The new King ...

[Tartansparkles]

Hi,

For many years I've thought the Monarchy was an outdated institution. I have changed my mind. This institution unites the people. It is their common heritage. It belongs to all of them.

The idea of the monarchy uniting people is an interesting one and in the case of the UK it will be interesting to see how the situation plays out. My MIL surprised me today. She is an ardent supporter of the Queen, she loves the pomp, ceremony and the sense of history that comes with generations of Royals. But then she mentioned that the 'Voice' was supposed to be on TV tonight and she hoped it wouldn't be cancelled because after two days of sad songs on the radio, even she needed a little levity. (She is a widower and lives alone so relies on the TV for company). I also heard that the funeral isn't until next week and that the period of mourning will extend for 10 days after the funeral, I suspect if that is the case, then the period of mourning may well run the risk of outstaying its welcome. Beyond being respectful of the passing of the Queen, the people I come into contact with just don't care that much, the event has little to no impact or relevance on their lives. The issue of unity becomes even more interesting when you throw in Scottish independence because the royal family are possibly seen as more of an English institution that a Scottish one. I heard that Charles will now be doing the rounds of the UK and beyond local kids being bussed into any event, union jacks being handed out and onlookers told to wave their flags and cheer, I again doubt there will be that much interest (in Scotland). I don't believe the monarchy unites people because beyond tourism revenue and a certain celebrity status that helps charities raise income, I don't see any relevance for people to unite behind. But as I said it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

I like the idea of a benign monarchy. I also like the idea of "socialized" medicine. (I hate that phrase. As if commercialized medicine is such a good thing! Commercializing people's sickness? Terrible!)

People who are criticizing the Queen and the monarchy (as some US pundits are doing) aren't in possession of all the facts, I'm sure. For example, Charles has no obligation to pay any income tax at all, but since the Nineties he has VOLUNTEERED to pay 50%. After his sons married, that went down to 25% because he needed to pay for security, clothing, and offices for the two new family units. Additionally, he has done SO MUCH GOOD via The Prince's Trust. And his many tenants on Duchy of Cornwall land say that he is a good landlord and keeps a close eye on rents to make sure they don't rise unfairly high.

Some of the US commentators are saying how awful the Queen was, but I really don't understand this. She stood back and let the empire dissolve, and she said that if the republican movement won out, she would go quietly. She let change happen and didn't fight it. She got rid of extras like the Royal Britannia yacht when told to by Parliament, handed back Hong Kong when asked, and so much more.

But the thing I REALLY don't get is how the critics don't understand these two basic facts: a) the Queen had NO power at all. Everything that was done during her reign was done by the government, in which she cannot interfere. The complaints should be aimed at Britain, not the Queen. The government did all the things that critics are pointing out, elected by the British people. So why are they foaming at the mouth about the Queen? They seem driven by emotion and not facts, to me. Perhaps I'm missing something.

b) The empire happened before she came to the throne and mostly it was formed before she was even born! And she let it dissolve without complaint! Some critics are saying that she was a colonizer and others are saying she was a violent decolonizer. I'm confused. You surely can't be both. And I want to reiterate that she had no power to influence any of it anyway! So I don't know why some corners of the US media are being so nasty about the late Queen.

I wish we had a benign monarchy like theirs. Politicians' egos are way big enough, in my opinion! Would be great to have an over-arching form of stability like the British Crown. The Queen endured across 15 US presidents!

i really like having a constitution monarchy style of government, i have never heard it called benign monarchy
lucky i havnt read any nasty bits, its way too soon, at the end of the day she was her family's mother
but she was also the mother of our commonwealth of nations

who really knows what goes on between a Prime Minister and the soverign? the soverign's job is to advise and to caution, the Queen knew and meet a lot of important and powerful people over her lifetime and a PM was fortunate to be able to tab into that knowledge to aid deplomacy
also it must be good for a PM to have someone to unburden themselves to who will keep their confidence

Our Soverign reins, they do not rule
you are right
THe late Queen was a huge stability in all our lives

 

[Tartansparkles]

THe late Queen was a huge stability in all our lives

In your opinion - in my every day life and in the lives of many, many other people, the queen played no significant part at all, offering stability or otherwise. The queen has passed away, I do hope she is reunited with Philip and I wish her family well.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

In your opinion - in my every day life and in the lives of many, many other people, the queen played no significant part at all, offering stability or otherwise. The queen has passed away, I do hope she is reunited with Philip and I wish her family well.

i enjoy and take great benifit from the stability of constitutional monatrchy
or rather the constant
The Queen was the only constant in my life
she may have just been there in the background, but everything else around me changes
my parents are dead, Gary's parents are dead, politicans come and go
friends come and go
but the Queen was always there even if just being the Queen (the Duke also i must add)

 

[Tartansparkles]

i enjoy and take great benifit from the stability of constitutional monatrchy
or rather the constant
The Queen was the only constant in my life
she may have just been there in the background, but everything else around me changes
my parents are dead, Gary's parents are dead, politicans come and go
friends come and go
but the Queen was always there even if just being the Queen (the Duke also i must add)

I'm glad that you found a means of stability, I agree, we live in constantly changing times. Simply consider that what is right for you does not necessarily apply to everyone else.

 

[Ally T]

I like the idea of a benign monarchy. I also like the idea of "socialized" medicine. (I hate that phrase. As if commercialized medicine is such a good thing! Commercializing people's sickness? Terrible!)

People who are criticizing the Queen and the monarchy (as some US pundits are doing) aren't in possession of all the facts, I'm sure. For example, Charles has no obligation to pay any income tax at all, but since the Nineties he has VOLUNTEERED to pay 50%. After his sons married, that went down to 25% because he needed to pay for security, clothing, and offices for the two new family units. Additionally, he has done SO MUCH GOOD via The Prince's Trust. And his many tenants on Duchy of Cornwall land say that he is a good landlord and keeps a close eye on rents to make sure they don't rise unfairly high.

Some of the US commentators are saying how awful the Queen was, but I really don't understand this. She stood back and let the empire dissolve, and she said that if the republican movement won out, she would go quietly. She let change happen and didn't fight it. She got rid of extras like the Royal Britannia yacht when told to by Parliament, handed back Hong Kong when asked, and so much more.

But the thing I REALLY don't get is how the critics don't understand these two basic facts: a) the Queen had NO power at all. Everything that was done during her reign was done by the government, in which she cannot interfere. The complaints should be aimed at Britain, not the Queen. The government did all the things that critics are pointing out, elected by the British people. So why are they foaming at the mouth about the Queen? They seem driven by emotion and not facts, to me. Perhaps I'm missing something.

b) The empire happened before she came to the throne and mostly it was formed before she was even born! And she let it dissolve without complaint! Some critics are saying that she was a colonizer and others are saying she was a violent decolonizer. I'm confused. You surely can't be both. And I want to reiterate that she had no power to influence any of it anyway! So I don't know why some corners of the US media are being so nasty about the late Queen.

I wish we had a benign monarchy like theirs. Politicians' egos are way big enough, in my opinion! Would be great to have an over-arching form of stability like the British Crown. The Queen endured across 15 US presidents!

I have zero idea what the US press are saying about the Queen that may be negative, but I can assure you that as an English woman living in the UK & being 48 years old, I have only ever had respect for the Queen. So I am not sure I want to know. She has always been there, silently in the wings, treading water & holding a whole host of sh!t together. I am not a Royalist & I think sometimes that many minor Royals should be out working & earning their salary like the rest of us. But I love having a Monarchy. I have loved Queen Elizabeth for as long as I can remember.

My amazing Great Aunty Amy, who died in 2014 aged 99, absolutely LOVED the Royal family. She was raised with it in a different way than I perhaps was. Each Christmas Day my father drove across to pick her up after we had opened presents in the morning. And no matter where mum was upto with dinner, we had to stop at 3pm to congregate in the lounge room & watch the Queens speech. I shall really miss that.

 

[Austina]

Newspapers are there to make money, not necessarily to report facts. Whatever your thoughts are on the Monarchy, this is about basic respect, an old lady has died, a mother, grandmother, great grandmother. It’s in extremely poor taste to write derogatory things about her just to make money.

I read today that a college professor in the US tweeted that she hopes she died an excruciating death.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Newspapers are there to make money, not necessarily to report facts. Whatever your thoughts are on the Monarchy, this is about basic respect, an old lady has died, a mother, grandmother, great grandmother. It’s in extremely poor taste to write derogatory things about her just to make money.

I read today that a college professor in the US tweeted that she hopes she died an excruciating death.

what a very unkind to say about anyone let alone our late head of state
personally i take that as an insult to my country

almost all the coverage (99%) here has been respectful, even from the anti

as for reporting the facts
i just saw the Dutchess of Gloucester ID-ed as being married to the Duke of Kent
from a British publication

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

I have zero idea what the US press are saying about the Queen that may be negative, but I can assure you that as an English woman living in the UK & being 48 years old, I have only ever had respect for the Queen. So I am not sure I want to know. She has always been there, silently in the wings, treading water & holding a whole host of sh!t together. I am not a Royalist & I think sometimes that many minor Royals should be out working & earning their salary like the rest of us. But I love having a Monarchy. I have loved Queen Elizabeth for as long as I can remember.

My amazing Great Aunty Amy, who died in 2014 aged 99, absolutely LOVED the Royal family. She was raised with it in a different way than I perhaps was. Each Christmas Day my father drove across to pick her up after we had opened presents in the morning. And no matter where mum was upto with dinner, we had to stop at 3pm to congregate in the lounge room & watch the Queens speech. I shall really miss that.

i wan to have tea with Aunty Amy
what a shame she didnt quite live to get her 100th birthday telegram

 

[Calliecake]

@Ally T, The American flag is being flown at half mast in honor of the Queen in this country. I believe they will be flown at half mast for 10 days (I could be wrong). Your Queen is respected by most people in the US. People are saddened by her passing.

If you hear or read negative comments by some Americans please keep in mind that our country is in a very divided at the moment. Showing respect and decency has seemed to go out the window for some of our citizens over the past five years. I’m hoping that this is temporary. Goodness and love always wins in the end.

@Austina, All I can say about the American who tweeted that awful tweet is the views of a few are not the views of most. It’s unfathomable that anyone would tweet something this horrible.

 

[canuk-gal]

@Ally T, The American flag is being flown at half mast in honor of the Queen in this country. I believe they will be flown at half mast for 10 days (I could be wrong). Your Queen is respected by most people in the US. People are saddened by her passing.

If you hear or read negative comments by some Americans please keep in mind that our country is in a very divided at the moment. Showing respect and decency has seemed to go out the window for some of our citizens over the past five years. I’m hoping that this is temporary. Goodness and love always wins in the end.

@Austina, All I can say about the American who tweeted that awful tweet is the views of a few are not the views of most. It’s unfathomable that anyone would tweet something this horrible.

+ a billion

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

i just watched the prolomation of our new king live on tv from the steps of parliment
it was very emotional
somewhat similar to the one in Westminister but with slightly more modern lanuga e(plus Maori and sign language)

70 years ago it would have been in monday's paper but today i can watch it from my chair in our lounge

slightly more modern language than the one from westminister with Maori and also NZ sign lanuage and then a 21 gun salute but a significant moment in our history
and a very unifying moment

Long live the King

thats the governer general Dame Cindy with the PM and her partner behind

the national antham (and spring weather)

thats the lady doing the sign language

not a lot of photos yet

 

[Matata]

Camilla looked horribly sad at the accession ceremony. I wonder how much of that was mourning the loss of the Queen and how much was due to the fact that her life and Charles' are no longer their own in profound ways.

 

[pearlsngems]

Or even just exhaustion. This week is very hard on them all, and she is 75....

 

[monarch64]

Who?

 

[pearlsngems]

Who?

In reply to Matata's post, I was referring to Camilla, who is 75.

 

[monarch64]

In reply to Matata's post, I was referring to Camilla, who is 75.

I was replying in general to the thread.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Camilla looked horribly sad at the accession ceremony. I wonder how much of that was mourning the loss of the Queen and how much was due to the fact that her life and Charles' are no longer their own in profound ways.

yes i agree
i do feel for the new Queen
HM know's the job of a queen consorts to look after the king
hopefully she can do it in good health well into old age

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

the new king is going home to Highgrove before going to Wales on friday
i hope he is able to have a good sleep in his own bed, but i had imsonia for months after my dad died
still the King and Queen will get some privacy

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

i just watched this
its very good

 

[telephone89]

I will note that the negative views are definitely NOT of a minority. Many many colonized nations are not grieving. I saw a few comments about this so I just wanted to add some perspective. We can feel empathy that a mother, grandmother and great grand mother has passed and still use the event to talk about the bigger picture and the gigantic impact the monarchy has had on the world - not all positive.

The queen and the monarchy has never acknowledged or apologized for the horrific sins of colonization.
The queen and the monarchy has not returned the jewels and artifacts stolen from other nations.
The queen and the monarchy has not ever paid reparations to the nations plundered and enslaved. The monarchy actively supported and profited from the trans-atlantic slave trade.
Lets also not forget she - specifically, not even the monarchy - harboured and sheltered a known pedophile.

Heck, even the pope apologized for the sins of their past.

I find it interesting to hear that the monarchy, responsible for some of these horrific acts "unified" the countries stolen, pilaged and plundered from. I mean, I guess it's correct, it just wasnt a voluntary unification for all.

 

[telephone89]

This is an interesting piece, copied in case of paywall.

Opinion

We must speak the ugly truths about Queen Elizabeth and Britain’s empire​

The death of Queen Elizabeth II, Britain’s longest-serving monarch, is causing a global battle royale over a central question: How do we speak honestly about the loyal servants to Britain’s powerful and historically brutal empire?

My answer? You speak the truth loudly, firmly and without hesitation. Use a microphone if you need to say it louder for those in the back.

In the wake of the queen’s death, propaganda, fantasy and ignorance are being pitted against Britain’s historical record and the lived experience of Africans, Asians, Middle Easterners, the Irish and others.
In the global north’s imagination, the queen is a symbol of decorum and stability in the post-World War II world. But to people of places that Britain invaded, carved up and colonized over centuries, the 96-year-old grandmother — and the rest of the royal family — evoke complex feelings, to say the least.


There are those who have a reverence for the royal family, as well as for Britain in general. Trust me, there are plenty of Black women across the African diaspora who loved Princess Diana. And I’ll never forget cringing as my father’s Ghanaian schoolmate, during a visit we made to her home in Accra, showed us pictures of her tourist trip to Buckingham Palace. “They ruled us,” she said. “So, we are British!”

But for many, the British — by extension the queen — remain guilty for the nation’s historical crimes.
Uju Anya, a Carnegie Mellon professor who is Nigerian, came under intense attack after tweeting Thursday, “I heard the chief monarch of a thieving raping genocidal empire is dying. May her pain be excruciating.” Those are harsh and hateful words toward the queen, but they shouldn’t be surprising — not to anyone who has truly grappled with the generational agony of families, such as Anya’s, that have suffered massacre and displacement at the hands of the British.


Defenders of the queen, of course, have their answer to that. They suggest she was something of a “liberator,” since decolonization occurred during her reign, and that the people thus “liberated” should be grateful. Again, the historical record is the crucial thing: When Elizabeth ascended to the throne in 1952, she inherited a Britain with a weakened grip on global power. Rebellions were gathering strength in its colonies. The economic drain from the conflicts, coupled with the growing independence movements in Africa and India, all but forced Britain to pull back.
Yet, even then, Britain under Elizabeth did not just let its prized colonies go. From 1952 to 1963, British forces crushed the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya, forcing between 160,000 and 320,000 Kenyans into concentration camps. Kenyan tribes are suing the British government at the European Court of Human Rights for land theft and torture.
Royalists will argue, too, that as a constitutional, symbolic monarch, Queen Elizabeth bore little responsibility for the ills that occurred during her long reign. But symbols matter. Elizabeth willingly took on the role of representing British power and wealth. She willingly adorned herself with jewels plundered from former colonies. Her image is on the currencies of many former colonies; by stewarding the British Commonwealth, she willingly took on the symbolic, patronizing role of “white mother” to the darker peoples of the former empire. All while reportedly banning “coloured immigrants or foreigners” from serving in royal clerical roles until the 1960s.


And still others say we shouldn’t talk ill of Britain at this moment. That the past is long gone. That we should forget about it. The ugly reality is, Britain deliberately wanted to hide its crimes from newly independent countries; in 1961, it destroyed thousands of colonial-era documents so as not to “embarrass Her Majesty’s government.”

I’m also living proof that the past is present.
My mother, born in pre-independence Nigeria, recalls having to celebrate “Empire Day,” marching in stadiums and singing “God Save the Queen.” Several years after Nigeria’s independence in 1960, Britain sided with the Nigerian forces to crush the Biafran secession efforts. Some 1 million people of the Ibo ethnic tribe were killed or starved to death. My grandfather, who was one of the chief financial officers of Biafra, was forced to flee the country with my mother and siblings.

It shouldn’t take the death of a monarch to bring this colonial history to light, but this is where we are. The public relations imagery of a dedicated, elderly grandmother devoted to her corgis, and the Hollywood-ification of the royal family, serves all too well to blunt questions about empire. When the opportunity comes to surface truth, it must be seized.
Because there’s one more way the royalists have it wrong — this conversation is about the future, too. Hagiography of Queen Elizabeth and the fading British Empire obscures the truth not only about Britain but also about our current world order, which is built on that history. We can speak the truth about that history even as we pause to wish her spirit and her family well during this transition. And then we must get back to work — to dismantle the present-day vestiges of the racist, colonial empire she so dutifully represented.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/09/10/britain-colonial-brutalities-queen-elizabeth-death-commentary/

 

[kenny]

But but but, what about the fairy tale?

I think their obscene ill-gotten wealth should be confiscated and somehow (?????) distributed to descendants of slaves and others they have stolen from and exploited over the centuries.

No, the current royals didn't commit these crimes, but horrific crime is the origin their wealth.
Ill-gotten wealth.

Not right.
Not fair.

It's not theirs, so take take away that money.
Make this as right as possible.

 

[kenny]

So, what was the British Empire up to 685 years ago?

Hmmm.

 

[kenny]

Partial snip:

Written by Nimi Princewill, CNN

Calls are growing in South Africa for Britain's royal family to return the world's largest known clear-cut diamond in the wake of Queen Elizabeth II's death.

Known as the Great Star of Africa or Cullinan I, the diamond is cut from a larger gem that was mined in South Africa in 1905 and handed over to the British royal family by South Africa's colonial authorities. It is currently mounted on a royal scepter belonging to the Queen.

Demands for the return of the Great Star of Africa and other diamonds -- along with calls for repatriations -- have intensified since the Queen's death. Many South Africans view Britain's acquisition of the jewels as illegitimate.

Source:

Royal gift or 'stolen' gem? Calls for UK to return 500 carat Great Star of Africa diamond

Calls are growing in South Africa for Britain's royal family to return the world's largest known clear-cut diamond in the wake of Queen Elizabeth II's death.

www.cnn.com

 

[telephone89]

@kenny and that is hardly the only one!

The kohinoor - where the british forced a 10 year old boy to hand it over in the treaty of lahore. This was 3000+ carats and recut, the largest (and majority of all the rest) they still own, and last seen resting atop the queen mothers coffin at her funeral. Camilla is expected to wear this for the coronation. Tipu Sultans ring, taken off a dead body and sold for 150k pounds. The Elgin Marbles stolen from greece, who have been asking for them back for 100 years and constantly refused.

I bet there are thousands more, theyve just not been marked in history and long forgotten. Tragic, honestly.

 

[yssie]

I’ll be blunt. As an Indian, who has lived to India, who has family still in India, who understands the current and pervasive abundance of authoritative corruption and social unrest, I feel completely confident asserting that if this diamond was returned to India it wouldn’t stay safe for long. Whatever the reasons - and there are many - India is not equipped to take care of treasures right now; those who question that statement need look no further than the disaster that is the Yamuna river - it’s so toxic that it’s literally destroying the Taj Mahal.

In my opinion the fix isn’t to “return” these items, only for them to become liabilities that are improperly safeguarded and inevitably re-stolen or damaged... Looting and pillaging happened, can’t just undo it with takebacksies. The fix is to stick them in actually-safe museums with honest placards that tell visitors the true stories of acquisition and maintenance. No more of this “gift” sh*t. And if those actually-safe locations happen to be places where people might most need some history review, well, that’s a bonus.

 

[kenny]

Before someone beats me to it ...

Of course Britain is not alone.
America and lots of other countries have shameful and embarrassing pasts.
That doesn't make all offending countries equally guilty of what GB has gotten away with.

It is argued wealth of whites today is the result of the suffering of America's slaves long ago.
Today Amazon has a zillion low-paid workers, while their boss Jeff Bezos is worth billions and billions.

 

[ChaiK]

I respect any monarchy and believe they are cultural institutions of significance.

I am very fond of the Queen and have every respect for her as a person.

The monarchy's past, though, cannot be exonerated. The ruthless plundering, and for me, particularly of Myanmar, remains grim and dreadful, and leaves an unpleasant after-taste when my ancestors speak of it.

I reiterate what many others have remarked, that you only have to look at the British Museum, to catch a small glimpse of the vast thievery that had occurred. Let us also not forget the Nga Mauk Ruby that has disappeared mysteriously. Stemming from the upper class cannot excuse such behaviour; nor can the reason that one's country is unable to look after its treasures justify the pilfering.

It is theft. There is no other way to put it or vindicate it. And it isn't just the theft and plundering; it is also about that era of white supremacy and colonialism which I find repulsive.

Oh, and Jeff Bezos does not whip humans into working for him at Amazon. You have a choice. You can choose to work elsewhere. He isn't going to walk into his employees' homes and steal their heirlooms and strip them of their identities either.

As for the new King, he has lately won a lot of people's respect in the way he has interacted with his sons.

The recent pen incident, though, is distasteful.

 

[purplesilk]

Camilla looked horribly sad at the accession ceremony. I wonder how much of that was mourning the loss of the Queen and how much was due to the fact that her life and Charles' are no longer their own in profound ways.

Or even just exhaustion. This week is very hard on them all, and she is 75....

Queen consort broke her toe just few days before QEII death