To find some language offensive about the funeral?

[Mushroo]

Out at the pub tonight and talk turns to the queens funeral.

Im not an ardent royalist or anything but I will be watching as a historical event and in recognition of the queens service.

My friend is very left wing and said ‘I won’t be watching, fuck that,, fuck the monarchy, I won’t be watching to save the electric’. (This is someone who does not have to count the pennies).

AIBU to say this was a bit offensive, and a simple ‘I won’t be watching, it’s not for me’ would have been fine and respectful to people who do want to watch,

It almost seems as though being offensive is ‘cool’.

Obviously the book will across as biased because it's blowing the lid on what really goes on. I don't know how else he could have written it really. He wouldn't get away with it if he was lying would he.

Sorry I only did the bold to show it was a separate post to the quote. It's so hard this format on my phone.

If it was objective it wouldn’t use words like “flunkies”, it’s straight out of the republican playbook. Along with:

Cap doffing
Forelock tugging
Bowing and scraping

Lying and bias, aka presenting something in the worst possible light and omitting facts that don’t suit your agenda, are near neighbours but not identical.

I gave heard plenty of vitriol from royalists including small business owners being abused for opening during the funeral and dog walkers for walking their dog.

I also heard that instead of lock down the government were implementing martial law. I heard it was confirmed, by peoples best friends brothers who were in the armed forces and ready to deploy any minute. Along with photoshopped photos and we were going to be locked in our houses with military on the street not allowing us out at all. And how we would need food for at least 2 weeks because even shopping for food would be banned.

I also hear, every Christmas time, that someone’s uncles friend found a wallet locally and it has a drivers license in. He went to the home of the person who had the wallet to return it. The person who owned the wallet was Muslim and thanked him and told him as a thank you, he was letting him know that he shouldn’t go to our local shopping centre on Christmas Eve and to keep his family away. And loads of people hear that racist pile of bullshit, as a Local story all over the country every year.

I also heard that the Queen took 10 indigenous Canadian children on a picnic and the children never came back and people believe it, despite her not being where it happened the year it happened. And the priest who said it being defrocked for a series of other lies and transgressions. People believe it.

Just last week I saw a grown adult tell people The Queen wasn’t the longest reigning British Monarch, because Louis 14th of France reigned longer.

I suggest, you don’t believe everything you hear.

How would someone be abused for waking their dog and not watching the funeral? The people who think are doing the abusing would have been….watching the funeral?

I feel the same about any one right wing or who vote Tory.

Great post.

Agreed great post and to all those saying this book is tin-foil 5G lizard stuff obviously haven't read it or want to frame anti-monarchical sentiments as some extreme David Icke nutjob outlier. C3 is one of the richest men and landowners in the country and has just inherited tax-free a lietral King's Ransom from his mum with a sealed will that we plebs can't read. Whilst we have had The Queue, Holly and Phil q jumping, the evil that Harry and Megs have done by holding hands, and the Lord's Chamberlain's wand being broken over the coffin and we're mad. Right......

You called the book poxy and shared a rather scathing 1 star review of the book. It makes no sense that you also think it’s given you secret knowledge.

yes, imo, that is ‘mad’ though not my choice of words.

I did that in favour of balance. It's probably not the greatest book ever written, the breathless prose of the free introduction means it's certainly not Tina Brown and there are critical voices such as the 1-star review that say its' bilge. Nevertheless, there is very little out there putting the case against the monarchy and as such, it is to be supported and recommended as starting point to develop a critical republican stance. A more informed populace that can see through the so-called ' magic of monarchy' with arguments and facts is to be welcomed as a sign of a healthy democracy and an antidote to the 99% of the news and opinion that is pushing the other way.

the so-called ' magic of monarchy'

I've never heard this phrase. Where's it from?

If a book is so important in political, social and historical value. It’s not poxy is it?

Doesnt matter how badly it’s written.

The fact that it’s badly written, suggests it’s a book someone wrote who didn’t care very much about getting their message across. Not everyone can write a book. Which is why people who can’t but want to write one have many options to make it into an actual book.

i wonder why such an important book was so badly written and why the author didn’t care about that? I would suggest that it’s because it’s a work in praise of their ego. They couldn’t see its huge flaws

Not someone you would trust to write a factual book, if their ego goes before the work.

I think it's a well-known phrase used I believe initially by Walter Bagehot.

What does “Don’t let the daylight in upon the magic of monarchy” mean?
By itself, not much. The unabridged quote, however, speaks volumes:
[The British monarchy:] Its mystery is its life. We must not let in daylight upon magic. We must not bring the Queen into the combat of politics, or she will cease to be reverenced by all combatants.

It’s basically an exhortation by Walter Bagehot to not drag Queen Victoria into the mudpits of political conflict. In his view, a politically-inactive monarchy served the best interests of the United Kingdom; by abstaining from direct rule, the monarch levitated above the political fray like a dignified David Copperfield, and remained a respected personage to whom all subjects could look to as a guiding light.

As Vernon Bogdanor wrote in The Monarchy and the Constitution:
In contrast to the Prince Consort’s conception of a politically active monarchy, a presidential monarchy, [Walter Bagehot and Benjamin Disraeli] understood that the sovereign could provide a beneficial influence only in so far as he or she abstained entirely from seeking to rule. Only then could the head of the state become the head of the nation.

I haven't read it! But have a physical copy on order when I will be in a better position to judge it in its entirety. But in a desert, even a dirty glass of water is better than nothing when you are thirsty. I was only alerted to it when there was a pile-on by monarchists in this thread I had never heard of it before.

Somewhere in my loft, I have a copy of the late MPs Wille Hamilton's 'The Queen and I' I bought as a spotty student teenager which was my first exposure to a counter-narrative 40 years ago!

www.amazon.co.uk/My-Queen-I-Willie-Hamilton/dp/0704312441

5.0 out of 5 stars A refreshing outbreak of sanity.

Willie Hamilton ploughed a lonely furrow in the late 1960s and 1970s.He was almost alone in being publicly anti-monarchist in an era when public discussion of the Monarchy in Britain was akin to worship, not journalism. I can remember seeing TV coverage of Princess Anne's wedding in 1973 which,even to my then 10-year-old mind, seemed mind-bendingly servile.
Mr.Hamilton was a godsend for a long-suffering minority of Britain's population. His questioning, not just of the financing of the Monarchy, but it's right to exist in a democratic society, was indeed a breath of fresh air.
MQAI is obviously a bit dated, but it's arguments haven't gone away in the last 40 years

Next steps - we start stripping Charles of any political power. We are supposed to be a modern nation and having a King as anything other than a completely ceremonial figurehead to roll out a couple of times a year is ridiculous

He doesn't have any political power. He is just a ceremonial figurehead. The last monarch to have any meaningful political power was Victoria.

@lemmein
Well said . Brilliantly put. I could weep for this country. I could weep for the children, the old ,the vulnerable and the lost but most I worry... alot , especially for my family. God fucking help us.

The monarch appoints the First Ministers of the devolved parliaments and also has the power to dissolve the UK Parliament so apart from that, no power at all🙄

The monarch appoints the First Ministers of the devolved parliaments

That is a formality though in most cases. They don’t choose the First Ministers.

I don’t think they appoint the First and Deputy First Minister in the Northern Ireland Executive?