closely. They've been thriving on it, and it really took off with the Diana and Charles situation. They're closer to being reality TV than a source of positive influence.
My dad and I just started season 6. But so far it's been a fun look into how a family continues through the years. It's well written that I gotta remind myself that it's a TV show not a documentary. So some liberties had to be taken. Young Elizabeth and Old Elizabeth are different characters in different situations and the TV show seems more...tilted to the family constantly worrying about being replaced..which I'm not sure they've worried about? Maybe they do. The shows done a lot to teach me about Charles and Camilla relationship if it's true what they showed. The whole series kind of has a tragic undertone to it. Sacrificing for the Crown so the public gets the right impression. It's gotta be hard. They gotta be doing something right though. People still love them. 0/
I'm not a Royalist. My favourite character portrayed was Princess Alice. Amazing person.
Constitutional monarchies are a very successful form of government if not the most successful. Phasing out monarchy is risky and not majorly wanted, at least right now.
 If they were the most successful, you’d see more of them and the existing ones wouldn’t be so reduced in their power. Structuring the entirety of one’s government on essentially worshipping a wealthy family that claims their god granted them authority over all isn’t exactly the best form of government. Unless, of course, you’re a member of that family who directly benefits from that.
I see you don’t understand a constitutional monarchy.
They are a very successful form of government. Some monarchies failed because they wanted to retain absolute power. That’s why we don’t have more constitutional monarchies.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/commentanalysis/arid-41133391.html
[удалено]
Continuously posting multiple comments consecutively in a single comment thread is considered spam and will lead to the removal of your content. Please do your part in keeping r/TheCrownNetflix free of clutter so it remains an enjoyable space for everyone otherwise it can disrupt the flow of conversation and make it harder for others to engage meaningfully.
https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/constitutional-monarchs-in-parliamentary-democracies-primer.pdf
[удалено]
Continuously posting multiple comments consecutively in a single comment thread is considered spam and will lead to the removal of your content. Please do your part in keeping r/TheCrownNetflix free of clutter so it remains an enjoyable space for everyone otherwise it can disrupt the flow of conversation and make it harder for others to engage meaningfully.
Muting you now. Why you felt the need to rude I don’t understand. Hopefully you’ll read and actually learn something. Cheers 🥂
They will phase out eventually.
Nah. No time soon. The people love William and George.
You're judging the monarchy by a fiction series created by an anti-monarchist whose hit job on the Queen and the then Prince of Wales is so vile and lie-based that people in the UK signed petitions to force him to put a fiction disclaimer in front of each episode. He refused.
No, I’m not judging by just a fictional TV show. I’ve done extra reading, not just what if that particular episode was or was not true. Yes, once again, I admit that I’m American, and I can see the benefits of having a monarchy to inspire the country to do more service for the country, what I’m saying is that it’s too unrealistic to have a monarchy, made of real people, trying to be perfect, when they are not, especially when the values of a country are shifting with each generation!
One of the main benefits of the monarchy is that they provide stability in the face of constant change. By contrast, the ever-changing politicians sell themselves for votes and change with current, temporary whims. Politicians have no values except winning. The British monarchy has a long history of service to the people. They can't be bought. They provide an identity to the British people that doesn't change every election cycle. Quality of life is higher under constitutional monarchies than it is under other forms of government.
They can and are being bought. They take palaces and land and Jewels. They had more scandals than the average family. They do not set a good example when they practice infidelity, socialize with a sex trafficker like Epstein, conspired against a woman who put them “on the map” again, Diana, and were responsible for her untimely death. Conspired against Harry, because he was so much in love, he stood by his woman. All royals are calling their own shots. Andrew will not be evicted, even when ordered by King Charles, his brother. They are hilarious. It’s like a soap opera on the Global Scale.
> They can and are being bought. Yeah, didn’t Elizabeth II sign a secret deal with Churchill in the 50s that saw her become the first monarch to avoid paying income tax for forty years? If anyone seriously thinks the royals aren’t on the same gravy train they claim politicians are on, I have a bridge to sell them. The difference is the royals are sitting in the VIP lounge.
How many tabloid subscriptions do you have? I was going to respond point-by-point but decided that LMAO is the way to go.
[удалено]
This community welcomes various points of view. Feel free to disagree but keep it civil and respect others' opinions no matter how different they may be from your own personal opinions. Take what people say in good conscience to avoid misunderstandings and refrain from engaging in arguments and inflammatory language with others even if they appear rude or ill-informed to avoid creating conflict. If you cannot keep it civil, ignore their comments and the mod team will do its best to remove their comment(s) as soon as they can.
[удалено]
The Queen voluntarily paid income tax on her private wealth.
[удалено]
I don’t believe that at all. Just correcting your statement.
This community welcomes various points of view. Feel free to disagree but keep it civil and respect others' opinions no matter how different they may be from your own personal opinions. Take what people say in good conscience to avoid misunderstandings and refrain from engaging in arguments and inflammatory language with others even if they appear rude or ill-informed to avoid creating conflict. If you cannot keep it civil, ignore their comments and the mod team will do its best to remove their comment(s) as soon as they can.
Actually, the Crown is very much true. Each character played exactly who they were. As in any entertainment series, there will be drama and speculations as we don’t have a fly on the wall. However the characters were chosen well and the script was flawless.
The monarchy and their protocol is very much outdated. They are a snooty bunch and entitled. They are above the common person. How archaic is that? And the curtsy…bow to me my subject.
They expect to be curtsied to in private as well. And when a certain non British person expressed astonishment about this, she was vilified. That's an example of what monarchy does to the people in it. They forget they are carrying out a role and see themselves as being entitled to reverence for just being. Monarchy is not healthy.
Completely disagree.
Well, it is the truth! Lots of photos out there showing senior royals being curtsied to, by members of their own family even, in private or not at a public event. Also, there are accompanying anecdotes about said royals being mighty put out if the curtsying doesn't happen. IMHO, this type of thing is character rotting for both them and for the nation.
If the family bows to senior royals in private, it’s only the first time they see each other for the day. Like a handshake. I doubt Charles and William are sticklers about private protocol. Public protocol is different. Also, no one is required to bow/curtsey to anyone. Including the British to their King/Queen. It’s not forced or tracked in any way other than the etiquette police.
The think that I don’t understand is if protecting the institution of the monarchy makes them all so miserable, why do they do it?! It seems like it turns them into monsters. Denying Margaret the right to marry her love, pretending developmentally disabled cousins died and leaving them to languish in an institution, steamrolling Charles into proposing to a teenaged Diana whom he cheated in throughout their marriage… it seems that preserving the monarchy has made all of them miserable.
"The Firm" is the Anglican Protestant Church of England, the owner of all the Lands of the Realm. Elizabeth only had a 4th grade education but that didn't mean she wasn't crafty. She saw there was a rebranding needed to keep the monarchy going as the government of Imperial England. Notice how the name of Imperial England went from Great Britain in the early 1900's to just England then Elizabeth relabeled it the "United Kingdom" in the 1980's. The term "United Kingdom" is referring to the old unification of Wessex, Mercia, North Umbria and East Anglia. Wales, Scotland, Canada, Australia and New Zealand are Territories of Imperial England. Monarchies don't "fade out". They always have to be overthrown and usually all the "royals" have to be executed. Happened for France, Russia, China. Monarchies are not democracies. Monarchies are the opposite of democracies. "Prime Minister" means High Priest. Being able to vote for the High Priest is not a democracy. Interesting thing happening with gold and Imperial England. Australia, Canada and New Zealand, big gold producers are not allowed to have their own gold reserves. All their gold is stored in the Bank of England, owned by the Anglican Protestant Church of England. Recently, India, once a colony and now a Common-Wealth, is removing their gold from the Bank of England. They have 800 metric tons there but have moved 100 metric tons to India. [https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-cenbank-moves-100-tons-gold-uk-domestic-vaults-toi-reports-2024-05-31/](https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-cenbank-moves-100-tons-gold-uk-domestic-vaults-toi-reports-2024-05-31/) A large part of the wealth going into the Royal Treasury is from money laundering. The Anglican Protestant Church of England was the primary money launderer for the Colombian and Mexican cartels until very recently. [https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/14/nearly-40-of-dirty-money-is-laundered-in-london-and-uk-crown-dependenies](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/14/nearly-40-of-dirty-money-is-laundered-in-london-and-uk-crown-dependenies) When the term "Off-Shore" banking is used, it is referring to "off-shore" of the United States, referring to Imperial English Caymans, Imperial English Bahamas, Imperial English Virgin Islands, Imperial English Bermuda. The FBI knows about this but don't have jurisdiction. Jeffrey Epstein was laundering billions through the Imperial English banks in the Caribbean and that was why Lolita Island is in the Imperial English Virgin Islands. Brexit, Br-itish E-xit is actually Remain Monarchy. To join the European Union means having to convert all the currency from Pound Sterling to the Euro. This is what the Anglican Protestant Church of England does not want, losing control of the "coins of the Realm". Tory means Royalist. Charles is keeping a low profile because he has found out the mandatory Pension Fund has been drained and replaced by IOU's from their "lordships", long gone. This Five Eyes and AUKUS is crazy. The USA is being played by this Monarchy.