A
That's okay. Catherine of Aragon was the Princess of Wales when she was married to Henry VIII's older brother who was the heir to the throne at that time. There were a couple before her, but nobody remembers them (and not just because they all seemed to be called Joan). The most popular Princess of Wales (pre-Diana) was Alexandra (wife of Edward VII) and she's the one that most of the old hospitals, streets and pubs are named after. As Princess of Wales, Alexandra (who was quite a looker) was also regarded as something of a fashionista and everyone felt sorry for her because her husband was very prolific in pursuing his extra-marital relationships and wasn't terribly discreet about them. She ceased to be the Princess of Wales upon the death of Queen Victoria when Edward (finally) took the throne.
Last edited:
Star
Homo Secretary (OB)
She'll be the only ever QUEEN of our HEARTS though ♥
Ellie
Super talented triple threat
I can’t stand this apparent war to be seen to be as righteous and morally upstanding as possible. Also, why does EVERYONE need an opinion on everything? Its exhausting to read, let alone be part of it.
I’m sticking to mainly posting about cute animals, films and theatre.
Soldi
User
- Pronouns
- He/him
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2020
- Messages
- 41,803
King Charles to release a charity single of Wolf Kati‘s “What About My Dreams?” as part of the pro-monarchy campaign.Can you imagine if we had a referendum on the monarchy
A
AGinAg (37)
Guest
Putin not coming to the funeral 
Cloud
Mlem
Right so that's a lot of money to us, of course
But my point being in the grand scheme of things at a country level it's not exactly a bank breaker. If you look at 2018 spending (picked out to avoid the covid bloating) it was 654 billion - my defence example being 47 billion. By comparison 100 million is a really tiny fraction of public spending.
Source
UK Central Government and Local Authority Spending in 2018 - Charts
I think it's perfectly understandable to be annoyed at a family being born into luxury when so many are struggling of course, I just think that pragmatically the spending issue isn't a case where it'd actually make any noticeable difference to scrap the monarchy. Say you wanted to fix healthcare that cost 144bn back then (much more now!)
Anyway don't want to annoy anyone so maybe this is something for another thread later.... no massively strong opinions really I was just curious to confirm the thought that maybe they don't really cost enough to be any kind of struggle to afford
Last edited:
Pingu
Noot noot
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 14,314
It was really bizarre. They did feature an interview with Andrew (presumably filmed a few years ago) but also referenced the UNPLEASANTNESS resulting in him stepping back in the same programme.THE BBC are leading with a video where “the Queen’s three children pay tribute”.
I know he’s persona non grata and all that, but are we really entirely erasing Andrew from existence now?
Rita
User
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2004
- Messages
- 49,674
Right so that's a lot of money to us, of course
But my point being in the grand scheme of things at a country level it's not exactly a bank breaker. If you look at 2018 spending (picked out to avoid the covid bloating) it was 654 billion - my defence example being 47 billion. By comparison 100 million is a really tiny fraction of public spending.
Source
UK Central Government and Local Authority Spending in 2018 - Charts
www.ukpublicspending.co.uk
I think it's perfectly understandable to be annoyed at a family being born into luxury when so many are struggling of course, I just think that pragmatically the spending issue isn't a case where it'd actually make any noticeable difference to scrap the monarchy. Say you wanted to fix healthcare that cost 144bn back then (much more now!)
Anyway don't want to annoy anyone so maybe this is something for another thread later.... no massively strong opinions really I was just curious to confirm the thought that maybe they don't really cost enough to be any kind of struggle to afford
Why should they be kept though? They have a wealth in to billions with property, jewels, and any other major possessions so why should the public fund them in this day and age? If it’s so little then surely they should be self sufficient and sell off some assets to fund their lifestyle if they don’t have it in ready cash to fund the new King and the rest of the hangers on. It’s just my opinion, and I am not saying I am right and anyone else is wrong.
ButterTart
Like Mussolini or Kennedy
Mad as a bucket of titsSeems Jaki has always been an oddball.
Rita
User
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2004
- Messages
- 49,674
I shall stop all this chat anyway as I do think I am being disrespectful talking like this in this thread before the poor woman is even buried. I don’t want to upset anyone, and I genuinely apologise to the people that do have great respect for the monarchy and I by no means meant to belittle that.
big ron
King of moopy
- Pronouns
- He/him
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2004
- Messages
- 39,301
Not really. Its hard not to look at a woman who spent 96 years living in castles and being waited on hand and footat our expense and wonder why the fuck that still exists in this day and age.
Suomi
User
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 54,304
Don’t be apologetic - it’s possible for two things to be true at the same time. She did her job well, but now is the time to move into the modern era and prepare for UK to become a Republic. There can’t be any real “levelling up” when one random family provides the country's head of state and a second parliamentary chamber is made up of unelected people. The subservience to these people is in the nation’s psyche, and it’s going to take more people speaking out to move on from it.
jyxz
User
¡REPUBLIC FORUM NOW!
I LOVED 'Drop Dead Gorgeous' AND 'Ready To Go'.
Suomi
User
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 54,304
Sweetie if you don’t think you are subservient to the ruling classes then you need to wake up
big ron
King of moopy
- Pronouns
- He/him
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2004
- Messages
- 39,301
I’m kind of on this side but also with the caveat they relinquish any power and exist as a token private entity, giving up a vast majority of their property and assets to the country
Cloud
Mlem
It's fine I think and we're very much above being at each other's throats on here. I do get your point that they could be self sufficient and about all the assets involved
Maybe it's best for us all to discuss it later but I'm sure we can have a healthy discussion without upset.
funky
(OMF)
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
- Messages
- 103,969
What’s with the existential take on classism all of a sudden? I thought we were just talking about the royal family.
There’s no need to be patronising just to make a point that anarchism is right and everyone else is wrong. It’s part of the reason I want nothing to do with anarchy
Weren’t you just telling Rita that there can be more than one truth? So which is it?
Suomi
User
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 54,304
How have you got to me being for anarchy?
I’m still trying to work out whether you meant “a British museum kind of way” ironically or not
funky
(OMF)
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
- Messages
- 103,969
Aren't I always being ironic?
"being subservient to the ruling classes" is anarchist speak. Apologies if it wasn't intenional. I'm still on you trying to teach a scouser about the impact of the class system!
Eddie
User
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2004
- Messages
- 28,047
I do think as a nation, a huge part of our collective identity revolves around the monarchy and the history and events that surround them. I speak as the child of immigrants when I say this.
What else have we got? Reality television? The music industry is dying on it's feet - we can't even point to our rich cultural history in that respect.
To suggest that we won't be affected adversely were they to be entirely abolished is naïve in my opinion. However I do obviously resent the privileges they are afforded. I'm torn, basically.
What else have we got? Reality television? The music industry is dying on it's feet - we can't even point to our rich cultural history in that respect.
To suggest that we won't be affected adversely were they to be entirely abolished is naïve in my opinion. However I do obviously resent the privileges they are afforded. I'm torn, basically.
Last edited:
funky
(OMF)
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
- Messages
- 103,969
Well there is Eurovision, which costs the country about £20m a year and we get nothing, not even advertising revenue, in return for it.
There is always wastage to be found. But if it's not harming anyone and brings joy to millions of people, do I really care? There's bigger fish to fry than Eurovision and there's bigger fish to fry than a dead old woman who happened to be filthy rich and very famous. Like I really don't care about her either way. I just don't see the need for the cruelty (on social media, again I'm not talking about moopy).
Suomi
User
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2004
- Messages
- 54,304
I literally have no idea what you’re talking about but I can tell you that now is the time to get over this
big ron
King of moopy
- Pronouns
- He/him
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2004
- Messages
- 39,301
How very petite bourgeois
big ron
King of moopy
- Pronouns
- He/him
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2004
- Messages
- 39,301
Exactly. The sooner the the Brits get over this faux identity of being a glorious, empirical super power and wake up to the fact were a footnote in the history of Europe the better
A
AGinAg (37)
Guest
LIVING HUNS
ZenGiraffe
Panini S.p.a.
How can talk of the royal family NOT be about classism?