Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Queen Elizabeth II has died

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: Queen Elizabeth II has died

#301

Post by ithinkso »

mattlondon wrote: post #131

Time to end on a high? Shall we just abandon this whole monarchy thing and time to flip over to a republic and leave the much revered queen as the last ever monarch of the UK? Seems like Scotland is going to go independent, and if Scotland do Wales will only be a matter of time so may as well just can it now?

I think that when people see the world 'monarchy' they still have the vision and ideas of monarchies from medival ages. Modern european monarchies that are still around are nothing but and, to be honest, I have no idea what would have changed really if they were no longer here

Re: Queen Elizabeth II has died

#302

Post by MichaelCollins »

PaulHoule wrote: post #184
dijit wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's understandable, she's been a constant vague presence for a lot of British people. It feels like a minor part of our personal history died. I definitely feel saddened, even if I don't have a connection with royalty.

She's also been a moral authority. She avoided the soap opera situations that have dogged the rest of the moral family and frequently she's shown leadership. In WWII she trained as a mechanic so she could do something tangible to support the war effort.

> the soap opera situations that have dogged the rest of the [royal] family

"Soap opera situations" seems like a gentle way to put it. Several of her family members have been accused of serious crimes, and associated with some very nasty people. For years they were shielded by their association with her.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II has died

#303

Post by origin_path »

Emma_Goldman wrote: post #240

I realise she has just died and it's unbecoming to do anything but laud the person, but this is just moral obsequiousness. She claims fealty by right of blood, reigned as the crown of an extraordinarily cruel empire, and frequently interceded in the democratic government of Britain to protect her private interests.

Given that most empires in history were pretty darn cruel, you might have to justify the idea that the British Empire was extraordinarily cruel, especially given that the Queen only reigned in its last years and that many of the former members of the Empire chose to stay on as part of the Commonwealth. Also the British Empire is unique (AFAIK?) in having wound itself up more or less peacefully at the end, rather than needing to be destroyed by a massive rebellion or war - the usual way empires usually die (well, except for the pesky Americas of course... but that was a bit before Liz's time!)

Re: Queen Elizabeth II has died

#305

Post by Waterluvian »

gwbas1c wrote: post #263
mattlondon wrote: post #131

Time to end on a high? Shall we just abandon this whole monarchy thing and time to flip over to a republic and leave the much revered queen as the last ever monarch of the UK? Seems like Scotland is going to go independent, and if Scotland do Wales will only be a matter of time so may as well just can it now?

As an American, I kind of envy the fact that there's a referee who can step in when needed. She stepped into Australia's government shut down and fired the whole government in the 1970s during a government shutdown. It works because she receives extensive training to be apolitical. (And if she is political, there are repercussions.)

There isn’t. If the Queen ever steps in, it’s immediately a constitutional crisis that threatens the entire legitimacy of our democracy. Her role has been purely ceremonial for the longest time.

At least this is true for Canada. I have to imagine it’s very similar for the rest of the Commonwealth. Every instance of involvement that wasn’t ceremonial has been doing precisely what the Prime Minister has requested of her via the Governor General, such as dissolving parliament. Which I guess makes that ceremonial too.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II has died

#306

Post by erehweb »

voisin wrote: post #266
Nursie wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently, when I was little, I got excited one Christmas when the Queen’s speech was on tv, because I thought it was my Grandmother… I used to take comfort in the idea that all things pass in time, now not so much. Probably because I realised that includes everyone I love, and myself! I’ve no great love for the monarchy, but this is certainly the end of an era in British public life and likely in UK international r…

> I can’t see the commonwealth nations welcoming King Charles as their new head of state. Well this is precisely what is about to happen. There may be some hand wringing articles in major newspapers about whether the Royal head of state is still relevant, appropriate, blah blah blah, but there is approximately zero chance that anything will change in reaction to this news.

You may speak too soon. From https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/08/queen-death-...

"In many [Commonwealth countries] constitutions state that the Queen, specifically, is the head of state. In these countries, constitutions will need to be amended to refer to her successor. In countries such as Jamaica, where there is a strong independence movement, and Belize, these constitutional changes will also require a referendum, according to Commonwealth experts. This is expected to bring about a moment of political peril for the new monarch, who, after Barbados became independent in 2021, could face the loss of another prominent part of the Caribbean Commonwealth."

Re: Queen Elizabeth II has died

#307

Post by madamelic »

g42gregory wrote: post #177

I really feel that Charles should at least consider passing on the Crown to his son William. William and Kate are immensely popular. It would be a good thing for Great Britain, British people as well as for the Royal Family. Charles and Camilla are the opposite in terms of respect and popularity to William and Kate, as far as I understand. If Charles does that, he would write himself into the annals of British histor…

Not to mention the actual cost.

I believe it is in the tens of billions when a monarch dies (changes of money, ceremonies, etc). Dude is in his 70s.

Save your country a bit of money unless you want to foot the bill for maybe 10 years of being King.

Re: Queen Elizabeth II has died

#310

Post by huhtenberg »

Terretta wrote: post #180
simonswords82 wrote: post #48

Winston Churchill (1951–55) Anthony Eden (1955–57) Harold Macmillan (1957–63) Alec Douglas-Home (1963–64) Harold Wilson (1964–70) Edward Heath (1970–74) Harold Wilson (1974–76) James Callaghan (1976–79) Margaret Thatcher (1979–90) John Major (1990–97) Tony Blair (1997–07) Gordon Brown (2007–10) David Cameron (2010–16) Theresa May (2016–19) Boris Johnson (2019–22) Liz Truss (2022 (two days ago) - current) Quite the re…

Put another way, her Prime Ministers saw the world from 1874 - 2022, nearly 150 years.

> her Prime Ministers

I suspect that you don't realize how bizarre this phrasing is for the vast majority of the world.

Post reply on HN