Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Why is Prince Charles being criticised?

63 replies

HappydaysArehere · 14/05/2015 18:59

when I studied the British Constitution some years ago, I remembered the monarch was able a) to be consulted b) to encourage and c) to warn. I therefore do not agree that the Queen or Prince Charles should remain tight lipped and incapable of expressing a point of view. Whether the Government chooses to take any notice is another thing. From what I have seen Prince Charles is showing integrity and a caring, dutiful approach to his role as the monarch in waiting. If he did nothing but sit around as an empty head he would then be criticised for being useless.

OP posts:
Pico2 · 17/05/2015 09:14

Charis1 - that is a big leap of imagination. Surely you can take the implication that we could become a republic from what BlossomTang wrote. It is perfectly possible to become a republic without beheading anyone. And meddling in politics has caused that in Greece not too long ago. I'm also struggling to see what you might find racist in that comment. I think you might need to calm down a bit.

Charis1 · 17/05/2015 09:20

his namesake had his head hacked off, pico, that is what is being referred to.

and royalty may not be classed as a race as such, but hating someone or bullying someone or attacking someone simply because they happen to have been born into that tribe is exactly parallel to racism.

personally, I am not a supporter of the system of having a royal family at all.

However, it is so unfair and unkind to spew vitriol at someone just because of the family they were born into. I hate seeing these attacks, and I think it should be considered as bad as racist attacks, and dealt with the same way.

you can support changing the system without threatening or insulting the innocent people caught up in it. They are human beings. Prince Charles has written some letters to some people to give his opinion.

WE ARE ALLL perfectly entitled to do so, without some twat referring to hacking our head off.

sourdrawers · 17/05/2015 11:09

I really don't think Charles is intent on 'absolutist rule' Blossom. The evidence just isn't there that he'd dissolve parliament, introduce his own taxes and impose uniform religion across the UK - if and when he becomes King. Just because he's written a few letters expressing his views on how the countries being governed. .

I'd like to see the monarchy abolished too, but comparing him with Charles 1 is a bit daft.

Springtimemama · 17/05/2015 11:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

toothlessoldhag · 17/05/2015 13:31

The letters are self-deprecating, yes, but look at their underlying impact:

"24 February 2005
Tony Blair

Dear Prime Minister,

We briefly mentioned the European Union Directive on Herbal Medicines, which is having such a deleterious effect on complementary medicine sector in this country by effectively outlawing the use of certain herbal extracts. I think we both agreed this was using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. You rightly asked me what could be done about it and I am asking the Chief Executive of my Foundation for Integrated Health to provide a more detailed briefing which I hope to be able to send shortly so that your advisers can look at it. Meanwhile, I have given Martin Hurst a note suggesting someone he could talk to who runs the Herbal Practitioner’s Association.

Yours ever, Charles"

See the blog linked to above. This was a serious attempt to lobby for a change to the law regarding herbal medicines and other such wackery.

Springtimemama · 17/05/2015 13:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BettyCatKitten · 17/05/2015 13:35

Imo we should have an elected HoS

DiegoDiegoDiego · 17/05/2015 13:43

Charles is being criticised for whinging about the publication of his letters to Government ministers.

If he didn't seek to influence public policy there wouldn't be an insistence that his letters were made publicly available.

sourdrawers · 17/05/2015 16:00

You're quite right toothless. But it seems to me Charles is a bit of a paper Tiger and an easy target.

It seems the Tory government are going to prevent future problems by legislating for any Palace correspondence to be open for publication. I wonder if this same Tory government will publish all ministerial or members' correspondence with multinational corporations, such as: BAE, rich Arabs from Saudi Arabia or other overseas nationals, and all the other vested interests and lobbyists that actually do seriously subvert the vestiges of democracy that remain?.

toothlessoldhag · 17/05/2015 16:04

Yes, point taken sourdrawers. The same applies I suppose to correspondence between the Labour party and the various union funders. Murky waters all around.

sourdrawers · 17/05/2015 16:31

Indeed. They (Labour) were no doubt up to exactly the same when they were in power.

For me it's more simply the principle that Charles (if he had his way) would be sitting at the head of a deeply undemocratic, feudal and rampantly privileged institution. Whilst promoting Govt's arms sales to other murdering, despot states, and peddles all sorts of hypocritical eco views while raking it in as a corporate-grasping, environment-destroying landowner. Whilst avoiding paying his corporation tax, the greedy bastard.

SuburbanRhonda · 17/05/2015 18:04

royalty may not be classed as a race as such

No "as such" about it.

Royalty are not a race, ergo, criticising them is not racist.

Charis1 · 17/05/2015 19:08

Royalty are not a race, ergo, criticising them is not racist

it is absolutly identical to racism in every respect.

Pico2 · 17/05/2015 19:22

Charis1 - I suggest you put that to someone who has experienced actual racism and see how they respond.

Charis1 · 17/05/2015 19:26

Charis1 - I suggest you put that to someone who has experienced actual racism and see how they respond

As a person who has experienced plenty of racism, including racist violence, let me spell it out to you

Hating, insulting or threatening someone because of the group they were born into is fundamentally ignorant, prejudiced and evil.

What don't you get?

Charis1 · 17/05/2015 19:35

just beyond belief.

A poster has implied that a completely innocent man should feel threatened with having his head hacked off because he has expressed a few harmless opinions in a democracy?

Obviously you are going to get the occasional unhinged psychopath replying on public threads, but in all honesty pico2, to try and defend that position? totally and utterly beyond any sane or reasonable justification what so ever.

If you think that is any different to racism, you honestly have no idea what the word means.

Pico2 · 17/05/2015 21:09

I'd be pretty surprised if he read this thread and very surprised if he felt threatened by it.

I think you are looking at an example of hyperbole, rather than a genuine threat to decapitate Prince Charles.

I really don't think BlossomTang is an unhinged psychopath. Nor do I think that BlossomTang's post has much in common with racism. But you are amusing me, so please do continue.

blowinahoolie · 17/05/2015 21:15

Never mind Prince Charles!! What about Prince Harry wanting to bring back National Service? What a ridiculous idea Hmm

Charis1 · 17/05/2015 21:42

I'd be pretty surprised if he read this thread and very surprised if he felt threatened by it.

so it would be ok to be posting here making threats against say jews, for example, if you think they are unlikely to read it or take it seriously if they do?

You just go ahead and be amused there are words for people who find it amusing to condone racial violence.

Pico2 · 17/05/2015 22:28

It isn't racism. Being a member of the royal family isn't a race. It is your continued insistence that a) BlossomTang has actually threatened Prince Charles, b) that this is constitutes racism and c) that I am beyond sane to defend BlossomTang's post that I find amusing.

I don't either condone racial violence or find anything amusing in racism.

Charis1 · 17/05/2015 22:39

He needs to remember what happened to his namesake Charles 1

All he has done is express a few peaceful opinions, as we all have a right to do.

He is being told that the brutal death of a beheaded king is relevant in this situation.

he is being told that BECAUSE OF THE GROUP OF PEOPLE HE WAS BORN INTO and for no other reason.

You find it amusing that this vile threat is criticised as exactly the same as racism

That makes you just as bad. You think it is ok to threaten someone with death because you don't like the group of people they are born into? Evil.

bookworm9229 · 17/05/2015 22:48

I think that he does a very good job ,he has always been ahead of his times with regard to many things .These letters have been made available after a very long legal battle with the Guardian and the fall out ………….nada ……….except for the huge legal bill …… i would prefer the Guardian to spend their time and money on more important stories .

bookworm9229 · 17/05/2015 22:54

This thread is awful The fact that jews have been pulled into it is just beyond the pale . People should take their hate somewhere else .

Pico2 · 17/05/2015 22:55

Charis1 - he isn't actually being threatened with death. I think you might need to chill out. I am finding this amusing because you are taking a slightly funny remark made by a stranger on the internet about someone you don't actually know and blowing it out of all proportion.

Actually, maybe you do know him. Camilla, is that you?

Charis1 · 17/05/2015 22:59

He needs to remember what happened to his namesake Charles 1

Charles 1 had his head hacked off for treason. How exactly is this not a suggestion that he should deserve the same fate.