Traitorfish
The Tighnahulish Kid
The Once-United Former Kingdom of Ex-Britain (Deceased).
The Very-Many-Questions-Not-Worth-Their-Own-Thread Thread XLI
- Status
Lohrenswald
世界的 bottom ranked physicist
Also stupid and bad
There are an awful lot of people who would prefer that Charles step aside in favor of William to succeed the Queen. He's old enough and responsible enough. His kids aren't little babies anymore and he's been taking on more duties since Harry quit, so it would be less of a drastic change for them now than it would have been a few years ago.
Mind you, the Queen could outlive Charles anyway. He's had Covid, and she comes from a line of long-lived people.
It won't. The monarchy will continue at least another generation, since William hasn't ruined any good-will that monarchists have for him.
After that, though... I dunno if there would be anything for George to inherit, other than money and properties (those privately owned).
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,482
I'd actually prefer Charles over William. Charles seems to be a decent enough chap, while William comes across as your standard issue posh ****.
Yes, the monarchy is supposed to be "above it all" - and are then accused of being useless parasites for following through on that.
There was quite a kerfuffle in Canada when our Governor-General - a former astronaut - made a speech at a science symposium that actually promoted science over astrology. Someone wrote in the comment section on the news site that the Queen needed to give her "a stern talking-to" about not getting political.
Synobun
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2006
- Messages
- 24,884
They are useless parasites either way. The idea of monarchy is heinous and requires careful grooming of the worst traits humanity has to offer on a generational scale. It forces a class divide and indoctrinates subjects from birth that there's a class of human inherently better than the rest and should be served on. In history, a majority of rebellion against nobility ends up in simply replacing the original families with new ones. The system itself simply changes hands. It poisons all conflict, all progress. The only good noble is one who isn't.
It is a relic that should be done away with. We never needed monarchy. We especially don't need it now. Could not care less about tourism dollars. Their existence is a blemish.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Tourism dollars is a false narrative anyways. Plenty of people go to see Versailles despite a lack of current monarch. Tourism won't just dissappear if the royals lose their crown - it's just a convenient justification with a ring of truthiness to it.
I like the monarchy! It is a relic of bygone days and firmly intertwined with British history. Historical pageantry in the here and now.
Besides, it is a British thing and mostly none of our business.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
And all the Commonwealth Realms as well!
You want them? You can have them. You have a fair few of them already, just start giving out taxpayer money and you will have a full set in no time.
They should choose if they want to keep Lizzy et al going forward.. They are stuck with the past.
Ah...they have not been part our our history for centuries. We have our own burdens of history. Now if we could trade, how about you give us the Windsors and we give you our racist past/present?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
