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

Originally she was to be Prince’s consort due to the seedy nature of their relationship. Head of C of E??? What a joke!

The C of E is a Christian denomination. Do you know the tenets of Christianity? They are not a joke.

After the late Queen had observed the married relationship between Charles and Camilla for several years she acknowledged, publicly, at one of his birthdays, that Camilla was his support.

The Church of England has been admitting sinners to communion for quite some years, strange organisation that it is, and that might be an understatement.

Most Kings since the adulterous founder of the C of E Henry viii have had mistresses. I don't think any of them married their mistresses and made them Queen though, so is it OK to shag about as long as its hidden away and you stay in a long dead marrisge? Unfortunately if you want a Monarchy, you get what you get. Camilla is Queen because she's married to the King. You don't get to choose.

@Angrycat2768 That is why they shouldn’t be in their position. What is so special about them? Nothing! Why do people want to bow and scrape to them? It beggars belief.

Don’t like any of them. Outdated, expensive nonsense. Time to get rid.

This

As indifferent overall as before but he does seem less aloof than his mother, less worried about certain protocols and more ready to talk to people. I know people who live near highgrove and he still is out and about, friendly.

Oh yes. I think I might have to get this book. A wry and amusing look at the Monarchy past and present. This is just a snippet from the book, worth a read.

I cannot believe we still have a Monarchy in 2023 reading that!

www.theguardian.com/books/2023/sep/24/england-royals-history-kings-queens-david-mitchell-unruly-book-tour

V. Good point.

Agreed. There is absolutely nothing special about them. However, I do like the idea of a ceremonial Head of State like the Irish model rather than a political HoS like the US. But who would do it? I'm not sure if we may as well have someone born into the job than waste the time of someone with intelligence and exoerience shaking hands and ribbon cutting. My issue is with all the hangers on, the obsequiousness that allows the entire family to get away with anything they like with little scrutiny from anyone and the sheer ostentaneousness of it. I think the only way we will ever get rid of the monarchy is if they decide to stand down themselves, but they cling on with everything they have. I think, at the very least, they should not only be slashed in terms of personnel, but properties, staff, and other 'expenses', so they are more in line with the Scandi Royals. Do William and Kate need 60 staff and 4 homes? They aren't Heads of State. Why isn't Buck House opened up all year for visitors, so tourists pay for the repairs? Why do they have 26 houses between them?

i am a royalist,
they seem to be popular in france and germany.
i am glad we have a royal family

as a nation we are too apathetic to have a revolution, unlike the french.

Oh come on that was also in terms of society at the time. None have had mistresses since Eddie. Also the French Presidents. Common place to have mistresses once. Don’t think Macron had one. May be first ever. In time cultural norms disappear.

No historically there are valid reasons we are different from the French. It’s Intergenerational. There set up was different and they had an unresponsive ruling elite for a long time which brewed the fire in the belly. Traditionally UK rulers in last hundreds of years more more responsive and read their populations better. One who didn’t got his head chopped off.

Oh course greatest savvy one was Charles II. And since then it’s been the politicians and advisory councils. His brother didn’t get it either and that worked out well for him.

Just a quick derail...regarding land grabs. Were the enclosure acts a good thing or a bad thing for the general population?
We can't change the past but we can move forward from where we are, I would prefer to move forward without the monarchy, as a pp said, we don't need them for stability, we are a country with a history of philanthropy and creativity if you choose to look for it. You can focus on the tyrants or the reformers.

Love them???

Why?
The spectacle? Their characters? Their wealth?

I just do not know what there is to love. I save my love for people I know, not characters in a never ending ostentatious soap opera

but the French still are a revolutionary people, far more fire than uk

They have hoodwinked people into thinking what they do is a 'public service' Much of what they do, other people do in their spare time. Actors and sports people are patrons of charities alongside having a job. As well as millions of volunteers. Going to sporting events and film premieres and asking inane questions of actors andcsports people isnt difficult ( and sometimes they cant even manage to do that politely!) They do charity work so that they can justify their existence. Even if they were ordinary aristocrats, one day they would have to sell a house to the National Trust or open it up to pay for their own roof repairs. They don't want to do that.

Totally disinterested now. Harry will always be my favourite. With the queen and him out I'm out too !

Spot on. I'm amazed more people don't see through them.

The Queen was always going to be a tough act to follow
particularly as Charles is not young, and he is male, not young and beautiful as the queen was when she first came to the throne.