Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The future of the British monarchy after QE?

Options
13

Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    What a load of rubbish. If the people do decide to abolish the monarchy, they will have also get to decide the head of state, possibly a President for fixed terms. At the moment, the people have no say in who the head of state is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 33,132 ✭✭✭✭NIMAN


    For someone who didn't want the role in the first place, she bloody hung on to it tightly rather than pass it to her son.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,344 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    She is dying now slowly. Medical care, the best will be given but that won't change it. Her mother dying at 105 won't change that.


    Will she make Christmas?

    The death pallor is there.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I wouldn't wish anybody's mind goes to mush. I appreciate you're trying to be controversial.

    I've no beef with the British Queen.



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,344 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    I don't have a problem with her but it's fairly obvious the rate she has declined in the last 11 months, even the way she walks, her face, colour etc, her shoulders disappearing, a wasting away.


    I've no doubt if she did not have whatever is carrying her, that she could have gone on for years more.

    It's not as if people haven't seen someone decline or die before, its obvious.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 468 ✭✭Shao Kahn


    Nah, I just find them an amusing oddity. That's all really.

    Edinburgh was like someone plucked from a bygone era. Walking around in a daze, pretending he was still in the Victorian times. Always had a good chuckle at his antics. The fact that most of them are completely oblivious to how they come across, is pretty funny.

    There is all sorts of privilege in this world, of course, but monarchy must be one of the most surreal examples.

    "Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives, and it puts itself into our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." (John Wayne)



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,817 ✭✭✭NickNickleby


    Have to say, I don't follow it closely enough to know the stats, so my opinion is based largely on what I read/hear/see in the media. That 41% seems surprisingly high, but I wouldn't be putting my money on it becoming something. If I remember it correctly, young people were predominantly pro-Remain, and if they'd got off their arses they'd have saved their country a lot of heartache.

    I'd say you're bang on with the Camilla thing, but can't imagine he'd be so daft. I read beyond your post and saw someone saying that the general public probably see the Charles/Diana/Camilla thing as the three of them being victims of the establishment. Thinking back to the time of her death, I don't recall a huge anti-Charles sentiment. So, its his to lose, so to speak.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,070 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    The royals were probably at one of their lowest ebbs with the public at the time Diana died. Such was the demand they had to make a public appearance even though they didn't seem to want to. There was huge anger with Charles over how she was treated after too. The British are silly about Diana and I don't see that diminishing.

    With the queen gone, I think all bets will be off with the public. The whole Andrew debacle could yet do serious damage.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    You may be spot-on there.

    A work colleague of mine spent 11 years living & working in the United States of America.

    His work took him across the country,spending months at a time in different states.

    His accounts of the stark poverty he encountered once off the countrys main-streets really opened my eyes.

    Yet,one of the most ingrained notions the poverty stricken American possesses,is the CERTAINTY that the Million Dollar chip is just around the corner.

    Very few of the legions of poor,forgotten,often elderly Americans would ever countenance tinkering with the American Dream,for them the Freedom to be poor over rides the reality of being poor,and woe betide anybody who suggests Communist **** such as Social Welfare or Universal Medical care.

    Proud "Veterans" living in Tent Cities around Los Angeles,Las Vegas,or even Washington D.C would fight tenaciously against such Socialist ideas.

    So too,it is with the British Monarchy..."Dieu et Mon Droit" 😁


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,817 ✭✭✭NickNickleby


    I saw that as extreme feelings for Diana, and a suspicion of the Royal Family, which I believed was more directed at the Queen and 'establishment' Royals, rather then specifically Charles. Certainly you're right that the Queen IS the Royal Family right now, and has an image of calm and above petty squabbles, and that obviously goes down well. To a certain extent I think the British public will sympathise with her 'predicament' vis-a-vis Andrew, and Harry and Meghan. But I still think Charles will do well, and as I described them , the 'golden couple' will reinforce the fairy tale royalty that will go down well.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 67,070 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    I wouldn't be too hopeful given the family propensity for scandal and no little deviance.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,817 ✭✭✭NickNickleby


    Hahaha, you're not wrong there. But I think they've enough teflon coating to protect themselves. I think the British view the the Royal Family the same way some here view the Irish Catholic Church - a fine institution with a few bad apples.



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,070 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    The 'view' of the church changed very quickly here and their status/power as a consequence.



  • Registered Users Posts: 7,542 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    She can't abdicate in favour of "Wills", the line of sucession is written into law. Only way that could happy if Charles abdicates after his mother does.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,703 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Not sure if it will have any significance in Scotland (who have talking the question for a while now) or NI but in other commonwealth countries where she was nominally the head of state you could see some movement



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,703 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    For you it maybe a chuckle but let me tell you as someone who had a family member losing some faculties before death it is anything but funny



  • Administrators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 75,559 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Beasty


    I think there should be a new national anthem. Camilla should change her name to Caroline and then the Neil Diamond song should be adopted😀



  • Registered Users Posts: 468 ✭✭Shao Kahn


    As have I.

    And they would constantly laugh about it too. Depends on the person involved.

    Some people are capable of seeing the humorous side of illness and old age.

    "Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives, and it puts itself into our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." (John Wayne)



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,703 ✭✭✭✭martingriff


    Good for you but I can say it my case it was far from a chuckling one

    Post edited by martingriff on


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    This seems to be more than a sore back, she has been unwell for few weeks. She couldn't go to Northern Ireland for the do Micky D turned down.

    Probably still heart broken at the hubby passing not so long ago too. That can age people quite quickly at that age.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,817 ✭✭✭NickNickleby


    that's true, but they're still here. They still have a voice, and must still have tacit support in the country, else how would they survive? So, I suspect the British Royal Family will similarly survive. these institutions are greater than the sum of their parts.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It will be a slimmed down Monarchy which Charles at the helm. Camilla is a fantastic asset. The British people have taken to her slowly but I think she is well liked now. I also think the scales are being removed from many yes regarding the "poor Diana" narrative.

    There is no love lost between him and Andrew so it will be interesting to see how things play out there. He will no longer have the protection of his mam.

    Although Beatrice and Eugenie are valued and close to their extended family I think. In order to be kind to them there won't be a complete ostracisation of Andrew in my opinion.

    The Queen will pass before the year is out or early next year. She looked great after Philip died (funny that....) and seemed in good form. Time has finally catched up with her.

    She is part of the fabric of British society in a way the other Royals aren't. She has been a constant presence in the lives of many. I think Liz will be a massive loss to them.

    Charles won't have the same long life but I'd be very surprised if he abdicated. William will take the throne in 10/15 years.

    Edward, Sophie and Louise will have a more active role and that will be the extent. William's 2 youngest will be encouraged to have as regular a life as is possible and to have jobs.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Rawr


    I can easily imagine her death to be a shock to everyone's system, not to mention Britain. The nearest comparison of what I think we can expect is reaction to when Queen Victoria died. She's been around so long that it is enough to know that when you talk about The Queen, it's automatically her and not some other monarch.

    That's going to be a weird adjustment where the world will have a King Charles...although my gut tells me that there's little chance of him also being simply known as The King. He won't be around long enough, and for so long he's been Prince Charles.



  • Registered Users Posts: 468 ✭✭Shao Kahn


    I think some other bunch of people in the UK should declare themselves as the new British monarchy.

    Richard Branson or someone perhaps. Just build a palace, and a new set of crown jewels. Completely usurp the Germans over in buckingham.

    What are they gonna do? Behead them for treason? lol

    They have no power, anyone could walk around with a crown and call themselves king or queen.

    "Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives, and it puts itself into our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday." (John Wayne)



  • Registered Users Posts: 67,070 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Well basically that is how it begins.

    There are some who believe in 'blue or royal' blood.

    My partner tells me that Elizabeth believes fully in 'the divine right of Kings(Queens)' and that is why she hasn't abdicated the throne for Charles.

    Don't know if that is true and haven't the will or desire to check, but it is even mad to countenance that such nonsense exists.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,429 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr




  • Registered Users Posts: 67,070 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith

    Her official title timberrr ^ 'jaysus' as right. Mad to think there are people who believe that stuff, worse than the Roman Catholics.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,462 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I was fairly lukewarm about the monarchy. I love reading history and thought it was somewhat nice that this piece of historical traditional had endured here. The Prince Andrew scandal just brought home the fact that it's an abomination in this day and age. We should have the right to choose the head of state and some cabal of inbred wretches just isn't good enough for a modern democracy.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,429 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    You said

    "My partner tells me that Elizabeth believes fully in 'the divine right of Kings(Queens)' and that is why she hasn't abdicated the throne for Charles."


    Did she write that above herself?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 67,070 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    I have no idea Timberrr.

    If you call yourself thon title though, is it hard to believe she might have a smidgin of belief in the old concept?

    It did exist you know, the belief...people genuinely believed in that tosh. At the end of the day, this whole set - the monarchy - feel entitled to be what they are, by dint of being born into it. There ain't no other entrance exam.



Advertisement