Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Kate and William - what are they doing? Thread 2

584 replies

Pelleas · 23/04/2020 16:19

A continuation of the thread discussing the Cambridges' contribution to the pandemic.

OP posts:
Wolfgirrl · 28/04/2020 20:11

Why you say being royal is a life of hardworking servitude and media intrusion, yet you are in favour of it carrying on.

Pelleas · 28/04/2020 20:15

That’s complete nonsense. Do you seriously believe that to be logical?

Yes, and I disagree that it's nonsense.

The institution monarchy is founded on a belief of divine right which states the next in line to the throne will always succeed the present monarch.

The next in line to the throne is Charles.

The 78% of people who are saying 'I don't want Charles to be the next king' are therefore not in support of the institution of monarchy, because the institution of monarchy states you get the next one in line as monarch.

They might support the Queen. They might support William. But they don't support the law of succession and therefore don't support the institution of monarchy.

They support a system whereby we have some choice about our head of state. They might want William (which I think is a foolish choice) but they are choosing him, not accepting their divinely instituted next king - Charles, The Man who would be a Tampon.

OP posts:
LaurieMarlow · 28/04/2020 20:19

The 78% of people who are saying 'I don't want Charles to be the next king' are therefore not in support of the institution of monarchy, because the institution of monarchy states you get the next one in line as monarch.

Yes.

These people say they’re in favour of monarchy, but they clearly don’t understand it.

Wolfgirrl · 28/04/2020 20:21

Pelleas I expect that is too complex for them.

Alsohuman · 28/04/2020 20:22

The bottom line is that only 14% want no monarch at all. The rest is irrelevant.

Wolfgirrl · 28/04/2020 20:24

Irrelevant because it doesnt support your argument.

LaurieMarlow · 28/04/2020 20:26

The rest is irrelevant.

No it isn’t.

If they want William but not Charles that’s a problem. It doesn’t work that way.

Pelleas · 28/04/2020 20:29

The bottom line is that if the people want William as monarch while Charles is still alive, the only way to achieve that would be by abolishing the monarchy and voting him in as Head of State.

OP posts:
Alsohuman · 28/04/2020 20:33

I’ll leave you to your illogical little echo chamber.

LaurieMarlow · 28/04/2020 20:35

I’ll leave you to your illogical little echo chamber.

The point is perfectly logical. You just can’t refute it.

Pelleas · 28/04/2020 20:37

I think the logic of what I have said is inarguable.

The only votes in that poll that are valid as supportive of the monarchy are those who want Charles as the next king. Any other option - William, Anne, Richard Branson - is not a vote for 'the monarchy' because the next monarch at this point in time is Charles.

OP posts:
CathyorClaire · 28/04/2020 20:46

The rest is irrelevant.

Well two years ago JustCallMeHarry couldn't put a foot wrong with the masses and look how that's turned out.

Lawyers for Epstein's victims have demanded anything on Andrew held by Epstein's estate so that's set to reignite.

Public opinion is a fickle beast.

Pelleas · 28/04/2020 20:51

If Charles, William and the Cambridges were to die (I am obviously not wishing that on them but it's not an impossibility in a time of pandemic) our next monarch would be Andrew - and there'd be naff all we could do about it.

How does that strike the Royalists?

OP posts:
Mamamia456 · 28/04/2020 20:53

blettemedlar - If you won't say who this very minor royal is who still has round the clock protection, then I think it's obvious you have made it up.

hellsbells99 · 28/04/2020 20:59

Pelleas it would be Harry, wouldn’t it?

Pelleas · 28/04/2020 21:01

I suppose that would depend if Harry's having stepped down ruled him out, but the principle is the same.

OP posts:
Mamamia456 · 28/04/2020 21:14

Pelleas - Harry is still a Prince so he is still 6th in line to the throne and Archie is still 7th in line.

But what a horrible thing to even be thinking of the Cambridges and their children dying.

CathyorClaire · 28/04/2020 21:21

it would be Harry, wouldn’t it?

I think it would but it still illustrates the whole arbitrary nature of it. Had Andrew been born before Charles we'd be staring down the barrel of a loaded gun. We're stuck with Buggins' turn.

CathyorClaire · 28/04/2020 21:24

But what a horrible thing to even be thinking of the Cambridges and their children dying

No-one would wish that on them of course but the fact is they have and do defy royal convention by flying together.

eddiemairswife · 28/04/2020 22:17

If we accept the concept of an hereditary monarchy then we have to accept the next in line to the throne, no matter how inadequate people think he or she might be

StoneofDestiny · 29/04/2020 06:38

But what a horrible thing to even be thinking of the Cambridges and their children dying

Ridiculous comment.
The 'line of succession' is in place from their very birth because they think about death! Everything they do - including the order they turn up at events, where they stand in relation to each other, how they travel, how they are 'schooled', how the 'flag' flies at Buck Palace, is all down to this 'line'. Their funerals and the associated pomp is planned from their birth - not just cobbled together at the end of life!
I can't think of any family who think about death more than this one! Don't blame a mumsnetter for pointing out the blindingly obvious fact!

SamanthaBrique · 29/04/2020 06:42

Weren't William and Kate on a flight in Pakistan last year that ran into difficulties? Glad they were ok, obviously, but it does go to show how things might change in an instant.

Pelleas · 29/04/2020 07:25

But what a horrible thing to even be thinking of the Cambridges and their children dying.

Well, I made a point of saying that I wouldn't wish that on them. But we are in a pandemic - my family might die, I might die, anyone might die. Even in times of non-pandemic, anyone might die unexpectedly. - Yes, it is a horrible thought but unfortunately we are all mortal so we have to face that fact.

The point I was making is that you can't choose your monarch - you have to accept the next one in line, even if the next one in line is someone who's been universally condemned for his behaviour. It's no use supporting the monarchy because you like William.

OP posts:
LaMarschallin · 29/04/2020 07:37

It's no use supporting the monarchy because you like William.

I get the impression that some people think it's like a reality show: you can vote for your favourite contestant.

Obviously, it might help to dispel that impression if some of them didn't act so much like reality show contestants.

Pelleas · 29/04/2020 07:46

It doesn't even take much stretching of the imagination to see a scenario where we might be facing a King Andrew. Suppose -

William and Harry had been with Diana in the car crash that killed all but one occupant of the car.

Charles, instead of recovering from Coronavirus, had died.

Ergo, Andrew would be our next King.

OP posts: