-
.i don’t think it’s quite that simple and the truth is, many in the UK adore the monarchy. you’d never get enough people to fully overturn it. what people don’t understand is that a select few of privileged buffoons are living the life of riley thanks to the poor who pay their taxes. i’d be incensed if i was stuck in a shitty rental with a shitty car, knowing my taxes were contributing to the palaces and range rover lifestyle of a few select “royals”. it’s a joke.
also it’s not the same thing - your president actually has constitutional and legal powers afforded to her/him. she/he can declare a war. they command an entire military and can pass legislation (not single-handedly of course) - charles just wears a crown and lopes around his country estate. the prime minister is the one who actually runs the country - they’re the commonwealth’s equivalent to a president. charles is ceremonial and nothing more.
Well its the same where i live we pay literally half of my husband income on taxes for this state yet nothing gets done yet the politicians get rich. Each country has its draw backs to what our taxes are contributing. I dont however think bashing the royal family will negate what H&M are doing which is just straight up toxic, the least we can say its also toxic what they are doing. Specially Meghan jezz that women its the worst to me. They could have just done what they said they were going to do in the first place but nop they did the opposite of that.
Comparing politicians to the RF is not comparing apples to apples. Politicians can be voted out, we cannot vote the RF out. They are there by birthright and in a modern society that is ridiculous. Just like the US, in the UK we still pay a lot of taxes and the politicians get nothing done. However, we pay that on top of paying the RF. It’s like we are being taxed twice yet the country is in disarray.
Charles is one of the richest people in the world but we had to pay millions as taxpayers for the coronation, during a crippling cost of living crisis. Charles, as a British citizen, didn’t have to pay tax (40%) on the inheritance the Queen left him. Buckingham Palace is owned by the monarch of the moment (one of the richest people in the world) but we, the tax payers, have to pay for the upkeep. All this while people have to live in squalor because rents are so high or libraries are shutting down because local Governments can’t afford to keep them.
Charles has agreed to pay income tax, following in his mother’s footsteps. Myself and many others find the fact that they are given a choice, absurd and insulting. Their income comes from us the tax payers.
I don’t disagree that H&M have been and still are absolute brats. However, I disagree that the RF have been honourable and quiet about it all. They use the press to say what they won’t say with their own mouths.
As this is the Royal Families thread, I am glad we can have a civilised debate about that, rather than the usual one sided H&M bashing and OTT RF adoration.
Edited by zizizouzou - 29/8/2023, 07:09. -
.
I’d say William would love nothing more but to denounce being a prince and live as a commoner. He loves the quiet life with his family. But if he did leave, Harry would be King. That would be like having King Joffrey from GOT. So William is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Many covet his position. He feels a strong sense of obligation to maintain the duties of the crown—because of his grandmother’s legacy, the many people that rely on him for a job and security, it’s all in motion and if he were to leave, who could be trusted with the task? It’s what he has been training for all his life and if he was gone, the Monarchy would continue with his brother who is emotionally unstable and under the influence of his wife and mother-in-law. Until the people of England rise up and demand the Monarchy be disbanded, it’s unlikely to change. The wheels are set in motion. I do agree that it’s a medieval concept to have this kind of power and overreach, but many Brits would disagree. . -
.Well its the same where i live we pay literally half of my husband income on taxes for this state yet nothing gets done yet the politicians get rich. Each country has its draw backs to what our taxes are contributing. I dont however think bashing the royal family will negate what H&M are doing which is just straight up toxic, the least we can say its also toxic what they are doing. Specially Meghan jezz that women its the worst to me. They could have just done what they said they were going to do in the first place but nop they did the opposite of that.
Comparing politicians to the RF is not comparing apples to apples. Politicians can be voted out, we cannot vote the RF out. They are there by birthright and in a modern society that is ridiculous. Just like the US, in the UK we still pay a lot of taxes and the politicians get nothing done. However, we pay that on top of paying the RF. It’s like we are being taxed twice yet the country is in disarray.
Charles is one of the richest people in the world but we had to pay millions as taxpayers for the coronation, during a crippling cost of living crisis. Charles, as a British citizen, didn’t have to pay tax (40%) on the inheritance the Queen left him. Buckingham Palace is owned by the monarch of the moment (one of the richest people in the world) but we, the tax payers, have to pay for the upkeep. All this while people have to live in squalor because rents are so high or libraries are shutting down because local Governments can’t afford to keep them.
Charles has agreed to pay income tax, following in his mother’s footsteps. Myself and many others find the fact that they are given a choice, absurd and insulting. Their income comes from us the tax payers.
I don’t disagree that H&M have been and still are absolute brats. However, I disagree that the RF have been honourable and quiet about it all. They use the press to say what they won’t say with their own mouths.
As this is the Royal Families thread, I am glad we can have a civilised debate about that, rather than the usual one sided H&M bashing and OTT RF adoration.
Correct if im wrong but cant titles be removed? If so then if people actually wanted to to remove them like the grand majority they would not have the titles nor the power they do now. I think from a historical stand point if people actually want them out there was plenty of different times in history that could have happen yet it did not.
Personally maybe its the historian side i don't know but i like the royal family not saying the people, i dont get attached not even to celebrities or anyone of “importance” but the history its just great, lots of information i feel like the uk specially the royal family is a gold mind of history( other places are too but if i were to do my phd it would be uk, Ireland and Scandinavia)
On another note i feel like H&M if they had done things differently then they would have less backlash but its the lying, the self importance and most of all crying victimhood without any evidence i don't believe. I need hard facts and evidence to believe people because then we just believe people blindly and accuse the other without any merit.
P.S. i know comparing the RF to Politicians is not the best because of the structure but it was the best example i could come up with at the moment! Ill have to think about it more later to have a better example for that. -
.i genuinely don’t like kate and also believe the hate towards MM is unfair. i realize i am in a minority (at least in this thread). what has MM actually “done”? besides unapologetically live her life? kate is a fraud; she keeps her starched panties firmly on and tacitly condoned the gross dysfunction that is the royal family. y’all read spare - harry was treated like a second class citizen by his own family. what choice did they give him and meghan? wills is favored as the heir and kate, by virtue of that fact, enjoys a level of protection and support from the palace. the other two were left to fend for themselves. i think their reactions are normal and expected; they did a narcissistic family cut off, nobody would bat an eye if it was a normal family. it’s so odd that such hate is directed at MM and harry for choosing to cut the
royal family off for treating them poorly. sounds like a fairly healthy response to me.
kate is a phony and a fake. her and wills pretend to give a shit about mental health but they have no idea - they’re totally out of touch with non-royal life and how people actually live. i agree the work she’s had is very natural but it’s the fact she pretends she’s never had anything done that is offensive - it’s duplicitous.
Maybe but she is still there doing all the boring stuff in the English weather ☔️ she stands back and doesn’t try to emasculate William by trying to push in front of him another example is the polo match where MM was trying to grab the trophy which was so cringe. They were both thoroughly debriefed about what their duties were by the Queens own Aide if they were unsure why let the British public shell out forty million on their wedding?
Meghan has gone around spouting lie after lie many that could be easily debunked and they’ve only taken a back seat now because nobody believes a word either of them says. Nobody made them a laughing stock Brits wanted to love them Americans wanted to love them they’ve made themselves look like entitled twats banging on about climate change while they were flying everywhere in a private jet while his brother was using a regular airline, posting publicly pics to make out they were being harassed by the media but people realised the pics were from a film premier or the like.
The list could go on and on …. -
Sand&Sun.
User deleted
In my own opinion the hate toward MM and H is self inflicted. They started off with everyones good will and became who they are all by themselves . -
.Comparing politicians to the RF is not comparing apples to apples. Politicians can be voted out, we cannot vote the RF out. They are there by birthright and in a modern society that is ridiculous. Just like the US, in the UK we still pay a lot of taxes and the politicians get nothing done. However, we pay that on top of paying the RF. It’s like we are being taxed twice yet the country is in disarray.
Charles is one of the richest people in the world but we had to pay millions as taxpayers for the coronation, during a crippling cost of living crisis. Charles, as a British citizen, didn’t have to pay tax (40%) on the inheritance the Queen left him. Buckingham Palace is owned by the monarch of the moment (one of the richest people in the world) but we, the tax payers, have to pay for the upkeep. All this while people have to live in squalor because rents are so high or libraries are shutting down because local Governments can’t afford to keep them.
Charles has agreed to pay income tax, following in his mother’s footsteps. Myself and many others find the fact that they are given a choice, absurd and insulting. Their income comes from us the tax payers.
I don’t disagree that H&M have been and still are absolute brats. However, I disagree that the RF have been honourable and quiet about it all. They use the press to say what they won’t say with their own mouths.
As this is the Royal Families thread, I am glad we can have a civilised debate about that, rather than the usual one sided H&M bashing and OTT RF adoration.
Correct if im wrong but cant titles be removed? If so then if people actually wanted to to remove them like the grand majority they would not have the titles nor the power they do now. I think from a historical stand point if people actually want them out there was plenty of different times in history that could have happen yet it did not.
Just to add though, that removing constitutional structures is not that simple - and I know the US getting rid of UK monarchy is often cited - and you guys did! but it wasn't smooth sailing either, and in admittedly simpler times when it came to jurisdiction. Lots of New England citizens ended up exiled to Canada because of that. It's actually a source of social tension to this day where I live. In our day and age, it's not that simple. Hell, the Canadian Constitution isn't actually signed by all provinces to this day - so an overhaul of the political structure isn't all that easy. It is overdue, IMO, but not that simple, especially in times when there is kind of other crisis to attend to.
Personally maybe its the historian side i don't know but i like the royal family not saying the people, i dont get attached not even to celebrities or anyone of “importance” but the history its just great, lots of information i feel like the uk specially the royal family is a gold mind of history( other places are too but if i were to do my phd it would be uk, Ireland and Scandinavia)
Lots of interesting history in France, especially about royal families, plenty of artifacts and castles left, yet the actual aristocrats aren't needed for that. Not that the French revolution should be emulated, because the revolution itseld and the years that followed were absolute nightmare (actually called "La Terreur" or the Terror year.)
On another note i feel like H&M if they had done things differently then they would have less backlash but its the lying, the self importance and most of all crying victimhood without any evidence i don't believe. I need hard facts and evidence to believe people because then we just believe people blindly and accuse the other without any merit.
They are good gossip fodder because they keep handing the stick to beat them with - making a splash about how evil monarchy is, then giving their children titles ; saying they want a private life, then writing memoirs and producing documentaries... when they probably were rich enough to just ride into the sunset with a comfortable life, and would have been forgotten by the public soon enough. That being said, it's true that the rest of the family are also rich priviledge products of ultimate and obsolete nepotism. It's not like we still believe God gave them magical powers to lead the country.
P.S. i know comparing the RF to Politicians is not the best because of the structure but it was the best example i could come up with at the moment! Ill have to think about it more later to have a better example for that. -
.Correct if im wrong but cant titles be removed? If so then if people actually wanted to to remove them like the grand majority they would not have the titles nor the power they do now. I think from a historical stand point if people actually want them out there was plenty of different times in history that could have happen yet it did not.
Just to add though, that removing constitutional structures is not that simple - and I know the US getting rid of UK monarchy is often cited - and you guys did! but it wasn't smooth sailing either, and in admittedly simpler times when it came to jurisdiction. Lots of New England citizens ended up exiled to Canada because of that. It's actually a source of social tension to this day where I live. In our day and age, it's not that simple. Hell, the Canadian Constitution isn't actually signed by all provinces to this day - so an overhaul of the political structure isn't all that easy. It is overdue, IMO, but not that simple, especially in times when there is kind of other crisis to attend to.
Personally maybe its the historian side i don't know but i like the royal family not saying the people, i dont get attached not even to celebrities or anyone of “importance” but the history its just great, lots of information i feel like the uk specially the royal family is a gold mind of history( other places are too but if i were to do my phd it would be uk, Ireland and Scandinavia)
Lots of interesting history in France, especially about royal families, plenty of artifacts and castles left, yet the actual aristocrats aren't needed for that. Not that the French revolution should be emulated, because the revolution itseld and the years that followed were absolute nightmare (actually called "La Terreur" or the Terror year.)
On another note i feel like H&M if they had done things differently then they would have less backlash but its the lying, the self importance and most of all crying victimhood without any evidence i don't believe. I need hard facts and evidence to believe people because then we just believe people blindly and accuse the other without any merit.
They are good gossip fodder because they keep handing the stick to beat them with - making a splash about how evil monarchy is, then giving their children titles ; saying they want a private life, then writing memoirs and producing documentaries... when they probably were rich enough to just ride into the sunset with a comfortable life, and would have been forgotten by the public soon enough. That being said, it's true that the rest of the family are also rich priviledge products of ultimate and obsolete nepotism. It's not like we still believe God gave them magical powers to lead the country.
P.S. i know comparing the RF to Politicians is not the best because of the structure but it was the best example i could come up with at the moment! Ill have to think about it more later to have a better example for that
I still believe un like before us had to fight to get rid of the monarchy im sure with a more modern society that can be done but once again it cant if people dont come together to do it, it is the same with any government. (Obviously there are things that make it more complicated then what im making it sound because to get people in power out like that a power that has had such a hold will take a push and shove but it can be done as it has been shown)
As for H&M in my opinion they are getting what they deserve with the backlash the reality is if the woman and harry (although i think he might be just brainwashed by her at this point with what he is doing not normal and only a person who is in a cult like mentality would do this for someone else, saying this from experience) get so much flack from a lot more people i wonder who is in the wrong. She and him mainly her has no self awareness of what she is doing. The double standard she has and also hypocrisies.
Side note as for politicians i gave that example as to see that grand majority of it is basically selling them selves say one thing do another. Lying using the media often times lie there. So what i was trying to do is show the comparison of how both at the end of the day is based on power.
I don't think the RF is this saint of a family but i will say this H&M constantly bashing them with no receipt is biting them in the ass. Specially after the queen dying (I definitely cried about it not because i know her but the essence of one historical period was over. I don't people realize the magnitude and importance that is but I digress). -
.
. Attached Image
. -
.
. Attached Image
. -
Sand&Sun.
User deleted
I wonder what the announcement is? . -
.
Kind of a silly question, but why do people call Princess Catherine "Kate"? Whenever I have heard her (in videos) introduce herself to either adults or children it is always Catherine. Same if Prince William talks about her (that I have seen). Did she used to go by Kate? Or she goes by Kate sometimes? Did the public just decide to call her Kate? Anyone know? 🤔 . -
.
IIRC, she went by Kate during her college years. I remember seeing an interview before they were engaged or thereabouts and William referred to her as Kate. So it stuck in the media, a lot of media outlets refer to her as Kate Middleton first, Catherine, POW second. Google searches bring up Kate Middleton quite frequently because of that. Since they've been married, TRF as only referred to her as Catherine. But the media does what it does. . -
.
She was Kate all her life before they were engaged. Kate Middleton. She needed a more proper name with her titles so she transitioned to Catherine. I believe that is her official birth name but I could be wrong...I just assumed her family called her Kate. Her sister Pippa is really Phillipa, isn't it? My brain is a little foggier on that one. I believe for the wedding, her dad had to actually have a Middleton family crest made as well.
What is wrong is the press/media still to be referring to her as Kate Middleton. That was the casual girl before she got married, dropped her last name, and had to formalize her name to match having titles.. -
.
Admittedly, I'm not British, so i don't know what the culture is over there, but regardless of titles, don't a lot of people phase out of nicknames as they get older? It's not that remarkable that she and the people around her would stop calling her Kate.
And the media would keep Kate Middleton for SEO and recognition purposes.
But it coule be a way to make it more official.. -
.
Thanks for the replies! It makes sense that she was called Kate growing up and later transitioned to Catherine with age and titles, and the public and media just haven't caught up yet. .
Royal Families Pt. 4 |
