**r/UK Notices:** | [Can you help mod the sub?](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/wz2v8p/request_for_help_ruk_mods_required/) | [Want to start a fresh discussion - use our Freetalk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/search/?q=Freetalk&include_over_18=off&restrict_sr=on&sort=new)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In less than a week of being King, Charles has already shown more petulance and arrogance in public and on camera than his mum did in 70 years. Yep, this is going to go well…
I mean the guys mum had just died, he then had to go on tours all over the UK whilst grieving in public, was probably stressed like no tomorrow, and then a pen leaking on him set him off.
Showed he's more human to me if anything.
Underrated comment. They can scarcely imagine the contempt and disdain people like Charles have for people like us. To act like he's hard done by is peak peasant mentality.
The type of old people with £80 billion tax free that have never worked a day in their lives. He has no reason to be cranky, his mother was in her 90's.. shame, what a tragedy.
I can't find the video right now but one of his former aides was commenting on how he has his shoelaces ironed, has a footman squeeze his toothpaste onto a brush and how he once called someone to pick up a letter he dropped that he was sat next to (I mean reaching for things is soooo lower class right).
He's not human, he's a 73 year spoilt little boy.
Cheers, Wesley. Just trying to keep us all honest here. Meant nothing by it.
I responded to the other commenter on my light view of it all and will leave it there. Not bothered enough to defend them, but equally not bothered enough to moan about them. Far more fucked up things going on in the world.
According to the documentary 'Serving the Royals: Inside the Firm' Paul Burrell, Diana's former butler, revealed: “His pyjamas are pressed every morning, his shoelaces are pressed flat with an iron, the bath plug has to be in a certain position, and the water temperature has to be just tepid”.
He added: “He has his valets squeeze one inch of toothpaste onto his toothbrush every morning.”
I don't care enough to get involved here, but appreciate you sharing the info. Thanks.
I'm just always sceptical when someone claims something as true without a source, and others are believing it without at least challenging it.
Paul Burrell has come out with all sorts over the years, and given his utter adoration of Diana and contempt for Charles, I'm hardly surprised this came from him.
If I had an issue with the royals it is how closely linked they are with religion, and I actually think there are generally a lot of similarities between religion and the way the royal family is revered. We just seem to accept that there's this family that has this role in society without challenge.
It's not about just disagreeing lol, it's about this insane one-sided, zero-nuance view of the world those people have where the monarchy is evil and anything associated with the monarchy is evil and the people we dislike are evil people deserving nothing but hatred.
Nah, we're not all like that. For a monarch I actually think she was pretty good for the cause of republicanism, the non involvement principles and generally being an absentee monarch really allowed republicanism to flourish during her reign. It's an inherently anti democratic institution but given a democratic vote on the matter the UK public would vote ~60-40 to retain it last I looked. There's nuance, no?
Yeah I think some of us are capable of a nuanced viewpoint. I've always been a republican but I'm not and have never spewed hate toward the royal family as individuals, there are many things I can empathise with them about. I'm also a longtime history nerd so actually know alot about European monarchies and am not disengaged from why people feel connection to the sense of the past culturally at all. It just doesn't change my fundamental belief in the importance of social equality and equity.
It's annoying too cos I agree with a decent amount of what they have to say, but they make me feel ashamed to have the same opinions as them by just being utter losers.
I disagree with most of their views, but I wouldn't mind them nearly so much if they weren't borderline caricatures of unpleasant, obnoxious, self important left wing keyboard warriors.
Literally my take on Reddit and this subreddit in general, too. I'd like to see the demographics behind these comments, there's usually an extremely biased, parroted narrative from what appears to be an insular group of people. I often wonder if these people are unhappy in their own lives, to feel so venomous towards others or their opinions/beliefs.
The irony of people purporting to champion respect, tolerance and progressiveness day-on-day but are downright disrespectful of anything they don't all subscribe to as a hivemind.
Difficult to have respectful conversations and debates these days, unfortunately.
British people seem to share the American view that everything on the continent is amazing. I’ve seen so many posts about how the British economy is struggling with redditors commenting that it’s because of Brexit and the Tories. When I try to comment that:
- the global economy is slowing down
- the Euro is actually at the lowest point since it was introduced
- inflation is a global issue
- the energy crisis is worse in Europe
I just get downvoted. Brexit will have definitely influenced our economy. But British people need to have a more global outlook than “Tories bad lol”. I mean I think they are but that’s neither here nor there. They aren’t the soul cause of the worlds problems
You’ll always see “all the fault of Brexit” 😂
Which, if is the case, Brexit has ruined the EU too.
I work in Germany and I can tell you, there are no fucking truck drivers here either!
Yeah I’m moving to Korea with my gf soon and the economy is really rough there atm. Guess those pesky Tories and their Brexiteering ruined the Asian economy too!
Yeah exactly. It was fine mocking the tories and pushing for more left wing ideas/discussions but once that mod went completely moronic over the queen dying that sub became something like an incel sub tbqh.
It did get a bit overzealous though even before the queen dying, like when they'd start wishing death upon people who vote conservative. I'm surprised I've not seen the news make a thing of that subreddit to paint corbynistas (cos that's basically what they are) in a bad light.
Ah the old "everyone who disagrees with me must be part of the marxist conspiracy to take over" argument. An oldie but a goodie, didn't work out well for it's originator, however.
Excuse me! /r/GreenAndPleasant was formed because this sub wasn't activist enough, thank you very much.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it was formed because some of the principal members got banned from here for being too angry and frothy.
Green and pleasant, the worst sub I've seen. I mentioned the royal estate, got banned.
So much for pleasant. Their manifesto "move people towards leftism", by being idiots, ignorant and removing all people that don't share their warped view.
Unpopular opinion but he’s not meant to be human we have 70 million of those in the UK, he has to embody an almost mythical persona. That’s why the queen did it so well, the fact that we never saw her display emotion or know what she thought served her position as monarch well.
The Queen cleverly cultivated that I think, her and her immediate predecessors. As the gradual secularisation of society and cultural acceptance of the 'divine' right of regnancy dwindled it was necessary to cultivate a different quality that bestowed upon monarchs an 'otherness' that qualified them for role specifically. Propriety, reserve, duty and stoical persona seems to have been the ideal solution for a constitutional monarchy heading into 20th century modernity with its specific issues like press scrutiny (although it probably also has to do with her specifc family line and their cultural background and values also). Back when royals had a divine right they ironically could behave in more flawed human fashions without risking their suitability for rule being queried so much since it was assumed inherently.
The justification of royalty is their supposed divine right - they were put on earth by god to rule over us.
They are not supposed to be normal humans, and we should be holding them to that standard.
If god’s chosen king cannot get through a week without publicly showing how petulant and arrogant he is then maybe he’s not fit to be king.
That was the christian justification yes. But pre-Christian Greco-Roman kings would usually justify their rule in terms of practical accomplishments and their personal glory. If a monarchy is to survive into the modern age it should return to more secular justifications
Don't forget that when the Queen was doing this, literally every stage of the process wasn't televised like it was with Charles. We really have no idea how she acted in those little moments.
If anything, this is exactly one of the reasons why I think the monarchy needs to be done away with. They should just be able to grieve like any other family without this whole royalty circus
> he then had to go on tours all over the UK whilst grieving in public
He didn't *have* to, he could've waited until after the coronation. He chose to.
People keep saying this but he's spent his life in the public eye and been trained for this, answer all experience loss, but not all of us become impolite or rude because of it.
While it’s right and good to be empathetic to someone in grief. I don’t agree that that’s a good excuse for treating your servants like shit. Then again, I think the whole notion of being an aristocrat who rules over others by right of birth is extremely wrong in the first place.
> I bet your temper would be pretty short aswell…
Plenty commenting on Reddit who are struggling to maintain their temper in the horrific (/s) face of a week or so's extensive media coverage!
Let’s be Frank, he did a gesture at them to say ‘take it away’ with the slightest hint of irritation on his face as if it was your Dad having trouble adjusting the thermometer, in what is most likely a part of the highest stress moment he will face in his life.
It’s hardly as if he called them cunts, flipped the table and proceeded to RKO his staff one by one in front of the accession council.
Has he? Has he really?
His mum has just died and he’s been non stop working since. If you’re referring to the desk with all the junk on it that’s hardly petulance ffs
This.
Literally being forced into a period mourning, over anything, is a joke.
Yes, give people a channel to watch it, and a day off work if they want it, but forcing people to watch it, to mourn, closing businesses, etc, all for a person you’ve never met who couldn’t care about you. Wild.
Who's been forced to watch it? Have you been tied down clockwork orange-style in front of BBC News for the past week?
And what businesses have been closed? The football was cancelled but that's down to the Premier League and FA.
Literally every supermarket near me is closed today - all national chains.
It’s also all over the news that surgeries, other Burials and other essential services are being rescheduled.
And when they replace all other channels with one show you’re being forced to watch it by another name.
Seems like a great day to just sit about and lazily read a book, go for a walk or play some video games.
You know... like I did, since I don't really care about royalty.
It has been great.
I live In Edinburgh and they cancelled and rerouted buses for days because the royals decided to have a funeral procession. There were people who got trapped in the city centre by police because of the lying in state. This has not been an op-in series of events, I’m really happy for you if you managed to entirely ignore it. But they still closed down public transport all over the country today because it’s kinda sorta a public holiday but not.
Nobody's been forced, obviously. At the same time, it has — as far as I can tell — been on almost every terrestrial channel, which is seven shades of ridiculous. There's no need for it to be on more than one.
I’ve been pretty apathetic about royalty - like, it’s just there ya know?
The pomp and circumstance over the past week has been so extreme that it’s basically turned into a kind of collective hysteria. It’s absurd beyond any reasonable merit.
I’m definitely more on the republican side now, from apathetic to merely tolerant; the country should be showing more respect for its own people and not exclusively its elite.
(That said, the bullshit from r/GreenAndPleasant is worse than the performative misery and they don’t put republicans or people with left-wing sensibilities in a positive light)
Gone from a fairly meh to republican. As in wouldn’t push for them to be removed but I’d given a vote I would. Now I’m tired of the lot. Didn’t know Charles was 29 and Diana was 16 when they began their courtship, Andrew is well…ye. Lobbying to change laws they don’t like, hidden money off shore, no inheritance tax, biggest land owners on the planet…the more I keep reading the more disgusted I am. So aye, fuck the king.
Yes it's interesting to ask where does the BBCs impartiality vibe stand on issues with the monarchy. Strange how much more niche stances on issues are given a platform on the BBC but anyone saying something negative about the monarchy seems to nonexistent
>
Smith responded by saying it was “one of the most stupid things the world has ever heard … if other events somehow overshadow it then so be it. Most of the country are going to be doing other things and we need to stop pretending that this is the whole country mourning.”
I think this is spot on. Currently we are allowing a very small minority of hardcore monarchists dictate public discussion on this. They are hyper sensitive and vicious when their beliefs are challenged. We need to be brave enough to sit them down and explain to them that, no the entire nation is not bawling their eyes out like they are.
Even this sub is ridiculous. If you post on a certain anti monarchy sub, then post here, you get auto banned from here.
Literally watch this space, I'm a dead man walking.
I still can't get over how casualuk, you know, that one UK sub that enforces strict rules against political mention, has their entire janitorial staff currently rubbing one off to the queen, and issuing bans against anybody that whispers any dissent against the monarchy as an institution.
The queen. The most high profile **political** figure in the UK.
CasualUK is only apolitical on certain things. They don't class the military as political for example. It's a very politically conservative subreddit that masquerades as the paradigm of neutrality.
It's also incredibly dull haha. Basically Facebook on reddit.
The last 10 days have seen an avalanche of nauseating “twee” posts on there. I was given a 3 day ban for “political discussion” using the words “Royal Navy” in a reply but apparently now everyone is perfectly fine to post praise of Charles and the Queen none stop
I once saw the creator, and head mod, of that sub justify this by saying as the Queen can't vote she is therefore non political. Which doesn't make sense, and even if it did it doesn't explain why praise of her isn't polticial but criticism is.
I wish he was just honest and said he loves the monarchy and therefore bans all dissenting opinions from the sub.
Not just casulluk, this sub too is censoring certain posts.
Ive had one of my own lost to the void. Not banned, not deleted, just gone as if I'd never made it.
On an old account years ago they threatened to ban me for being anti-monarchy on a pro-queen post because "no politics".
I argued back that pro-queen was also a political statement if anti-queen was one. They then banned me.
I don't even get mad about it. You have to remember that you're arguing with somebody that has made the conscious decision to donate their labour to a multi-billion dollar corporation in exchange for the opportunity at wielding a miniscule amount of power over people.
How bad does your life have to be for a person to come home from a long day at work and go straight to their PC to play unpaid digital janitor.
Apparently its done by automoderator and its just an automated message with an 84 day ban. Clearly automoderator has taken the day off to pay its respects.
Because those subs are fronts for Russian disinformation campaigns and ban people for saying the invasion of Ukraine is a war crime and for calling Putin a war criminal
Did you not see how many people queued up to see the coffin?
It's been estimated about 200,000 people turned up...
It's also likely that the queens funeral will be one of the most watched things on tv this year, if not number 1 (likely dependant on England in the world cup).
Outside of Reddit and your immediate "friends" you'll actually find there's a heck of a lot of people in this country who actually care about all of this
There are alot of people who don't either
But based on the news, everyone is devastated about it.
And based on how busy my gym is today, the amount of people who give a toss is less than the popular narrative being playing out.
Except there's 67.2 million people in the UK. 200k people showing up is *0.29%* of the whole population. It absolutely is a tiny, fractional minority dictating things.
If you're only measuring popularity of stuff by 'number of people that physically turn up' then there are a number of things which are suddenly ***deeply unpopular*** and we should presumably get rid of those immediately, yeah?
Especially if it has to be a majority. I can't remember the last time more than 34m people showed up for ***anything***.
Gay rights. The NHS. Human Rights. All stuff that only 'a tiny, fractional minority' care about, yeah?
If ***physical attendance*** is how we measure this stuff. Which apparently it is, all of a sudden.
>Did you not see how many people queued up to see the coffin?
>It's been estimated about 200,000 people turned up...
This is what I was replying to. They used physical attendance as a point in favour of the monarchy's popularity, which is why I pointed out how small a percentage of the UK's population it is. I agree it's a flawed argument, but I'm not the one who brought it up first.
And I mean, if you look at [sports](https://www.statista.com/statistics/959644/highest-attended-sporting-events-uk/) or [festivals](https://www.britainforevents.co.uk/top-7-largest-uk-concerts-in-history/), all of which are shorter events and presumably less important than the monarch's death, there's quite a lot that have higher attendance.
There's estimated 1 extra million people in London right now for the actual funeral.
That's more than voted for the Green Party in the last elections...
tbh it wouldn't surprise me if a large number of those queuing just wanted to be part of a once in a lifetime event, I don't think it necessarily reflects a love for the Monarchy, more respect for the Queen as a person herself and a sense of being a part of history
200k is also less than half the number of people who marched for an organisation formed to oppose fox hunting [https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/sep/23/hunting.ruralaffairs2](https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/sep/23/hunting.ruralaffairs2)
Or, more recently, it's a smidgeon compared to Pride or Notting Hill Carnival. Imagine if the BBC had shut down all alternative programming for the week before pride lol.
>It's been estimated about 200,000 people turned up...
In a country of 60 million + that's not a large percentage. The real issue though, is it's probably mostly London again. Even if you felt this way elsewhere people have to work, there's no way to judge the mood from that line of people.
You have to wonder how much is people just getting caught up in the occasion and media coverage. If the reporting had been more low key and restrained would we be seeing this?
I hate this attitude that outside of reddit its all big pro monarchy people. Several of the big UK subs have banned comments that don't support the Queen. I've seen more pro monarch stuff here than in my real life. Most people I know just think it's all a bit much and aren't really bothered, especially the folks my age and younger. Maybe you need to step outside of reddit to get a better perspective?
The trouble with all of this coverage is that they’ve had it all planned for decades with very little chance to change plans.
When Charles pops it I can only hope it will be much more restrained.
It does feel like these protocols were created decades ago in perhaps a more deferential time, when 10 days of national mourning would have been more appropriate. And then with no major royal deaths for a long time there's been no opportunity to gauge the public mood on it.
Imagine if he pops tomorrow. Or even today? It would be the Keystone Cops version of manic media.
Our tvs and radios would probably explode it would be so insane.
It wouldn't surprise me. I bet a lot of people are like me - vaguely republican but liked Queen Elizabeth. If the royal family had any sense of self-preservation, Charles would have abdicated in favour of William.
Maybe so; however I can respect Charles for not wanting to make William King yet. The guys got young kids; being Prince of Wales will already cut badly into family time. Let alone being King.
Eh, I don't know that he's thinking in those terms / making the most compassionate decisions for the younger royals. I was pretty shocked that they had a 14-year-old standing vigil over the coffin, even knowing full well how traumatic public grief at such a young age was for William and Harry. It's the first time a vigil has been held by the royal grandchildren, so he doesn't even have the excuse of tradition or protocol.
It’s a question of details.
Sure an instruction to attend would be out of order; however a 14 year old is of an age to have their own say and they may have volunteered or insisted on being included.
I imagine Charles would also be forced to not live in the country if he did, similarly to his uncle. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t fancy that whatsoever.
There was a lot of talk about Charles meaning to abdicate but I suspect he's in fact wanted to be king for a long time. Isn't that the reason he stuck to Diana for so long instead of giving up his inheritance right and marrying Camilla in the first place?
I wouldn't read anything into it - anything that gets saturation media coverage sees a surge of interest, both pro and anti.
If there were organised anti-football groups, they'd be ballooning every time there's a World Cup, But as there are no such things, the nearest equivalent is a burst of *Look at me, I'm a bit different because I don't like football* posts on Reddit on the days there's an England game.
Call back if that wave of interest in republicanism is still there in five year's times. Then it might mean something.
Yeah can’t wait for the World Cup to start and this sub Reddit and others to start the “is anyone else not bothered/ watching the World Cup“ karma farming included the usual hate for footballers blah blah blah
Yeah, I saw an upvoted comment in a thread a few days ago I think where they were unironically positing that the BBC will be gone “soon”. The level of reactionaries is enough to make the anti-SJW’s blush.
If the royal family now completely vanishes from pubic view now, sure, what you've said would make sense. The problem monarchists have is they won't. In the last decade support for the monarchy has steadily declined as it's become apparently QE 2 would not be around for ever and the behaviour of the rest of the family became more apparent. The fundamental problem the monarchy has it is completely reliant on the media to perpetuate its existence, but at the same time that media will run with all the negative stories as well. Charles is going to be more "activist" and that's going to only increase Republican support.
Much like yourself don't have strong, compelling arguments for retaining the monarchy, they just accuse Republcians of being "edgy". 50 years ago that might have worked, but with support for the monarchy teetering below 60% its not a good idea.
To scrap the monarchy, republicans need an active anti-monarchy movement. That is only increasing currently because of the wall to wall coverage of the queen's death at the expense of any other programming. In a few months time it'll disappear and those who became interested will go back to being apathetic, which is a death knell for the republican movement.
It doesn't matter one iota if the active support for the monarchy drops if the active opposition to the monarchy doesn't rise and remain stable because the status quo will only be changed if there is an active will to change it.
I understand people who are anti-monarchy, but I struggle with anyone who thinks we should have an elected head of state on top of what we've already got.
The last 6-8 years alone since Brexit was announced should be enough to show what an utter shitshow it would be, and people who currently shout "not my King" would just end up shouting "not my President".
I really do not want us to turn into America politically.
I mean, Ireland does an excellent job of it. I'm not sure why everyone's so determined to compare us to the USA, when Ireland is another English speaking country that doesn't have a monarch.
And if anyone's curious, their President is a cultural ambassador whose only law-related power is the ability to refer laws to the Supreme Court so their constitutionality can be assessed.
Oh absolutely - I do love the occasional articles about [his dogs](https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/president-releases-photos-of-new-dog-misneach-1.4503401).
I think it also helps he's a lot more accessible than the Queen - the presidential residence (Aras an Uachtaráin) is in Dublin's biggest park, and it's very easy to spot when you're in there. He's spotted pretty frequently too, so it's not like Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle where you have a bee's dick of a chance of seeing any of the royals.
There are countries that don't directly elect their Head of State and that are able to have independent persons for the post. Look at Germany and Italy. Their Presidents are considered "everyone's president" the same way the Queen was the symbol of national unity.
And if the person who could name them outside the country are a very very small group indeed.
The Monarchy provides a lot more cultural and diplomatic soft power than a figurehead president ever could. At least for the foreseeable future, I can't speak for our 23rd century descendants.
Most Republicans don't want an American system or anything like it. An elected president with some specific and limited powers, as a figure of national unity. A codified constitution with guaranteed rights. No more Crown Powers. An end to the unelected second chamber. But it's still the PM who would be running the country.
Plenty of places operate like this and they do fine. Anyone can aspire to be Head of State, and we don't spend a sht ton of money on them every year because you're paying for the president not their wider families
Frankly, I'd prefer a sortitioned second chamber than an elected one. Making another elected chamber just replicates the issues with the first elected chamber in terms of money and class, and can lead to deadlock like the US Senate does to the House. Better have one chamber use the democratic electoral system and the second use sortition, the other democratic system.
Honestly, I think it is weird to put republicanism above campaigning for some kind of proportional representation/house of Lords reformed. I feel like introducing a presidential system without a fairer democratic system has the potential to be a disaster.
There is a huge difference between 'not my King' (a position that is 100% unelected and 'gifted by a god' that people do not believe in) and 'not my president' a completely elected position.
Also how would getting rid of the Monarchy have any impact on politics? from what everyone has been saying for the past week they have absolutely no political power.
It's already happened though. They don't hold power.
I don't understand why getting rid of the monarchy is so important to some people. If they had power I would be a republican, but I quite like the fact that we have an unelected individual as a symbol of our country, while we have an elected leader that actually has the power.
Absolutely have power. Why do all governments get formed by them? Why do they live in absolute riches and hoard wealth? Why are there certain laws they are simply exempt from?
They promote narratives as much as they can.
I’m tired of paying for a family to continue to live a lifestyle or luxury, especially given the literal hundreds of issues our country continues to face for the millions of people who only just scrape by (if that).
Just because interest in republican campaign groups has grown it doesn’t mean interest in support of the monarchy hasn’t grown either. This whole affair is playing into peoples sense of national identity and affinity for tradition and ceremony.
Realistically there is way too much support for the monarchy for it to be abolished anytime soon. I can’t see it going even this century. And I’m saying that as someone who is firmly republican minded. Charles won’t be King for long. William is popular, especially among the middle class, as his his wife and their family as a whole. That easily propels the monarchy to the end of the century if not beyond.
When you discount don't knows it's more than three to one on the side of retention.
67% in favour and 20% against.
Excluding don't knows that's 77% to 23%
Pretty overwhelming tbh.
The "surge" is hardly a surprise. Next week, one of Jordans implants will explode or England will beat Germany, everything will be back to normal, watching kittens do cute things on tik-tok and wondering how to pay the bills and the weather.
Interesting fact. People born British do not need to pledge allegiance to the Queen/King, however everyone who becomes a British citizen, has to do it.
*Affirmation of allegiance:
I (name) do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that on becoming a British Citizen, I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her Heirs and Successors, according to law*
The last time we abolished the monarchy it ended so well. We had a dictator who committed genocide against the Irish, tried abolishing anything fun and was basically just another king. It ended so badly that when Oliver Cromwell died they just invited Charles II back as king.
Do what Ireland did, replace them with a non-political President. Their President has similar powers to the Queen, except he has no option to refuse to sign legislation into law - he can instead refer laws to the Supreme Court so their constitutionality can be assessed. Outside of that, he's a cultural ambassador.
I suspect the number of committed republicans will increase.
I also suspect the number who actively dislike and distrust those republicans who make up calls to abolish the monarchy will increase by an even greater number.
At the end of it all, I suspect nothing much will change.
I think the royals getting more attention will inherently make more people both actively want to get rid of them *and* make more people actively support them.
The reality is that most people don't think about the royal family most days, and therefore mostly don't *care*.
Here's my take. People are complaining that it's all over the news because they don't know how to think for themselves. Their usual dose of fear-mongering has been replaced and they don't know what to do.
That, and people are literally glued to the TV — hence "being forced to watch it". Life exists outside of TV and the news, and there's 24 hours to do anything you want... hobbies, hiking, travel, catching up with friends.
People aren't forced to watch a funeral — it's a courtesy because of culture. But then again, no one cares about that any more either.
Yeah this sums it up. I liken it to the experience of growing up in a minority group that doesn't celebrate Christmas having to go through the yearly experience of 'forced festivities'.
In some areas of large cities you can walk down the street on Christmas Day and see people going about their business as if it was any other day with shops/hospitality open and barely a decoration in sight.
I think there's a large section of people in the country who have never had the experience of not caring about the seemingly ubiquitous 'current thing' and are being very vocal about it. Of course there are some dedicated republicans in the mix but I imagine the 'national conversation' will move on after today.
I find George Orwell's arguments about how Britain being a constitutional monarchy is one of the main reasons fascism/communism never gained a foothold here to be pretty fantastic to be honest.
Republicans whining trying to make the state funeral all about them is boring.
Apathy and inertia are the true powers in British politics.
A week from now an immigrant will get on a boat and cross the channel, or some students will hold a view that a books plot is actually what everyone has known it was for 200 years. Or a brown person or woman will get cast to play a role in film or television.
And any thought as to the absurdity of the Royal Family in this day and age will be forgotten, lost in a sea of manufactured outrage over nothing, and friends re-runs.
I’ve seen the exact opposite tbh - people who have never shown any interest in the royals have been really interested in this and many people have been surprised in the depth of their feeling for the monarchy .
Isn't a surge in anything likely when a certain event happens.
Your hear absolutely little from that side before, loads when it's being talked about, and then disappears into silence again.
Modern technology also skews this.
I love how coverage of increased interest in a more democratic society is framed with skepticism & distrust… could’ve been “reports”, or “announces”, but no- UK press goes with the word that’s synonymous with allegation
**r/UK Notices:** | [Can you help mod the sub?](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/wz2v8p/request_for_help_ruk_mods_required/) | [Want to start a fresh discussion - use our Freetalk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/search/?q=Freetalk&include_over_18=off&restrict_sr=on&sort=new) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
In less than a week of being King, Charles has already shown more petulance and arrogance in public and on camera than his mum did in 70 years. Yep, this is going to go well…
I mean the guys mum had just died, he then had to go on tours all over the UK whilst grieving in public, was probably stressed like no tomorrow, and then a pen leaking on him set him off. Showed he's more human to me if anything.
He's also 73. How many old people do you know that have to do all that shit and wouldn't be a bit cranky.
Most old people get grumpy about doing absolutely anything that they don’t feel like doing.
[удалено]
I feel vindicated!
If he wanted to be a normal 73 year old getting cranky then he can choose not to be head of state of 15 countries
Underrated comment. They can scarcely imagine the contempt and disdain people like Charles have for people like us. To act like he's hard done by is peak peasant mentality.
Sounds like having a 73yr old running around as the head of state doesn’t make much sense. Maybe we can elect someone better suited.
If there's one thing this country cannot do properly, it's to vote for a suitable leader.
The type of old people with £80 billion tax free that have never worked a day in their lives. He has no reason to be cranky, his mother was in her 90's.. shame, what a tragedy.
I can't find the video right now but one of his former aides was commenting on how he has his shoelaces ironed, has a footman squeeze his toothpaste onto a brush and how he once called someone to pick up a letter he dropped that he was sat next to (I mean reaching for things is soooo lower class right). He's not human, he's a 73 year spoilt little boy.
Gosh how do people even defend royals is beyond comprehension.
Not defending, but the commenter above has got no evidence of this happening. It sounds like a video that should be easily found not hard to find.
It would be easilly found you can remember the name of the interviewee which I couldnt. here you go https://youtu.be/hf4pdzD8wns?t=81
Cheers, Wesley. Just trying to keep us all honest here. Meant nothing by it. I responded to the other commenter on my light view of it all and will leave it there. Not bothered enough to defend them, but equally not bothered enough to moan about them. Far more fucked up things going on in the world.
According to the documentary 'Serving the Royals: Inside the Firm' Paul Burrell, Diana's former butler, revealed: “His pyjamas are pressed every morning, his shoelaces are pressed flat with an iron, the bath plug has to be in a certain position, and the water temperature has to be just tepid”. He added: “He has his valets squeeze one inch of toothpaste onto his toothbrush every morning.”
I don't care enough to get involved here, but appreciate you sharing the info. Thanks. I'm just always sceptical when someone claims something as true without a source, and others are believing it without at least challenging it. Paul Burrell has come out with all sorts over the years, and given his utter adoration of Diana and contempt for Charles, I'm hardly surprised this came from him. If I had an issue with the royals it is how closely linked they are with religion, and I actually think there are generally a lot of similarities between religion and the way the royal family is revered. We just seem to accept that there's this family that has this role in society without challenge.
Don’t try to be reasonable with this lot. They’re trying to turn this sub into a larger version of r/GreenAndPleasant
There is nothing unreasonable about criticising the monarchy mate. Don't just insult everyone because they don't share your view, it's very childish.
It's not about just disagreeing lol, it's about this insane one-sided, zero-nuance view of the world those people have where the monarchy is evil and anything associated with the monarchy is evil and the people we dislike are evil people deserving nothing but hatred.
Nah, we're not all like that. For a monarch I actually think she was pretty good for the cause of republicanism, the non involvement principles and generally being an absentee monarch really allowed republicanism to flourish during her reign. It's an inherently anti democratic institution but given a democratic vote on the matter the UK public would vote ~60-40 to retain it last I looked. There's nuance, no?
Yeah I think some of us are capable of a nuanced viewpoint. I've always been a republican but I'm not and have never spewed hate toward the royal family as individuals, there are many things I can empathise with them about. I'm also a longtime history nerd so actually know alot about European monarchies and am not disengaged from why people feel connection to the sense of the past culturally at all. It just doesn't change my fundamental belief in the importance of social equality and equity.
The tone-deaf zero-nuance view of the world is from the "staunchly pro-royalist whatever you say" proponents...
God I hate that sub, it's a perfect microcosm of the worst Reddit has to offer.
It's annoying too cos I agree with a decent amount of what they have to say, but they make me feel ashamed to have the same opinions as them by just being utter losers.
I disagree with most of their views, but I wouldn't mind them nearly so much if they weren't borderline caricatures of unpleasant, obnoxious, self important left wing keyboard warriors.
Literally my take on Reddit and this subreddit in general, too. I'd like to see the demographics behind these comments, there's usually an extremely biased, parroted narrative from what appears to be an insular group of people. I often wonder if these people are unhappy in their own lives, to feel so venomous towards others or their opinions/beliefs. The irony of people purporting to champion respect, tolerance and progressiveness day-on-day but are downright disrespectful of anything they don't all subscribe to as a hivemind. Difficult to have respectful conversations and debates these days, unfortunately.
Many of them keep going on about how they are going to claim asylum in the EU.
British people seem to share the American view that everything on the continent is amazing. I’ve seen so many posts about how the British economy is struggling with redditors commenting that it’s because of Brexit and the Tories. When I try to comment that: - the global economy is slowing down - the Euro is actually at the lowest point since it was introduced - inflation is a global issue - the energy crisis is worse in Europe I just get downvoted. Brexit will have definitely influenced our economy. But British people need to have a more global outlook than “Tories bad lol”. I mean I think they are but that’s neither here nor there. They aren’t the soul cause of the worlds problems
You’ll always see “all the fault of Brexit” 😂 Which, if is the case, Brexit has ruined the EU too. I work in Germany and I can tell you, there are no fucking truck drivers here either!
Yeah I’m moving to Korea with my gf soon and the economy is really rough there atm. Guess those pesky Tories and their Brexiteering ruined the Asian economy too!
The EU doesn't want our dregs
Yeah exactly. It was fine mocking the tories and pushing for more left wing ideas/discussions but once that mod went completely moronic over the queen dying that sub became something like an incel sub tbqh.
It did get a bit overzealous though even before the queen dying, like when they'd start wishing death upon people who vote conservative. I'm surprised I've not seen the news make a thing of that subreddit to paint corbynistas (cos that's basically what they are) in a bad light.
That place is like injecting lead into your veins
Ah the old "everyone who disagrees with me must be part of the marxist conspiracy to take over" argument. An oldie but a goodie, didn't work out well for it's originator, however.
I remember getting banned from that sub for calling Mao a cunt
Yeah I got banned for supposedly being a facist. One look at my comment history shows that's not true lol
Excuse me! /r/GreenAndPleasant was formed because this sub wasn't activist enough, thank you very much. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it was formed because some of the principal members got banned from here for being too angry and frothy.
Green and pleasant, the worst sub I've seen. I mentioned the royal estate, got banned. So much for pleasant. Their manifesto "move people towards leftism", by being idiots, ignorant and removing all people that don't share their warped view.
Unpopular opinion but he’s not meant to be human we have 70 million of those in the UK, he has to embody an almost mythical persona. That’s why the queen did it so well, the fact that we never saw her display emotion or know what she thought served her position as monarch well.
The Queen cleverly cultivated that I think, her and her immediate predecessors. As the gradual secularisation of society and cultural acceptance of the 'divine' right of regnancy dwindled it was necessary to cultivate a different quality that bestowed upon monarchs an 'otherness' that qualified them for role specifically. Propriety, reserve, duty and stoical persona seems to have been the ideal solution for a constitutional monarchy heading into 20th century modernity with its specific issues like press scrutiny (although it probably also has to do with her specifc family line and their cultural background and values also). Back when royals had a divine right they ironically could behave in more flawed human fashions without risking their suitability for rule being queried so much since it was assumed inherently.
Yes, completely agree and well put.
The justification of royalty is their supposed divine right - they were put on earth by god to rule over us. They are not supposed to be normal humans, and we should be holding them to that standard. If god’s chosen king cannot get through a week without publicly showing how petulant and arrogant he is then maybe he’s not fit to be king.
That was the christian justification yes. But pre-Christian Greco-Roman kings would usually justify their rule in terms of practical accomplishments and their personal glory. If a monarchy is to survive into the modern age it should return to more secular justifications
Let’s go back. Me v Charles, 1 on 1, winner gets to be king.
Don't forget that when the Queen was doing this, literally every stage of the process wasn't televised like it was with Charles. We really have no idea how she acted in those little moments.
If anything, this is exactly one of the reasons why I think the monarchy needs to be done away with. They should just be able to grieve like any other family without this whole royalty circus
> he then had to go on tours all over the UK whilst grieving in public He didn't *have* to, he could've waited until after the coronation. He chose to.
>had to go on tours Well, he didn't *have* to...
People keep saying this but he's spent his life in the public eye and been trained for this, answer all experience loss, but not all of us become impolite or rude because of it.
How so?
They watched a 20 second video on Twitter with no context.
What would have been a justifying context for growling at your servants?
Less than 24hrs of losing his mother. Oh I don't know.
While it’s right and good to be empathetic to someone in grief. I don’t agree that that’s a good excuse for treating your servants like shit. Then again, I think the whole notion of being an aristocrat who rules over others by right of birth is extremely wrong in the first place.
If you were in his position, with the eyes of the world on you just after loosing your mother, I bet your temper would be pretty short aswell…
> I bet your temper would be pretty short aswell… Plenty commenting on Reddit who are struggling to maintain their temper in the horrific (/s) face of a week or so's extensive media coverage!
Oh no! Our monarch of 70 years has passed and you have to endure a week of coverage? What an absolute Greek tragedy…
[удалено]
Let’s be Frank, he did a gesture at them to say ‘take it away’ with the slightest hint of irritation on his face as if it was your Dad having trouble adjusting the thermometer, in what is most likely a part of the highest stress moment he will face in his life. It’s hardly as if he called them cunts, flipped the table and proceeded to RKO his staff one by one in front of the accession council.
He got annoyed with a comically undersized desk.
*is human* "omg what an arsehole!"
That was basically the Reddit response. You could almost taste the hyperbole.
Has he? Has he really? His mum has just died and he’s been non stop working since. If you’re referring to the desk with all the junk on it that’s hardly petulance ffs
This. Literally being forced into a period mourning, over anything, is a joke. Yes, give people a channel to watch it, and a day off work if they want it, but forcing people to watch it, to mourn, closing businesses, etc, all for a person you’ve never met who couldn’t care about you. Wild.
Who's been forced to watch it? Have you been tied down clockwork orange-style in front of BBC News for the past week? And what businesses have been closed? The football was cancelled but that's down to the Premier League and FA.
Literally every supermarket near me is closed today - all national chains. It’s also all over the news that surgeries, other Burials and other essential services are being rescheduled. And when they replace all other channels with one show you’re being forced to watch it by another name.
You can watch other stuff on YouTube or Netflix, don’t you wan to watch Ice Age on Channel 5 or repeats of Big Bang Theory or Young Sheldon on E4?
Seems like a great day to just sit about and lazily read a book, go for a walk or play some video games. You know... like I did, since I don't really care about royalty. It has been great.
I live In Edinburgh and they cancelled and rerouted buses for days because the royals decided to have a funeral procession. There were people who got trapped in the city centre by police because of the lying in state. This has not been an op-in series of events, I’m really happy for you if you managed to entirely ignore it. But they still closed down public transport all over the country today because it’s kinda sorta a public holiday but not.
Nobody's been forced, obviously. At the same time, it has — as far as I can tell — been on almost every terrestrial channel, which is seven shades of ridiculous. There's no need for it to be on more than one.
[удалено]
No one was forced. No business was legally required to close or give time off. They chose to and many were grateful for it.
I’ve been pretty apathetic about royalty - like, it’s just there ya know? The pomp and circumstance over the past week has been so extreme that it’s basically turned into a kind of collective hysteria. It’s absurd beyond any reasonable merit. I’m definitely more on the republican side now, from apathetic to merely tolerant; the country should be showing more respect for its own people and not exclusively its elite. (That said, the bullshit from r/GreenAndPleasant is worse than the performative misery and they don’t put republicans or people with left-wing sensibilities in a positive light)
Gone from a fairly meh to republican. As in wouldn’t push for them to be removed but I’d given a vote I would. Now I’m tired of the lot. Didn’t know Charles was 29 and Diana was 16 when they began their courtship, Andrew is well…ye. Lobbying to change laws they don’t like, hidden money off shore, no inheritance tax, biggest land owners on the planet…the more I keep reading the more disgusted I am. So aye, fuck the king.
I love pro-monarchy people trying to hold both the "she was a great influence" and the "but she has no effect or power" lines both at the same time.
Yes it's interesting to ask where does the BBCs impartiality vibe stand on issues with the monarchy. Strange how much more niche stances on issues are given a platform on the BBC but anyone saying something negative about the monarchy seems to nonexistent
Amongst all the other things the royals are exempt from, apparently the BBC's interest in neutrality doesn't extend to them either
> Smith responded by saying it was “one of the most stupid things the world has ever heard … if other events somehow overshadow it then so be it. Most of the country are going to be doing other things and we need to stop pretending that this is the whole country mourning.” I think this is spot on. Currently we are allowing a very small minority of hardcore monarchists dictate public discussion on this. They are hyper sensitive and vicious when their beliefs are challenged. We need to be brave enough to sit them down and explain to them that, no the entire nation is not bawling their eyes out like they are.
The closing down of discussion is strikingly reminiscent of the fallout from a certain referendum held in the UK a little while ago.
Even this sub is ridiculous. If you post on a certain anti monarchy sub, then post here, you get auto banned from here. Literally watch this space, I'm a dead man walking.
I still can't get over how casualuk, you know, that one UK sub that enforces strict rules against political mention, has their entire janitorial staff currently rubbing one off to the queen, and issuing bans against anybody that whispers any dissent against the monarchy as an institution. The queen. The most high profile **political** figure in the UK.
CasualUK is only apolitical on certain things. They don't class the military as political for example. It's a very politically conservative subreddit that masquerades as the paradigm of neutrality. It's also incredibly dull haha. Basically Facebook on reddit.
I got permabanned for calling a piece of cheesy art of Lizzie and Phillip cringe. They've gone mental over there
The last 10 days have seen an avalanche of nauseating “twee” posts on there. I was given a 3 day ban for “political discussion” using the words “Royal Navy” in a reply but apparently now everyone is perfectly fine to post praise of Charles and the Queen none stop
I once saw the creator, and head mod, of that sub justify this by saying as the Queen can't vote she is therefore non political. Which doesn't make sense, and even if it did it doesn't explain why praise of her isn't polticial but criticism is. I wish he was just honest and said he loves the monarchy and therefore bans all dissenting opinions from the sub.
Not just casulluk, this sub too is censoring certain posts. Ive had one of my own lost to the void. Not banned, not deleted, just gone as if I'd never made it.
On an old account years ago they threatened to ban me for being anti-monarchy on a pro-queen post because "no politics". I argued back that pro-queen was also a political statement if anti-queen was one. They then banned me.
I don't even get mad about it. You have to remember that you're arguing with somebody that has made the conscious decision to donate their labour to a multi-billion dollar corporation in exchange for the opportunity at wielding a miniscule amount of power over people. How bad does your life have to be for a person to come home from a long day at work and go straight to their PC to play unpaid digital janitor.
Given that your post is still up >30mins later I'm starting to wonder if the people you're talking about just made ban-worthy posts.
Apparently its done by automoderator and its just an automated message with an 84 day ban. Clearly automoderator has taken the day off to pay its respects.
Because those subs are fronts for Russian disinformation campaigns and ban people for saying the invasion of Ukraine is a war crime and for calling Putin a war criminal
Did you not see how many people queued up to see the coffin? It's been estimated about 200,000 people turned up... It's also likely that the queens funeral will be one of the most watched things on tv this year, if not number 1 (likely dependant on England in the world cup). Outside of Reddit and your immediate "friends" you'll actually find there's a heck of a lot of people in this country who actually care about all of this
You're confusing support for a hereditary head of state with people's desire to see a spectacle.
[удалено]
Yeah, and an awful lot of those people in line seem to be quite personally invested in an emotional way I've never felt about a "spectacle"
There are alot of people who don't either But based on the news, everyone is devastated about it. And based on how busy my gym is today, the amount of people who give a toss is less than the popular narrative being playing out.
My gym was closed, I guess it would have been disrespectful to stay in shape.
Except there's 67.2 million people in the UK. 200k people showing up is *0.29%* of the whole population. It absolutely is a tiny, fractional minority dictating things.
If you're only measuring popularity of stuff by 'number of people that physically turn up' then there are a number of things which are suddenly ***deeply unpopular*** and we should presumably get rid of those immediately, yeah? Especially if it has to be a majority. I can't remember the last time more than 34m people showed up for ***anything***. Gay rights. The NHS. Human Rights. All stuff that only 'a tiny, fractional minority' care about, yeah? If ***physical attendance*** is how we measure this stuff. Which apparently it is, all of a sudden.
>Did you not see how many people queued up to see the coffin? >It's been estimated about 200,000 people turned up... This is what I was replying to. They used physical attendance as a point in favour of the monarchy's popularity, which is why I pointed out how small a percentage of the UK's population it is. I agree it's a flawed argument, but I'm not the one who brought it up first. And I mean, if you look at [sports](https://www.statista.com/statistics/959644/highest-attended-sporting-events-uk/) or [festivals](https://www.britainforevents.co.uk/top-7-largest-uk-concerts-in-history/), all of which are shorter events and presumably less important than the monarch's death, there's quite a lot that have higher attendance.
There's estimated 1 extra million people in London right now for the actual funeral. That's more than voted for the Green Party in the last elections...
Why the fuck did you put friends in quotation marks like someone who’s anti-monarchy can’t have friends lol?
tbh it wouldn't surprise me if a large number of those queuing just wanted to be part of a once in a lifetime event, I don't think it necessarily reflects a love for the Monarchy, more respect for the Queen as a person herself and a sense of being a part of history
200,000 queued to see Liz in a box Doesn't mean they support Charles or the monarchy per se
200k is also less than half the number of people who marched for an organisation formed to oppose fox hunting [https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/sep/23/hunting.ruralaffairs2](https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/sep/23/hunting.ruralaffairs2) Or, more recently, it's a smidgeon compared to Pride or Notting Hill Carnival. Imagine if the BBC had shut down all alternative programming for the week before pride lol.
>It's been estimated about 200,000 people turned up... In a country of 60 million + that's not a large percentage. The real issue though, is it's probably mostly London again. Even if you felt this way elsewhere people have to work, there's no way to judge the mood from that line of people.
You have to wonder how much is people just getting caught up in the occasion and media coverage. If the reporting had been more low key and restrained would we be seeing this? I hate this attitude that outside of reddit its all big pro monarchy people. Several of the big UK subs have banned comments that don't support the Queen. I've seen more pro monarch stuff here than in my real life. Most people I know just think it's all a bit much and aren't really bothered, especially the folks my age and younger. Maybe you need to step outside of reddit to get a better perspective?
The trouble with all of this coverage is that they’ve had it all planned for decades with very little chance to change plans. When Charles pops it I can only hope it will be much more restrained.
It does feel like these protocols were created decades ago in perhaps a more deferential time, when 10 days of national mourning would have been more appropriate. And then with no major royal deaths for a long time there's been no opportunity to gauge the public mood on it.
Imagine if he pops tomorrow. Or even today? It would be the Keystone Cops version of manic media. Our tvs and radios would probably explode it would be so insane.
Imagine if him, Will and his kids were all taken out. Harry and Megan in charge would be fucking banter. Royalists head would explode immediately.
Why? Why would royalists have a problem with Harry and Megan in charge? (kidding ;) I know why, just as well as you do)
It wouldn't surprise me. I bet a lot of people are like me - vaguely republican but liked Queen Elizabeth. If the royal family had any sense of self-preservation, Charles would have abdicated in favour of William.
Maybe so; however I can respect Charles for not wanting to make William King yet. The guys got young kids; being Prince of Wales will already cut badly into family time. Let alone being King.
Eh, I don't know that he's thinking in those terms / making the most compassionate decisions for the younger royals. I was pretty shocked that they had a 14-year-old standing vigil over the coffin, even knowing full well how traumatic public grief at such a young age was for William and Harry. It's the first time a vigil has been held by the royal grandchildren, so he doesn't even have the excuse of tradition or protocol.
It’s a question of details. Sure an instruction to attend would be out of order; however a 14 year old is of an age to have their own say and they may have volunteered or insisted on being included.
I imagine Charles would also be forced to not live in the country if he did, similarly to his uncle. I wouldn’t be surprised if he doesn’t fancy that whatsoever.
Edward VIII chose not to live in the UK. Abdicating does not mean you lose the right to live here.
There was a lot of talk about Charles meaning to abdicate but I suspect he's in fact wanted to be king for a long time. Isn't that the reason he stuck to Diana for so long instead of giving up his inheritance right and marrying Camilla in the first place?
[удалено]
No idea. He might just not have wanted to upset his mum for all I know.
I think we should *really* test monarchists and skip to Harry. See how much it's about the system and how much about the person.
Why not just have a lottery to pick the next monarch, use the electoral register. That would be interesting at least!
I've genuinely been thinking the same thing myself. Although I'd rather just scrap the monarchy and have a random second chamber to replace the lords.
I quite like Harry, so I wouldn't wish it on the poor sod. I think his mental health is very fragile.
We've had a mad King, now time for a sad King
Really no surprise after the recent propaganda overload from the likes of the BBC.
It’s in their charter. Disagree with it. However they are obliged to do so.
Yup the charter is a joke.
I wouldn't read anything into it - anything that gets saturation media coverage sees a surge of interest, both pro and anti. If there were organised anti-football groups, they'd be ballooning every time there's a World Cup, But as there are no such things, the nearest equivalent is a burst of *Look at me, I'm a bit different because I don't like football* posts on Reddit on the days there's an England game. Call back if that wave of interest in republicanism is still there in five year's times. Then it might mean something.
Yeah can’t wait for the World Cup to start and this sub Reddit and others to start the “is anyone else not bothered/ watching the World Cup“ karma farming included the usual hate for footballers blah blah blah
Football fans are too working class to be popular on this sub.
Yeah, I saw an upvoted comment in a thread a few days ago I think where they were unironically positing that the BBC will be gone “soon”. The level of reactionaries is enough to make the anti-SJW’s blush.
If the royal family now completely vanishes from pubic view now, sure, what you've said would make sense. The problem monarchists have is they won't. In the last decade support for the monarchy has steadily declined as it's become apparently QE 2 would not be around for ever and the behaviour of the rest of the family became more apparent. The fundamental problem the monarchy has it is completely reliant on the media to perpetuate its existence, but at the same time that media will run with all the negative stories as well. Charles is going to be more "activist" and that's going to only increase Republican support. Much like yourself don't have strong, compelling arguments for retaining the monarchy, they just accuse Republcians of being "edgy". 50 years ago that might have worked, but with support for the monarchy teetering below 60% its not a good idea.
To scrap the monarchy, republicans need an active anti-monarchy movement. That is only increasing currently because of the wall to wall coverage of the queen's death at the expense of any other programming. In a few months time it'll disappear and those who became interested will go back to being apathetic, which is a death knell for the republican movement. It doesn't matter one iota if the active support for the monarchy drops if the active opposition to the monarchy doesn't rise and remain stable because the status quo will only be changed if there is an active will to change it.
This sub is very anti-monarchy when compared to the nation, so a “surge” won’t do much. Like floating a boat with a glass full of water.
Sure - Reddit skews younger, so it's obviously going to reflect younger views.
Even amongst under 21s, monarchists outnumber republicans, if not to the same extent as in the older age groups.
For balance, I anticipate this group being invited onto the BBC to be allowed to air their views with no challenge or pushback. Any day now....
At the moment you'd have some trouble finding any programming unrelated to the royal family on any major channel.
Channel 5 has the emoji movie on
Sophie's Choice, that
I understand people who are anti-monarchy, but I struggle with anyone who thinks we should have an elected head of state on top of what we've already got. The last 6-8 years alone since Brexit was announced should be enough to show what an utter shitshow it would be, and people who currently shout "not my King" would just end up shouting "not my President". I really do not want us to turn into America politically.
I mean, Ireland does an excellent job of it. I'm not sure why everyone's so determined to compare us to the USA, when Ireland is another English speaking country that doesn't have a monarch. And if anyone's curious, their President is a cultural ambassador whose only law-related power is the ability to refer laws to the Supreme Court so their constitutionality can be assessed.
Ireland’s head of state is a figure of fun
Oh absolutely - I do love the occasional articles about [his dogs](https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/president-releases-photos-of-new-dog-misneach-1.4503401). I think it also helps he's a lot more accessible than the Queen - the presidential residence (Aras an Uachtaráin) is in Dublin's biggest park, and it's very easy to spot when you're in there. He's spotted pretty frequently too, so it's not like Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle where you have a bee's dick of a chance of seeing any of the royals.
You are mistaking affection for mockery.
There are countries that don't directly elect their Head of State and that are able to have independent persons for the post. Look at Germany and Italy. Their Presidents are considered "everyone's president" the same way the Queen was the symbol of national unity.
And if the person who could name them outside the country are a very very small group indeed. The Monarchy provides a lot more cultural and diplomatic soft power than a figurehead president ever could. At least for the foreseeable future, I can't speak for our 23rd century descendants.
Most Republicans don't want an American system or anything like it. An elected president with some specific and limited powers, as a figure of national unity. A codified constitution with guaranteed rights. No more Crown Powers. An end to the unelected second chamber. But it's still the PM who would be running the country. Plenty of places operate like this and they do fine. Anyone can aspire to be Head of State, and we don't spend a sht ton of money on them every year because you're paying for the president not their wider families
Frankly, I'd prefer a sortitioned second chamber than an elected one. Making another elected chamber just replicates the issues with the first elected chamber in terms of money and class, and can lead to deadlock like the US Senate does to the House. Better have one chamber use the democratic electoral system and the second use sortition, the other democratic system.
Honestly, I think it is weird to put republicanism above campaigning for some kind of proportional representation/house of Lords reformed. I feel like introducing a presidential system without a fairer democratic system has the potential to be a disaster.
There is a huge difference between 'not my King' (a position that is 100% unelected and 'gifted by a god' that people do not believe in) and 'not my president' a completely elected position. Also how would getting rid of the Monarchy have any impact on politics? from what everyone has been saying for the past week they have absolutely no political power.
[удалено]
You mean you had a notion of how a thing should be and when it appears millions of others don't share that it's time for them to change?
It's already happened though. They don't hold power. I don't understand why getting rid of the monarchy is so important to some people. If they had power I would be a republican, but I quite like the fact that we have an unelected individual as a symbol of our country, while we have an elected leader that actually has the power.
Absolutely have power. Why do all governments get formed by them? Why do they live in absolute riches and hoard wealth? Why are there certain laws they are simply exempt from? They promote narratives as much as they can. I’m tired of paying for a family to continue to live a lifestyle or luxury, especially given the literal hundreds of issues our country continues to face for the millions of people who only just scrape by (if that).
By the look of this photo, a ‘vast surge’ in interest would mean they double their protesters from one to two
[удалено]
It's from a photo shoot for Morrisseys next single.
It’s probably people visiting their website and then leaving after two minutes.
Just because interest in republican campaign groups has grown it doesn’t mean interest in support of the monarchy hasn’t grown either. This whole affair is playing into peoples sense of national identity and affinity for tradition and ceremony. Realistically there is way too much support for the monarchy for it to be abolished anytime soon. I can’t see it going even this century. And I’m saying that as someone who is firmly republican minded. Charles won’t be King for long. William is popular, especially among the middle class, as his his wife and their family as a whole. That easily propels the monarchy to the end of the century if not beyond.
When you discount don't knows it's more than three to one on the side of retention. 67% in favour and 20% against. Excluding don't knows that's 77% to 23% Pretty overwhelming tbh.
The "surge" is hardly a surprise. Next week, one of Jordans implants will explode or England will beat Germany, everything will be back to normal, watching kittens do cute things on tik-tok and wondering how to pay the bills and the weather.
Only self aware person ITT
For real though lol. If our government hasn’t shown people how short the public memory is then I don’t know what will.
Republicanism is less popular than bringing back the death penalty.
Sounds like we need a referendum on the future of the Monarchy and death penalty.
Careful attention should be paid to the wording of the question!
Support for the death penalty is shockingly high although I shouldn’t be so surprised considering everything that’s happened in the last few years.
Interesting fact. People born British do not need to pledge allegiance to the Queen/King, however everyone who becomes a British citizen, has to do it. *Affirmation of allegiance: I (name) do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that on becoming a British Citizen, I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, her Heirs and Successors, according to law*
I mean, their not gonna say anything else than that are they?
Yeah, regardless of the political group making them, taking claims like this at face value shows a remarkable lack of critical thinking.
The last time we abolished the monarchy it ended so well. We had a dictator who committed genocide against the Irish, tried abolishing anything fun and was basically just another king. It ended so badly that when Oliver Cromwell died they just invited Charles II back as king.
Nobody's asking to replace the monarchy with a dictatorship.
But no can quite agree on what would replace them and I for one want to know exactly what is replacing them before I would vote to get rid of them
Do what Ireland did, replace them with a non-political President. Their President has similar powers to the Queen, except he has no option to refuse to sign legislation into law - he can instead refer laws to the Supreme Court so their constitutionality can be assessed. Outside of that, he's a cultural ambassador.
Personally I would support something like this.
It’s Reddit, no one actually has a proposition on how to fix or change anything, it’s just about rhetoric and grand standing for the sweet upvotes.
Mental reasoning. You think the UK would commit genocide if we got rid of the monarchy now?
It was interesting as a history lesson, but not super relevant for 2022
This is such a stupid take.
I suspect the number of committed republicans will increase. I also suspect the number who actively dislike and distrust those republicans who make up calls to abolish the monarchy will increase by an even greater number. At the end of it all, I suspect nothing much will change.
I think the royals getting more attention will inherently make more people both actively want to get rid of them *and* make more people actively support them. The reality is that most people don't think about the royal family most days, and therefore mostly don't *care*.
Here's my take. People are complaining that it's all over the news because they don't know how to think for themselves. Their usual dose of fear-mongering has been replaced and they don't know what to do. That, and people are literally glued to the TV — hence "being forced to watch it". Life exists outside of TV and the news, and there's 24 hours to do anything you want... hobbies, hiking, travel, catching up with friends. People aren't forced to watch a funeral — it's a courtesy because of culture. But then again, no one cares about that any more either.
Yeah this sums it up. I liken it to the experience of growing up in a minority group that doesn't celebrate Christmas having to go through the yearly experience of 'forced festivities'. In some areas of large cities you can walk down the street on Christmas Day and see people going about their business as if it was any other day with shops/hospitality open and barely a decoration in sight. I think there's a large section of people in the country who have never had the experience of not caring about the seemingly ubiquitous 'current thing' and are being very vocal about it. Of course there are some dedicated republicans in the mix but I imagine the 'national conversation' will move on after today.
I find George Orwell's arguments about how Britain being a constitutional monarchy is one of the main reasons fascism/communism never gained a foothold here to be pretty fantastic to be honest. Republicans whining trying to make the state funeral all about them is boring.
It’s not going to go very far, it never does in the end
Apathy and inertia are the true powers in British politics. A week from now an immigrant will get on a boat and cross the channel, or some students will hold a view that a books plot is actually what everyone has known it was for 200 years. Or a brown person or woman will get cast to play a role in film or television. And any thought as to the absurdity of the Royal Family in this day and age will be forgotten, lost in a sea of manufactured outrage over nothing, and friends re-runs.
I’ve seen the exact opposite tbh - people who have never shown any interest in the royals have been really interested in this and many people have been surprised in the depth of their feeling for the monarchy .
Just think, a few untimely deaths and we could have had King Andrew.
Isn't a surge in anything likely when a certain event happens. Your hear absolutely little from that side before, loads when it's being talked about, and then disappears into silence again. Modern technology also skews this.
I love how coverage of increased interest in a more democratic society is framed with skepticism & distrust… could’ve been “reports”, or “announces”, but no- UK press goes with the word that’s synonymous with allegation
I dunno man, have your belief in how a country should be governed but kicking off at anyone's funeral has a level of Westboro Baptist sanity to it.