Prince Harry is relevant imo

[FloridaCheese]

He's the son of the King.

And will be the brother of the next King

we grew up with him around during QE2's reign

the discord on here for Harry is becoming laughable. Posters desperate to dig him out at every opportunity

Id welcome him back and I'm sure there are others that would too. Not on MN though.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/prince-harrys-spectacularly-wrongheaded-commission-on-information-disorder/

What is hilarious that both writers point out that Harry, who famously dressed up as a Nazi, is criticizing freedom of speech.

Re the current round of positive / negative press on William and Harry.

I’ve talked about this before in regards to Meghan and how H&M overreacted to the wave of negative press they got, not understanding they were just at the bottom of the wave.

The tabloids in particular - although the broadsheets are just as bad now for chasing clicks - follow a constant pattern of build them up, knock them down, build them up knock them down. It’s because their audience likes drama but constant negativity doesn’t sell as it gets too depressing so you need some light smiley stuff in there too.

It’s super easy to do at the beginning of a young Royal couple’s life (or celebrity, watch Taylor Swift’s story arc over the next few years) because you get the happy engagement followed by the press chasing some drama - family conflict is the easiest. Meghan’s family made bit that super easy but they tried hard with the Middleton’s too.

Then they return to the happy for the wedding itself - yay!

Then they look for the drama - trouble in paradise / internal family squabbles etc.

Then back to the happy for a baby born.

And repeat.

They are screwed at the moment with Kate as they went in so hard for the drama over the photoshopped photo and the Where’s Kate brouhaha and then were totally burned by the cancer diagnosis - can’t do the knock them down cycle with a cancer patient/survivor - too awful even for the tabs.

But she’s looking pretty healthy and happy again now so it’s safe to give William his kicking.

Well, there is the upcoming Trump visit:

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/story/prince-william-and-kate-middleton-will-play-a-major-role-in-donald-trumps-visit-to-britain

I wonder if there are key differences between how KC and William see things. I sometimes wonder if all this stuff is made up media stirring or if there is any grain of truth in it al.

Kc waited a long time to be king and is sadly unlikely to live as long as his mother, so he is probably rushing to make changes and do the things he wants to do while he is well enough. He has the kings/princes trust as a legacy to be proud of. Camilla is supportive but I suspect she wishes he would take it easy at times.

Princess Anne comtinues in the style and legacy of her mother, so lots of in person engagements, doing what she does best.

I suspect William sees things slightly differently. I don’t think he will be the Prince of wales for decades as his father was, with time to bring in long term projects like the princes trust before he takes the throne. I suspect he wants to create a legacy of change (such as his homeless projects and earthshot) which probably have a lot of background work and zoom calls and fewer public appearances. He may also be looking at reforming the duchy and royal property to be more sustainable which isn’t a bad thing at all. His desire to live in a relatively modest home also suggests he wants to do things differently.

I also think the way he parents his children is different to the generation before, perhaps wanting to avoid some of the difficulties of his own childhood. We also don’t know the long term effects and prognosis from Catherine’s illness, and for a person who lost a parent in childhood, I can totally understand why spending maximum time as a family and not taking anything for granted is important to them. Also sport is an interest of Williams where Charles was maybe more into nature/gardening so this may affect their engagement choices.

I wonder if there is some tension between the turning up and handshaking approach which the older royals value (being seen to be believed) and the more modern instagram and football match royals. I also wonder if Charles feels that William’s approach to family life is somewhat critical of how he parented himself. As a parent, he may also be frustrated if William will not attempt to reconcile with Harry (even if it is justifiable that he feels this way), most parents want their kids to get along. It’s all a bit prodigal son. Perhaps the long term rift is seen to weaken the institution too.

H realises he needs RF more than they need him.

He has come back to daddy with his tail between his legs and will use his children to aid a reconciliation which will be hard for KC to refuse as the gc are, of course, innocent in all this sorry mess.

I am 😮 😮 at William will be living in a relatively modest home?
My home is modest, this really is not. It is a massive Georgian mansion, with tennis courts, swimming pool, a ballroom and is having an eye watering amount of money spent on it

I think we have a different idea as to what 'modest' means

It’s actually a relatively modest home. Have you seen where the other royals live? By comparison, William is living modestly.

How is Harry relevant?

In terms of the constitution only the monarch and the heir are relevant. Harry is neither, he is a non working royal so is simply another member of the family.

I mean, he has got at least 2 other homes as well!

Harry’s position in the LOS is irrelevant- the country would become a republic before he became king.

The half-in/out thing was about profiteering.

Yes I know all about the other homes. Gatcombe, Highgrove, Amner, Kensington Palace. And many more

I am just gobsmacked that you think a Georgian Manor with a ballroom, swimming pool and tennis courts is modest

If it becomes all too poky for them they can always skedaddle off to Kensington Palace or Amner Hall 😂

William was in Harry's shadow this week ? @DaphneduM . 😂

The European royals are far grander than ours, their riches and property portfolios would blow your mind. This urban myth of European royals somehow being more “normal” than ours seems to stick for some weird reason, and don’t get me started on the scandals that are currently ongoing. Riding around on bicycles they are not!

Absolutely.

All the 'European royals' have their scandals and issues, some of them much more serious than the British royals. To read some posts here, you'd think they shopped at the local supermarket and ordered their clothes from Vinted!

Agree, it’s ridiculous! when posters site the European royals as a fine example of how ours should “Royal” then I know they really know nothing about European royalty, they also are not one humongous mass either 🙄.

Then only the Monarch and heir ( and their spouses) should have HRH etc and be expected to be Royals and funded out of the public purse. The rest should be set free. They can turn up on balconies and family events if they wish

I think that's a good idea in the long run. Considering the decades of service the Kents and Gloucester have given I feel at their age is fair to let them retire naturally. I'm ok with Anne and the Edinburgh's (Edward and Sophie) continuing because they shine the light on some important issues and only get security when they are at engagements. I bet they would continue to support their causes anyway as neither family seems that hung up on titles

But going forward as the monarchy transitions from a model that was mostly stuck in the 50s to something more 21st century i hope that they gradually cut down the number of those who are officially working royals and limit HRH to the Heir's immediate line. If it can pop into existence when your grandfather inherits it can equally pop out of existence once the crown moves down a generation.

If members of the family want to sit in windows at events great but they are there as family not working royals.

To be fair the fact that the late Queen resisted giving Beatrice and Eugenie official roles does indicate that she wanted to go that way, it just took so long to change anything at all in her reign.

There's something fascinating about the human behaviour here.

It's a fairly regular thing:
Harry does something to try and improve his reputation/standing. MN royal family area has an awaking of people arriving all singing the same tune of "Harry's done something amazing; William is boring. Harry's going to come back/succeed in everything and everyone is going to be delighted". With a side sprinkle of "Andrew's worse. William is mean/lazy/doesn't do royal-ing right."

And at the same time there are a number of (often ill-informed) puff pieces in various papers proclaiming how brilliantly Harry is doing and some negative ones about William and sometimes other royals.

But what's interesting this time is this morning when I went down my news feed, there were loads of pieces at the top saying what a wonderful week Harry has had doing such amazing things.
I don't normally bother reading them because they're not very interesting, but they tend to stick at the top for ages. But I thought I'd have a look at the comments. I think saying 95% of the comments were negative is an under estimation.

Now I've just gone back on my news feed, and every one has dropped off. They're all down towards the bottom if they're there at all. The first royal story there is a opinion article on something fairly neutral.
I'm sure the pro-Harry lot are going to cry "see the palace has full control and they wanted to hide positive stories."
But if that was the case, then their claim upthread that the palace was deliberately putting positive Harry, negative William stories out, looks a bit silly. Why would they put them out then tell them to drop them?

I suspect it's far more that the general public isn't interested and so by the algorithms where the popular stories appear at the top of the newsfeed they've dropped without trace.

Errr I don't think so

That infographic doesn't say anything about the different families' riches and property portfolios, which is what was referenced.

Now you have looked at how much each royal family does, take a look at how much they are worth, especially Luxembourg, Monaco and Lichtenstein.

So ifcthe European Royals are so much grander, why are we spending so much more on ours? And it's not just the money we spend but things like slimming down the Monarchy to the main members, coronations etc. Monaco is a millionnaires playground. Of course the Grimaldis are going to have a shitload of money. Don't they basically bankroll the whole place too? Hardly a comparison to the UK.

Of course they'll have money invested, and if that's been wisely done that would, as I've suggested, be enough for them to have a very comfortable life. But I suspect both feel themselves entitled to rather more than 'comfortable'.

@IcedPurple Yes, California is a very expensive place to live and realizing that their money only goes so far must be a big shock to Harry. He wants KC’s support.

Also it’s incorrect stereotyping, as William has said Louis is a good boy and George, being five years older, knows how to behave in public but is different at home.