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

Good posts @Roussette and @wordler
reasonable and fair criticisms and observations.

I strongly disagree.

For me, the treatment of Harry (after years of dedicated service) and the silence and lack of support from ‘family’ when both Meghan and Archie received abuse and death threats, irreparably damaged the Monarchy.

Everything else that has transpired since then, stems from that.

I also think the Tories (Simon Case etc), tabloids (Murdoch and Rothermere), Piers Morgan, the royal rota, trolls, single purpose hate accounts on YouTube, ITV (GMB, Lorraine, This Morning, Loose Women), The Jeremy Vine Show, GB News, Talk TV and the close friendships and collaborations that the royals have with many of these unsavoury individuals, have irreparably damaged the Monarchy.

The ones that think they defending the Royals, are the ones that are destroying it.

Years of dedicated service? He only stepped up when Meghan came on the scene. Before that he was living on the tax payer playing his PlayStation and going to Vegas. He was lazy and a waste of space. Apart from Invictus which is about the only thing he’s done with his life .

It’s ok. I trust my own eyes. I’m not looking for anyone to rewrite history for me.

Sentebale is obviously irrelevant despite Harry's ongoing support and large donations to the charity of which he is Patron

Earlier this year, Harry personally donation $1.5million to help grow his own global development charity and Sentebale grew by more than 50 percent last year after raising $5.5million (£4.5million).
Founded in 2006.
Before Meghan.

What I’d like to see first - if it was up to me - is a more transparent accounting at the end of each year for the sovereign grant - so we can see how much it costs for the upkeep of the crown properties and estates and the national archives.

I quite agree although I'd see a return to the set amount civil list which at least got reviewed and debated even though at disgracefully long intervals.

So you were watching him all the time?

Oh dear.

I’m very familiar with his charity work, military service, work with the Commonwealth on behalf of the Queen and patronages.

I agree. They are also the people salivating and whipping up drama over a family breakdown in order to make money.

Yes, it’s very sad. That’s why I can’t understand the need to work with them. Cut them off at the knees.

Out of curiosity, who did you side with in Depp vs Heard?

Neither

I feel the same as I did under the queen.

There's a lot of secrecy that allows the royal estate to have exemptions from all sorts of laws, the country is run to preserve their wealth, and if we don't shift to a full republic then the very least that should happen is total transparency on royal assets and finances.

I think we should keep them as a relic, for pomp and ceremony if people like the traditions, but as private citizens who are under the same laws as everyone else.

The only time I found myself not wanting abolition of the monarchy as a constitutional force was when Boris and his cronies were showing complete contempt for parliament. I'd not trust our current government to properly structure a democratic reform so I guess I'm having to hold my nose and accept the monarchy offers some form of check and balance for now.

The bigger problem is that the country is run to protect the wealth of the monied class which has a LOT more money and power than the royal family. So a republic is not going to change that at all. And if we end up repeatedly voting in a Boris type as head of state we'll end up with even more people like that finding ways to shore up their wealth at the expense of everyone else.

But I'd be interested in a viable head of state option if we could work out a way of it not just being an extension of whichever political party was in charge at the time.

I'm not sure Harry has that much power! Or if that was ever his goal. I think that both sides came out of this clash looking worse. And I reckon that's more of an issue for the royal family / the monarchy as an institution. So I guess we agree in a way!

We had managed to discuss the monarchy and Charles' erm, performance so far without making much reference so Harrygate!

Harry has damaged it irreparably

I think Harry and Meghan tried very hard to damage the monarchy. I think they hoped to set up a royal court in America to rival the BRF and needed to damage them to achieve it. Initially they did damage the RF but as they pushed the envelope further and further it backfired on them spectacularly and they are now not popular (except with their fanbase) in the UK or America. The RF however, regardless of the noisy republican faction, are growing in influence and popularity. William and Kate are the most popular royals in America with high ratings, and their comparative youth appeals to a wide range of people. The King has only been in the job for a year, so it will take time to unwind all the outdated protocols and respond to calls for greater transparency.

Their policy of silence in the face of months of attacks, lies and smear campaigns has proven to be the correct one. Personally I wasn't much bothered with them, but seeing a family attacked so relentlessly and unfairly, actually made me want to support them more. I think they're doing a good job but still have a long way to go to appeal to more people. Charles' appearances in Germany and France, and Williams in New York, with large enthusiastic crowds, demonstrate they are far more popular than you are led to believe by the Sussex supporters who seem to feature so heavily in the RF section of MN.

This thread about how we feel about the Monarchy under Charles really didn't need an essay about Harry and Meghan and how awful they supposedly are. Especially calling those who feel differently 'a fanbase' and 'Sussex supporters' and 'noisy republican faction'. And questioning why they are on 'royal threads' when those who dislike H&M are all over those threads using every opportunity to insult a couple who aren't here. Can't you write a post without knocking those with a different view to you? It's goading.

Harry and Meghan have left, you really need to get over it.

We had managed to discuss the monarchy and Charles' erm, performance so far without making much reference so Harrygate!

Yes, it's a shame it's just been hijacked. It's been interesting up until now.

Charles has a lot of work to do for sure, they are far from growing in neither influence nor popularity at the moment.

Apologies, I took the bait earlier. Will keep on topic next time 😊

The bigger problem is that the country is run to protect the wealth of the monied class which has a LOT more money and power than the royal family. So a republic is not going to change that at all. And if we end up repeatedly voting in a Boris type as head of state we'll end up with even more people like that finding ways to shore up their wealth at the expense of everyone else.

But I'd be interested in a viable head of state option if we could work out a way of it not just being an extension of whichever political party was in charge at the time
I agree with you.

The idea of a Boris figure terrifies me. Just hearing how the Human Rights Act is being described by our current government is chilling. Any system that would have a head of state as an extension of parliament isn't an option.

We need a viable head of state option and a system of government that gets back to civic duty.

seeing a family attacked so relentlessly and unfairly

Can you explain which criticisms you have found unfair?

@colourwheelofortune stop commenting on where and how often people comment, its actually against the guidelines of this forum and its goading. The royal board isn't a fan forum, discussions about the royals is what it is for and people are entitled to criticise a tax payer funded institution in much the same way people will criticise the government on the politics board. It has nothing to do with Meghan and Harry why people are against a monarchy either.

@Roussette I have to disagree with you when you say mentioning H&M has nothing to do with the popularity of the monarchy. The attacks from the Sussexes very much affected the popularity of the monarchy following Oprah, Netflix and Spare in particular. It was from a diminished base popularity that the monarchy has had to work hard to recover from. That diminution was entirely down to the Sussexes. Fortunately many people's opinion has bounced back following some high profile visits and (lets be honest) a charm offensive from the royal camp. Their popularity is evidenced by the polls in the UK and America, their recent trips to France, Germany and NYC. Of course they are not 100% popular with everyone. No one would pretend that. They were always divisive within certain factions.

If I choose to use terms as you describe, who are you to censor me? I also never questioned why Sussex supporters are on the royal threads. As for saying 'Can't you write a post without knocking those with a different view to you? It's goading'. Again are you trying to censor me? I did not 'knock' anyone who is posting on these threads, I simply stated my opinion without commenting on anyone else's post. As for highjacking, its not highjacking to comment on a thread about the monarchs popularity without mentioning the devastating affect the Sussex smear campaign had on that popularity.

@Iwantcakeeveryday Your post was very offensive to me and a PA. I will not report as I want posts like this to stand for all to see. I did not object to other people having an opinion regarding their views on the RFs status, so please do not say I did. If you wish to criticise them go ahead, it is your valid opinion and I at least show some respect for your view, even if I disagree with it.
However, this comment from you is completely unacceptable.
stop commenting on where and how often people comment, its actually against the guidelines of this forum and its goading.
I have contacted MN and they looked at my post and have said it does not break guidelines. So I'm asking you to please not use threatening language. If you believe any post I put up breaks guidelines, just report it, don't use aggressive language.

I'm afraid you will have to google that information as I refuse to interact with someone who repeated uses the term 'Willy' as a derogatory term for William. Using a penis reference is so childish and belongs in the playground.

I'm afraid you will have to google that information as I refuse to interact with someone who repeated uses the term 'Willy' as a derogatory term for William. Using a penis reference is so childish and belongs in the playground.

Yet there you are replying anyway😉