Elizabeth II / Charles III megathread

[Michel Meilleur]

Why? Quite a significant part of the planet does not like Britain - and as Piers Morgan so eloquently stated "the Queen embodied Britishness". She falls and in the eyes of its enemies an opening is presented.

Because behavior of that sort is ghoulish. The woman hasn't even been interred yet. They can keep the unwarranted giddiness to themselves for a couple days and show a little tact in the meantime. Gloating about the death of beloved figures is... not even a winning political strategy. It just makes such people look like asses.

The monarchy has been more or less holding out thanks to her popularity and the force of habit of her existence itself. Now that she's gone, people are rightfully wondering when will the British peoples (and the peoples abroad still tied to them), will do away with it altogether.
It's a rightful question for a rightful problem.

[Ifreann]

I love that Charles hasn't even been King for two days after waiting 70 years and everyone's already talking about dissolving the commonwealth realms and abolishing the monarchy.

It's more than a little crass.

Hardly crass to discuss the possible political fallout of a new head of state.

[Celritannia]

I love that Charles hasn't even been King for two days after waiting 70 years and everyone's already talking about dissolving the commonwealth realms and abolishing the monarchy.

It's more than a little crass.

Not really, since it is a discussion of the institution, not the individual person.

[The Alma Mater]

Why? Quite a significant part of the planet does not like Britain - and as Piers Morgan so eloquently stated "the Queen embodied Britishness". She falls and in the eyes of its enemies an opening is presented.

Because behavior of that sort is ghoulish. The woman hasn't even been interred yet. They can keep the unwarranted giddiness to themselves for a couple days and show a little tact in the meantime. Gloating about the death of beloved figures is... not even a winning political strategy. It just makes such people look like asses.

You do understand that she was NOT beloved by many?

[The Notorious Mad Jack]

Because behavior of that sort is ghoulish. The woman hasn't even been interred yet. They can keep the unwarranted giddiness to themselves for a couple days and show a little tact in the meantime. Gloating about the death of beloved figures is... not even a winning political strategy. It just makes such people look like asses.

The monarchy has been more or less holding out thanks to her popularity and the force of habit of her existence itself. Now that she's gone, people are rightfully wondering when will the British peoples (and the peoples abroad still tied to them), will do away with it altogether.
It's a rightful question for a rightful problem.

"Rightfully". Calm down.

[Luminesa]

Because behavior of that sort is ghoulish. The woman hasn't even been interred yet. They can keep the unwarranted giddiness to themselves for a couple days and show a little tact in the meantime. Gloating about the death of beloved figures is... not even a winning political strategy. It just makes such people look like asses.

You do understand that she was NOT beloved by many?

Well, many DID love her, many did NOT love her, and some who did NOT like the monarchy still held respect for her.

[Fahran]

You do understand that she was NOT beloved by many?

I'm well aware. The aforementioned ghouls have made quite certain of it through their lack of social media etiquette. That said, almost invariably their hatred is rooted in a broader hatred of either Britishness or the institution of the monarchy.

The former, of course, isn't really something the British can or should try to address through self-mutilation or the humoring of villains. You do not need to make allowances for self-identified political enemies who cannot be won over. This is doubly true when the political enemies in question are so brazen in their hatred and evil that an old woman, who doesn't seem to have actively harmed anyone, dying makes them happy.

The latter can be addressed in accordance with the public will in due time. I suspect that bringing up the issue right now will award British republicans yet another L, but, if they are swayed to do so by foreigners gloating and speculating, that's on them. I'm not really going to speculate on that at all until Elizabeth II has been buried and mourned. We can revisit that conversation later if you like.

[Fahran]

Not really, since it is a discussion of the institution, not the individual person.

Does the British public, on the whole, really want to have that conversation right now? Or are committed republicans and journos bringing it up because it serves ideological or financial goals?

Hardly crass to discuss the possible political fallout of a new head of state.

It's pretty crass to begin speculating over the political ramifications of a death or deaths when folks haven't even gotten around to burying the person or people who passed. To me at least, it's unpleasant on a visceral level prima facie.

[Perikuresu]

Honestly the only good thing from people celebrating Liz's death is that Count Dankula is trolling them on twitter, y'all should take a look at his response to the Argentines, they're especially brutal

[Michel Meilleur]

Honestly the only good thing from people celebrating Liz's death is that Count Dankula is trolling them on twitter, y'all should take a look at his response to the Argentines, they're especially brutal

Isn't he the lad who got his pug to do the nazi salute, joined UKIP and now is doing some random youtube videos for a living?

[Perikuresu]

Honestly the only good thing from people celebrating Liz's death is that Count Dankula is trolling them on twitter, y'all should take a look at his response to the Argentines, they're especially brutal

Isn't he the lad who got his pug to do the nazi salute, joined UKIP and now is doing some random youtube videos for a living?

Yeah, he's more of "wacky information and celtic myth" guy on his main channel now and is enjoying some success, his politics stuff is on another channel

[Celritannia]

Not really, since it is a discussion of the institution, not the individual person.

Does the British public, on the whole, really want to have that conversation right now? Or are committed republicans and journos bringing it up because it serves ideological or financial goals?

*shrugs*, it's just something to mention that has zero harmful intent.

[Ifreann]

Not really, since it is a discussion of the institution, not the individual person.

Does the British public, on the whole, really want to have that conversation right now? Or are committed republicans and journos bringing it up because it serves ideological or financial goals?

As it happens I just mentioned in the UK politics thread that a Sky News presenter live on the air described a protest against a killing by the Metropolitan Police as well-wishers going to pay their tributes to the Queen. A BBC correspondent yesterday said that the cost of living and energy crisis must now be seen as insignificant in the light of the Queen's passing. Thousands of Britons are at risk of freezing to death in their own homes for want of money to pay their heating bills. I really don't think that the problem with journalism right now is insufficient deference being paid to the Queen.

Hardly crass to discuss the possible political fallout of a new head of state.

It's pretty crass to begin speculating over the political ramifications of a death or deaths when folks haven't even gotten around to burying the person or people who passed. To me at least, it's unpleasant on a fairly visceral level.

If the Queen didn't want her death to coincide with Charles taking the throne then she had all the time in the world to step down. But she did not, and as such her entirely natural death of old age is, necessarily, politically relevant.

[Fahran]

*shrugs*, it's just something to mention that has zero harmful intent.

It doesn't even need to be malicious to be crass or tactless. I'd liken it a little more to a social faux pas. A little rude, a little too soon. More of a "read the room" thing than a "you're a monster" thing, though, as I've mentioned, some people are actively playing at being ghouls on Twitter at the moment.

[Celritannia]

*shrugs*, it's just something to mention that has zero harmful intent.

It doesn't even need to be malicious to be crass or tactless. I'd liken it a little more to a social faux pas. A little rude, a little too soon. More of a "read the room" thing than a "you're a monster" thing, though, as I've mentioned, some people are actively playing at being ghouls on Twitter at the moment.

Which is why I am not going on Twitter.
I am just saying it is nothing bad to have a conversation over for those that wish it in decorum.

[Fractalnavel]

Just wondering why a lot of that hasn't moved into the UK politics thread. Also wondering why QEII topics there aren't moved here. Obviously overlapping concerns, but for these longer tangents ...

[The Blaatschapen]

I love that Charles hasn't even been King for two days after waiting 70 years and everyone's already talking about dissolving the commonwealth realms and abolishing the monarchy.

It's more than a little crass.

Eh, I'll be polite and not bring up abolishing the monarchy in front of anyone who was personally close to Elisabeth 2.

The rest, your mourning is noted, but it's also not something I have to take into account.

[Sordhau]

When discussing how beloved or not a person was it becomes necessary to ask the question of what they did to deserve said love. Perhaps it's only me but when I think of Queen Elizabeth II there aren't any accomplishments of hers that spring to mind that I believe would warrant a beloved status. Almost entirely to do with the fact that her political power was virtually nonexistent as a consequence of the monarchy being little more than a tourist attraction kept alive for the sake of tradition alone. Perhaps then if she did not do anything to actually warrant the status of a beloved figure then maybe her being one is not only potentially misplaced adoration but also rather irrelevant to assessments of her as a public figure and discussions of the political ramifications of her passing regardless of the state of her decomposition or burial.

For all his faults Jimmy Carter spends his twilight years building houses for people who don't have any. That's more than most people would do at his age, including myself. While I wouldn't say that alone means he should be beloved by anyone I can certainly better understand such attitudes toward him than that of a monarch who, near as I can tell, has never done anything to the benefit of working people and is apparently beloved purely for being the subject of memes regarding her age and general attitude or for her role as a figure in British nationalism. Of course I accept that I could be entirely wrong. If there is anything she's done to actually improve the lives of people who needed it I'm more than willing to hear of these great works of hers.

But if there isn't then perhaps her being a beloved figure is perhaps is undeserved. Either way it's definitely irrelevant to political discussions regarding what affect her death will have on the political landscapes of both the U.K. and other Commonwealth countries.

[Diarcesia]

It's more than a little crass.

Hardly crass to discuss the possible political fallout of a new head of state.

The short reign penalty is real.

[Shrillland]

BC's First Nations Leadership Council calls on King Charles to renounce Doctrine of Discovery

So the pressure's already started.

[Sordhau]

BC's First Nations Leadership Council calls on King Charles to renounce Doctrine of Discovery

So the pressure's already started.

Based

[Luminesa]

BC's First Nations Leadership Council calls on King Charles to renounce Doctrine of Discovery

So the pressure's already started.

I mean this is completely valid, and he should do it. Might not be his first action, but yeah. It should be a priority.

[Old Tyrannia]

BC's First Nations Leadership Council calls on King Charles to renounce Doctrine of Discovery

So the pressure's already started.

I mean this is completely valid, and he should do it. Might not be his first action, but yeah. It should be a priority.

It's not something that His Majesty could do on his own initiative under present constitutional restrictions. He's bound to act only on the advice of his ministers, in this case his Canadian ministers.

[Lile Ulie Islands]

I want a Prince Harry and a Queen Consort Meghan. But William messed that up.

[Sordhau]

I want a Prince Harry and a Queen Consort Meghan. But William messed that up.

I want a Republic of England, Republic of Scotland, Republic of Wales, Republic of Cornwall, Republic of Mann, and United Ireland. But Cromwell messed that up.