Indifference to PoW?

[FaiIureToLunch]

I find it strange that there’s no real interest or concern from the public about POW being in hospital. Nobody seems to be that bothered. If you compare it to the circus if Diana had been in the same situation….. I just find it odd. I always thought she was relatively popular because we’re constantly told she is but actually…. Tumbleweed.

I know it’s her own business etc but it just feels quite odd that somebody can disappear and there is no interest in why. I don’t really know or care what’s happened or why, but the silence is really intriguing. It reminds me of when the brexit referendum happened and I had no idea that there was such strong feeling about the EU…. I had no idea that there was such apathy about the PoW until now. It’s been a real eye opener for me.

I reckon the next generation or two, the monarchy will be gone.

Agree on not solely relied upon. That's not what you said originally though.
I'm pleased we are in agreement now, that it's not completely unreliable and inaccurate.

@CoffeeCantata
Thats all very well but one person’s opinion of ‘quiet’ personalities ( and Anne I believe may be quiet now - she’s 70 odd - but she was abrasive for years ) fades into insignificance when placed against a charismatic personality who can reach people remotely .

I want the ‘royals’ gone because they are a medieval remnant with all of the corruption and unearned influence that entails .

With the sex abuse scandals and financial secrecy the ‘royals’ need a Diana now more than ever . So I’m glad they dont have that .
The only one close to Diana in terms of personality , Harry, has left .

@Novella4
I take your point about PA when younger - but I would still defend her on the grounds that she was a genuine person - warts and all, not a persona and most certainly not 'fake'. It's a personal preference, yes, but I don't think I'm alone here. Lots of people like me distrust extrovert, showy 'warmth' and performatively huggy people.

I am particularly suspicious of 'charisma', whatever that might be. It's very hard to define, isn't it, but we recognise it when we see it. Hitler had loads and loads of charisma (apparently...) and millions loved him. I used to work in research on Nazi Germany and it made me think hard about whether I would have fallen for it. I really, really hope not, but then I'm highly suspicious of charismatic people.

I just think it's unfair a) to say that the current top royals have no personality or charisma and b) to assert that that is a bad thing.

I've seen lots of people taken in by superficial charm and I personally don't rate it. My problem with H & M is that they rely on this and even think it's all that's required - they seem just to want to endow events and organisations with their presence/name/image and there seems pitifully poor evidence of any actual substance/hard work behind it. I don't think M, particularly, is interested in spending time talking to the 'little people', which is something the royals have to do, and many do do very well.

Why are you trying to start an argument with me about Wikipedia @Roussette ?
Seems an extremely odd hill to make a stand for!

And no we are not in agreement about it !
I'm just not going to indulge in an argument about something so trivial.

I don't think M, particularly, is interested in spending time talking to the 'little people', which is something the royals have to do, and many do do very well.

How weird. I think completely the opposite. As I was reading through your post, I could tell right from the first para, who you were having a dig at!

I think Harry and Meghan both show warmth when greeting others, and it shows. The royals are bound by more protocol, I get that, but I don't see the same warmth at all. I do think Kate is great with little children though, as is Harry and indeed Meghan.

I'm not, I just disagreed with your opening statement about it, which I'm allowed to do!
We can agree to disagree or agree or whatever 👍

I'm was saying I don't think older generation I know are ardent monarchists they're just not in favour of more constitutional upset with no obvious upside for them and lot of potential pit falls especially as many are increasingly cynical about politicians.

Devolution and Brexit harked back to mythical olden days that were better - the Interregnum doesn't invoke war fuzzy feelings - especially as it devolved into a dictatorship with no parliament representation and tried to be a inherited dictatorship and is best known for banning Christmas and mass slaughter of Catholics in Ireland.

At the minute the Royal family not enough of a problem for anyone to really care enough to get rid of - and they've been smart enough to not rock the boat too much and look vaguely useful.

I actually wonder if after next couple of generations if the royal family themselves might be ones to walk away - a pay off so they had the money but none of the scrutiny and restrictions.

I think there are two kinds of charisma, there is the type that connects well through the media and the type that connects well in person. I would hesitate to call anyone uncharismatic just because they didn't come across well on screens, be they news or social media. Plus I don't equate charisma to necessarily feeling positive about a person Add that to the fact that we all look at people in the light of our own experiences and it is natural to find some more charismatic than others and to warm to some people more than others. Unless we actually know someone with a public profile personally we can't ever really be sure what they are like

I didn't warm to Diana but she obviously had charisma for many people but I did find Harry charismatic on his public engagements as shown in the press and felt positive towards him until he gave interviews about his family after which I felt rather less so. I found Prince Philip charismatic but also quite repelling. I find William and Catherine appropriate to their role rather than charismatic but I do feel positive about them.

In the long term I wonder if charisma is a bit of a poisoned chalice.

x

@RhubarbGingerJam I think people who still get their news from the BBC, newspapers and magazines are more likely to quietly support the royal family. These do tend to be older people. They are not ardent royalists, they just quietly support them.

asrarpolar · Today 12:23

@RhubarbGingerJam I think people who still get their news from the BBC, newspapers and magazines are more likely to quietly support the royal family. These do tend to be older people. They are not ardent royalists, they just quietly support them.

I don't actually know any ardent royalists - I never have. I think that's just the point, and links in to the charisma/no charisma argument. It would be very unhealthy to an 'ardent' anything, I think. Keep it calm, moderate, considered and benignly boring and you'll be OK.

People tend to 'quietly support them', yes. Looking around the world I'm grateful for the (so-called) boringness of our RF. Would hate the circus going on in the US, for example. The massive population of that country and all it can present its electorate with is Trump or Biden. I know republicans will come out with the 'yes, but they step down at regular intervals'. I like continuity and I think it's becoming a rarity in this increasingly scary and de-stabilised world.

Totally agree with scaling down to Scandinavian proportions, but I like the consitututional monarchy for lots of reasons I won't bore you with here - they've all been said before, just as the arguments for republicanism have. You just pick a side!

The comparison to Trump etc is void

We have a different political system .
We are constantly told the ‘royals’ have no power - indeed they are literally a cipher .
There is no need for ‘upheaval ‘ .
The ‘royals ‘live a life of unearned luxury off the backs of the people .
It has to , and will, stop
The ‘royals’ could continue on a voluntary basis but somehow I think that they will run once the money stops

Oh come on - Harry?!! Are you having a laugh?

He’s as thick as pigshit 😂😂😂

😂😂😂

My family 70+ plus must be some form of aberration with facebook, watching you tube (particularly enjoy time team on there), internet shopping and reading online new sites on their phones. They don't just watch BBC they have ITV and Channel 4 often Sky and digital channels. They are more likely than us to get newspapers and magazines but that's more a disposable income issue and time though even the one technophobe now has a kindle and gets magazines on there as well.

I do agree quiet support is there - but also think it's often quiet indifference and wanting to join in with celebrations to be part of it all being interpreted as support.

Why does Camilla need to be “qualified” to visit her husband in the hospital?

Novella
I want the ‘royals’ gone because they are a medieval remnant with all of the corruption and unearned influence that entails .

The UK system of constitutional monarchy may be far from perfect, but it's laughable to condemn it on the basis of corruption. We are probably the least corrupt governmental system on the planet! It's designed to be a system of checks and balances and in that area, it works pretty well - in the sway that the judiciary, executive and legislature operate.

On a less pompous note (sorry) I absolutely love all that medieval stuff - it's brilliant, and does no harm. People in outfits off playing cards, trumpets, parades - go for it. And the republics of the world like their parades, too - but they're usually not quite so enjoyable - look at Russia and its lovely May Day Parade of nuclear warheads.

By the way - she's out of hospital.

You made some very good points @CoffeeCantata in your post
as did @goodbyestranger who was writing about Camilla
".....the fact that she evidently couldn't give a shit about inflicting hurt on others over a period of many years.......Basically not someone worth any respect....."

Yes she's out and hope she recovers well and privately

@CoffeeCantata

I was referring to the ‘royals ‘ as corrupt - Andrew , Mountbatten, bags of cash - do I have to spell it out ?

They are literally above the law .
They have been forced after centuries to reluctantly pay what little tax they themselves decide on ..
no inheritance tax
Secret wills …
Its an insult
And sorry to break it to you, but the ‘pomp’ is invented .

Personally I thought the sight of Charles and Camilla wobbling around with those fugly closed crowns ( stuffed with blood diamonds but shush about that !) was an embarrassment
But it’s all there is really - a facade

I could not care less, the woman bears absolutely no relevance to my life. To be fair she bears no relevance to anyone else's either but for some unfathomable reason people think she does.

rooftopbird · Today 13:38

I could not care less, the woman bears absolutely no relevance to my life. To be fair she bears no relevance to anyone else's either but for some unfathomable reason people think she does.

If they think she does, then she does.

I am still finding it all a bit strange. Rishi Sunak briefed reporters this morning about the PoW being “released” from hospital.

A 30 second comment from William to TV reporters outside the hospital would put so much speculation to rest.

There’s an over-heated narrative on Twitter that goes along the lines of she was hospitalised on 28 December - likely following a serious DV incident - and it was so serious she was put into an induced coma, hence the lack of visible visitors.

But yes, I hope it’s true that she’s home, and best wishes to her for a speedy recovery.