Royals facing two years of tours in 'soft democracy' blitz to keep Commonwealth intact

[MamoruHisaishi]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/royals/royals-facing-two-years-tours-30531789

I’m pretty sure they know that horse has bolted.

But I am sure that foreign tours will be generally back on, of course.

I wish I was facing two years of luxury, funded tours with an entourage rather than a very stressful 45 hr a week job with an average salary.

I think bringing the kids along to the tours will definitely contribute greatly to the ‘charm offensive’. It’s hard to do protests when kids are involved, and people love seeing families with cute kids.

Yeah they are panicked.

The ‘royals’ need the Commonwealth, the Commonwealth does not need the ‘royals’.

If they bring the kids it will prove it.
So much for protecting the children

The kids are protected, they will be with their family and surrounded by security personnel and will get to meet the heads of state. Regardless of how you feel about the motives of these tours, the kids will get to experience what their future roles will be like.

Exactly my point re the children

That's understandable, but then you would be under surveillance 24/7 all phone and social media monitored, satellite tracked etc could you handle the trade off

Yes, I would gladly swap. I don’t believe that Royal life is half as much of a hardship as is made out.

Royal life is not a hardship. They have extreme privilege, wealth and power.

The expectation is that the Commonwealth is going to change. Jamaica is going ahead with their plans. The problem is these tours do not improve the optics. Sending the kids looks worse not better.

Why do people think the royals need the commonwealth exactly? I would think William knows those days are long gone.

Good. The Commonwealth has a lot of value. What do the royals get out of it, I don't think they care? But soft cultural groups of countries with shared history with us will be necessary in the years to come.

Why do royals need the commonwealth? I wouldn't have thought they much cared.

As an aside, when people say the commonwealth in this context ("royals needs the commonwealth"), do they mean the countries with the king as head of state (14 of the 56 commonwealth countries)?
Is the commonwealth going to change that much? When Barbados removed the queen as head of state, they remained in the commonwealth.

Because the monarch is what tied the commonwealth together, once you are only the monarch of a small single state you are more expendable to that small single state.

Yes I agree with both your posts @calmcoco

The commonwealth was begun as an attempt to soothe the British butt hurt racists who longed for Empire

The Commonwealth has evolved into its own thing with countries joining who ( luckily for them) had no experience of being a British colony and only 14 commonwealth countries retaining links with the ‘royals’ . Those 14 are nearly all busy trying to get rid of the ‘royals’. Australia will probably be next after Caribbean islands .
Chuck will be booking his flights soon I bet with the deluded idea that ‘royals’ swanning about costing everyone a fortune , will help

@WeWereInParis

Yes - it’s the countries removing Chuck as head off state that is the issue . The Commonwealth itself is a different organisation now.

I’m sure the Commonwealth as an organisation has no enthusiasm for Chuck being imposed on them - but you know, mummy said so .
She literally imposed him so it does have value to the ‘royals’

@Middlelanehogger its the ‘shared history’ as you put it that is offensive to many of these former colonies

This is an interesting article on the commonwealth

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/sep/13/royals-commonwealth-debts-colonies-monarchy

But the Monarch is only King to 14 of the 54 countries in the Commonwealth. And even though Barbados became independent they actively remain part of the Commonwealth even though they no longer have the King as HoS.

Yes, but for the monarchy to have any influence over the commonwealth it needs to be HoS for more than just UK. If all the countries in the commonwealth ditch the monarch, the UK will be just one amongst many, rather than having the bigger influence it has.

Being HoS of so many, and having a lead role in the commonwealth, is part of the justification for keeping a monarchy in the UK.

The two things are linked.

My understanding is that a lot of overseas visits are undertaken by the royal family at the behest of the government. With that in mind, does anyone know whether having our King as Head of the commonwealth benefits the government? I'm thinking that maybe it gives more status or influence, something that is rather lacking since we left the EU as far as I can tell.

Any articles I've read have always said that the Queen and now Charles were happy for countries to remove them as Head of State if that was what the people wanted, which makes me wonder where the impetus for this announcement is from. Did the plan come from the royals or the government and who benefits the most?

Some people here seem to confuse The Commonwealth of Nations and the 15 Commonwealth Realms, who still have Charles as a monarch.

While I'm not anti monarchist, I 100% think that all realms should become republics. Honestly, I don't see the point of these countries having the UK monarch as their head of state. The late Queen cared a lot but I don't think Charles does. He has been King for almost a year now and still hasn't visited any of the realms. In fact, when was the last time he even visited a Realm that wasn't Australia, Canada or New Zealand?

A very muddled article from the Mirror - what a surprise!

As others have noted, there’s a big different between the 56 members of the Commonwealth, which appears to be thriving as an organisation (though the Commonwealth games are not 😀) and those remaining countries that have the UK Royal Family as their Head of State.

The latter countries will also most certainly transition to become independent countries in due course - I can’t imagine why anyone would think they wouldn’t? And I also can’t imagine that the Royal Family would think it appropriate to try and stop that. As Prince William recently said, the royal family has, and will continue to, stand by any country that wishes to part ways with the British monarchy.

One of the most notable elements of Elizabeth’s long reign was the peaceful transition of the majority of the former Empire to independent nations. This is not something that all the former colonial powers have achieved. I fully imagine that we will see the Prince of Wales attending peaceful ceremonies to mark the transition from former realm to independent country, just as his father and grandmother so often have done. None of these countries are suggesting leaving the Commonwealth, however. It’s a separate issue.

The late Queen cared a lot but I don't think Charles does. He has been King for almost a year now and still hasn't visited any of the realms. In fact, when was the last time he even visited a Realm that wasn't Australia, Canada or New Zealand?

You can pick out of these which ones are the realms, but since July 2018 (i.e. the last 5 years, which time period includes all the Covid restrictions) he has been to all of the below in addition to the three you mention :

The Gambia
Ghana
Nigeria
Barbados
St Lucia
St Vincent and the Grenadines
St Kitts & Nevis
Granada
Cayman Islands
Rwanda
India
The Solomon Islands

Fair enough, but I suspect it's a lot more stage managed than it seems.

“One of the most notable elements of Elizabeth’s long reign was the peaceful transition of the majority of the former Empire to independent nations”

History is clearly not your strong point @Serenster .

And many former colonies are asking for apologies and financial recompense as a result of their treatment by the British .

And lol at your white wash of Chuck and Willy raising no objection to the remaining countries removing the Windsors as head of state!

As if they had any choice