One year into King Charles's reign, how do Britons feel about the monarchy?

[MamoruHisaishi]

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2023/09/04/one-year-of-king-charles-how-do-britons-feel-ab

KC2 complete irrelevance. That’s it! He was and is such an uncharismatic man, which surely is essential for the role. I hope we become a republic eventually. Let the family keep their lands and live off their income and pay taxes like the rest of us. Give the National Trust the grants and they can run what’s left and the people can enjoy.

I don’t think it’s right that they keep their lands. All their houses and property ought to be given to the NT and they ought to find jobs like everyone and actually work for their keep. Maybe they get to keep one modest house each. Their lands were all gained through war and looting anyway originally.

How was Sandringham House and estate 'gained through war and looting'?

Queen Victoria bought Sandringham House, after putting out the begging bowl to the government for more money because she was apparently skint. But managed to find enough money to buy her son a huge swathe of West Norfolk. So she looted the Victorian government, who were busy looting India in her name.

I think you mean KCIII. Quite a big mistake.

I used to think that Charles had prepared his whole life for this and we should let him have it but say he is the last. But seeing his childish toddler behaviour around signing the papers and seeming to be trying to to bring Andrew back in the fold I think it's time to end the Monarchy.

William and Kate are unspeakably dull and as a pp said, just seem to be interested in having a nice life at the taxpayers expense.

I seem to remember William telling people ( I think it was in Africa) that they should have fewer children. His children do and will use many more resources than children born in Africa.

Edward and Sophie are just annoying - trying to muscle in in the action.

I hear time and time again that the royals bring in more money than they cost. I have yet to see any actual figures to support this. And what's with increasing the amount Charles receives? Do they not have enough?

The amount of money spent on the coronation was obscene and the rituals were bizarre.

Outdated and pointless

Well said.

They're outdated and pointless. I think they should be giving all the land and homes and art back to the taxpayer.

LoL yes KC3. They shouldn’t have restored the monarchy after the first two.

It was restored after the first one - that was how Charles II got onto the throne.

The reason that will never happen is that the current royal family - the Windsors - are small fry in terms of inherited wealth (stuff they actually own) compared to a lot of the other people / families who have also benefited from historical circumstances in gathering resources from other people.

And all those rich people are fairly powerful so would not want an example made of the Windsors and their inherited wealth in case the spotlight turned in their coffers next.

And where is the cut off for when inherited wealth is okay vs not okay - is it a historical date - if you inherited money made by your ancestors after 1918 you are fine etc.

Or is it an amount of inherited wealth that gets targeted?

The wealth is small fry compared to others ( which is why they get into hot water with their love of Middle Eastern absolute Monarchs, Kazakh oligarchs and dodgy billionnaires) it's the power they wield, the complete lack of scrutiny of the important stuff, the ability to get grown adults to do everything they tell them to do- walk out of rooms backwards, pick things up for them, start and stop eating, putting toothpaste on their toothbrush etc and the lack of accountability that comes as part ofvthe package. They could be absolutely loaded, but without the power and the obsequiousness, they would very soon run out of money. As long as they are monarchs they will never have to hire out a home to TV companies or allow tourists in to make ends meet as they may have to if they had to maintain their homes from their own efforts. Harry is finding out for himself what he has to do to pay his own bills when all he has of any value is that he is a Royal. He is only an outlier because he was stupid enough to leave and try and make his own way.

The wealth is small fry compared to others ( which is why they get into hot water with their love of Middle Eastern absolute Monarchs, Kazakh oligarchs and dodgy billionnaires) it's the power they wield, the complete lack of scrutiny of the important stuff, the ability to get grown adults to do everything they tell them to do- walk out of rooms backwards, pick things up for them, start and stop eating, putting toothpaste on their toothbrush etc and the lack of accountability that comes as part ofvthe package. They could be absolutely loaded, but without the power and the obsequiousness, they would very soon run out of money. As long as they are monarchs they will never have to hire out a home to TV companies or allow tourists in to make ends meet as they may have to if they had to maintain their homes from their own efforts. Harry is finding out for himself what he has to do to pay his own bills when all he has of any value is that he is a Royal. He is only an outlier because he was stupid enough to leave and try and make his own way.

Absolutely this.

..the ability to get grown adults to do everything they tell them to do - walk out of rooms backwards, pick things up for them, start and stop eating, putting toothpaste on their toothbrushes etc..............

Does this include people who have freely applied to work in the RF's households and can presumably give notice to leave whenever they want to? Do members of the RF tell the servants when to stop and start eating, or are you now on to banquets with invited guests?
I have read here on Mumsnet that any valet might put toothpaste on an employer's toothbrush, not only Prince Charles's. I have also read on here that it only happened when Charles had hurt his arm. Obviously, those things might have come from lying Mumsnetters.

'The monarchs', presumably Elizabeth and Charles, already let the tourists in to help make ends meet, unless they let them in for free and give them gin.

How do you know that THEY TELL people to do things. Perhaps one or two did it a few times but for the most part they ask people to do things. Have you had a boss who bossily TOLD you what to do or one who asked you pleasantly to do something. Which way works best? Yes, I know Andrew is reputed to have asked or told someone to draw the curtains, but he's one person, not all of them.

WHY did Charles II come back? Why did the Commonwealth (Cromwell's) come to an end? Did I ever know? If so, I can't remember why.

How do you know that THEY TELL people to do things. Perhaps one or two did it a few times but for the most part they ask people to do things

I just think (for what it's worth) that because QE11 was on the throne for soooo long, things were set in stone and the royal aides and courtiers have just gone with what's happened before as far as protocol. Everything has been set in stone and now we are in a transition period and the Monarchy needs to update from the antiquated ways to something more modern. It will take time.

Basically because, when Oliver Cromwell was succeeded after only 11 years by his son Richard, the new guy was considered a dead loss and the nobility took their chance to press for the return of the Monarchy

I agree - a lot of the rules surrounding the BRF do seem to have been a combination of the late Queen’s personal preferences and remnants of rules that were in place hundreds of years ago.

I mentioned in the protocol thread that there was an official document in Henry VIII time which stated exactly which six courtiers were allowed to touch the King and under what circumstances and exactly how servants were allowed to live and comport themselves if they had any close contact with the King.

Presumably those rules were in place to protect against disease, stealth poisonings and all other sorts of nasty things which could befall a monarch in Tudor times.

But in the 2000s we were still talking about a ‘you must not touch the Queen’ protocol rule as if it’s in a current legal document like Henry VIII’s Eltham Ordinances.

Fuller version here if you're interested, @upinaballoon:

https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofEngland/Richard-Cromwell-Lord-Protector/

Thank you!

I thought I was posting on the protocol thread hence my out of sync post!

Andrew is reported to have done far more than that. And we only hear about it now because of his fall from grace. Who knows how the rest of them behave? And it doesn't matter whether people apply for jobs or not. The power the Royals have over people is what the attraction is, over and above being incredibly rich when they could be rich and not have the power if they wanted.

Angrycat2768 · Yesterday 20:59
Who knows how the rest of them behave?
And yet you assume they behave badly

And it doesn't matter whether people apply for jobs or not.
It probably matters to those applying, and are presumably keen to get the job. Otherwise, why apply?

Not sure where to post this, this seems like the most suitable thread.

Mic Wright:
The Mail runs anecdotes about the Royal Family destroying papers to conceal their behaviour as a funny little jape. The Windsor crime family’s instinct to burn the evidence is another reason I support Republic.

@MissElinorDashwood So you don't think the Royal family, who are actually human beings with private thoughts, wishes, actions and so on, deserve any kind of privacy? That the taxpayers own them body and soul, and that even in the peace of death their secrets should be drawn out of them, displayed for the world to gawp at and salivate over?

Would you like that for your family?

I'm sure that it isn't just members of the RF who sift through their papers and throw things away. Jane Austen's sister destroyed quite a lot and I've definitely been known to cringe at an old diary entry and shred stuff. Lots of people do it.