141–150 of 553 posts
Rest in peace. 99 isn't a bad age to go, what a life he had.
Narrowly missed getting a telegram from his wife
I believe my grandmother waited around for this, at the end. She had never been particularly interested in the monarchy, I’d thought, but when she got older and had trouble reading I noticed that among her large print gardening books were a couple on the monarchy.
As I can't be the only one curious, the South Pacific tribe that deified him plan to worship Charles now. To me, signifying that they are doing it for the publicity now. https://nypost.com/2021/02/27/islanders-who-call-prince-phil...
I wasn't part of the curious, and I don't know where/when defiance comes into the story but... There's enough in this article to make me curious. It feels a little mean to assume "only for publicity" without hearing some of these people commenting on it themselves. “ One of the oarsmen taking them ashore was a chap from Tanna called Chief Jack,” former Buckingham Palace spokesman Dickie Arbiter recalled to The Post.…
I think you misread "deified" (with the extra i, meaning "To worship or revere as a god"). I did too the first time
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It should be noted that the 'staying out of politics' is a public phenomenon. In her weekly meeting with the Prime Minister, The Queen makes her political stance well known (that is the entire point of the meeting).
She's worked with 14 prime ministers, starting with Winston Churchill and going downhill from there. She might know a thing or two.
Because Prince Charles is heir to the throne (and has been portrayed more negatively in the news media than any other living person), some in the HN community may be surprised to know that he wrote a book on philosophy . https://www.amazon.com/Harmony-New-Way-Looking-World/dp/0061... I found the book to be astonishingly good. It takes a design approach to Platonism and western esotericism. It goes deep into "sacred g…
I can sit and name persons more negatively treated for hours and not run out of names.
EDIT: Why is my comment collapsed? Genuine question, don't know how this works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's obviously not a social fiction, regardless of what you may think about monarchy in general. They have power because they inherited it from someone that conquered it. Just like people may inherit companies and fortunes.
Not at all in the case of Elizabeth II. She holds the throne because parliament gave it to her ancestor, George I, to avoid a Catholic inheriting the throne.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An interesting perspective I've heard is that she should have been more political in a few extreme cases. She is the head of state and her actual job should be to bring left and right together in the very controversial, almost unsolvable issues, and get them sorted out. She should really be like a couples therapist for political leaders. She never did this. She always stayed out of politics.
It should be noted that the 'staying out of politics' is a public phenomenon. In her weekly meeting with the Prime Minister, The Queen makes her political stance well known (that is the entire point of the meeting).
Taken from a flagged comment below: “If you stay here much longer, you’ll all be slitty-eyed.” (to British students in China, during the 1986 state visit)
Relevant with all the Asian hate going on recently.
It wasn't that long ago he recovered from an infection [1]. And I remember reading he is only a few more months from 100 years old!. Spending his life serving the country. Rest In Peace [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-56172496
More like spending his life having the country serve him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The biggest impact is that all TV and radio shows are cancelled for the forseeable. Will be interesting how it's dealt with due to covid. Will be especially interesting in Northern Ireland, which is currently inflames because of the fallout from a funeral for a republican figure which had many people attending it in breach of lockdown rules, but with no police action (which, combined with Boris's Border, has led to a…
Eh? I'm watching TV in the UK right now. Nothing is cancelled.
Rest in peace! I have always felt strongly against monarchy. Especially against the British royal family, more so as I am an Indian. They never apologized for any of the massacres (Jallianwala is just one example) or pogroms committed at their behest and in their name. I do believe they are a disgusting symbol of colonialism, racism, subjugation. It is very disturbing that a good part of the world and an entire natio…
I think it’s interesting that you’d blame this family for the horrors of colonialism. They haven’t had a say in British policy for around 2 centuries. Although the monarch meets the Prime Minister every week, they cannot tell the PM what to do, unless it affects the royal family personally. The PM listens to what they have to say but charts their own course. If you’re looking for someone to blame, Churchill deserves…
From 'bidirectional' above :
It should be noted that the 'staying out of politics' is
a public phenomenon. In her weekly meeting with the Prime
Minister, The Queen makes her political stance well known
(that is the entire point of the meeting).[1]
While you say:
They haven’t had a say in British policy for around 2 centuries.
Although the monarch meets the Prime Minister every week, they
cannot tell the PM what to do, unless it affects the royal
family personally. The PM listens to what they have to say but
charts their own course.
One would think her influence particularly would have gone unquestioned to a larger degree, by the PM or politicians & their constituencies in general, in that era - when the royal family enjoyed far greater popularity than it does now.
So the OP isn't too far off the mark to assume they deserve ample blame.