Page 3 | Is Charles sitting on a time bomb?

Chiseltip · 03/10/2025 16:10

They are completely out of touch though and about as boring as you can get. What relevance does W&K have for anyone under the age of 30?

They could have made an effort, William had the credentials to play the cool young royal. He was military pilot, with a "beautiful" young wife, the King in waiting. He should have shaved his head, got a stylist, shown up at THE places to be. He could have broke with tradition and gave endorsements for high end cool stuff. Kate could have leveraged the Social Media frenzy of a few years ago and became a sort of "Royalfluencer".

But no!

No, instead they chose to imitate the Royals of 50 years ago, they even went on a walkabout in Jamacia. Talk about a lost opportunity. Now, William just joy rides in a helicopter and is for the most part invisible.

H&M are mildly annoying but Harry is way more relatable than William, in hindsight, if the British public and media hadn't been so Racist, H&M could have "saved" the Royals. They were always cooler than the other two.

I think the Royals should just stay where they are, out of sight, slowly fade away.

They had a chance and they blew it.

milveycrohn · 03/10/2025 16:47

"Parliament was illegally prorogued"
It wasn't 'illegal'. It was 'unlawful', after the Judges pronounced it unlawful, which is technically not quite the same thing.
ie there was no act of parliament stating it was illegal, so no act that was ignored.
The late Queen had to act on the instructions of her Government at the time.

wordler · 03/10/2025 16:52

He could have broke with tradition and gave endorsements for high end cool stuff. Kate could have leveraged the Social Media frenzy of a few years ago and became a sort of "Royalfluencer".

LOL - that's the perfect description of what they are not allowed to do!

Chiseltip · 03/10/2025 17:43

wordler · 03/10/2025 16:52

He could have broke with tradition and gave endorsements for high end cool stuff. Kate could have leveraged the Social Media frenzy of a few years ago and became a sort of "Royalfluencer".

LOL - that's the perfect description of what they are not allowed to do!

By who?

Is there a law against it?

Were they going to be arrested?

Fined?

They had a chance to break tradition to make the Royal brand relevant again, and they didn't take it.

wordler · 03/10/2025 18:09

Chiseltip · 03/10/2025 17:43

By who?

Is there a law against it?

Were they going to be arrested?

Fined?

They had a chance to break tradition to make the Royal brand relevant again, and they didn't take it.

Edited

Show quote history

That's exactly what half in, half out means. Using the royal status to make commercial endorsements. And the late Queen was firmly against it, so everyone in her 'team' had to play by her rules as she was the boss.

Also, I'd rather the heir spends his pre-reign time learning about the constitution, the government, foreign affairs and diplomacy, how to manage a budget, how to be a leader etc. All the skills needed for a head of state who will be representing the country and using diplomacy to further the interests of the country.

Not really interested in a TikTok influencer-style monarch-lite.

Letmeoutodhere · 03/10/2025 21:28

Chiseltip · 03/10/2025 16:10

They are completely out of touch though and about as boring as you can get. What relevance does W&K have for anyone under the age of 30?

They could have made an effort, William had the credentials to play the cool young royal. He was military pilot, with a "beautiful" young wife, the King in waiting. He should have shaved his head, got a stylist, shown up at THE places to be. He could have broke with tradition and gave endorsements for high end cool stuff. Kate could have leveraged the Social Media frenzy of a few years ago and became a sort of "Royalfluencer".

But no!

No, instead they chose to imitate the Royals of 50 years ago, they even went on a walkabout in Jamacia. Talk about a lost opportunity. Now, William just joy rides in a helicopter and is for the most part invisible.

H&M are mildly annoying but Harry is way more relatable than William, in hindsight, if the British public and media hadn't been so Racist, H&M could have "saved" the Royals. They were always cooler than the other two.

I think the Royals should just stay where they are, out of sight, slowly fade away.

They had a chance and they blew it.

Edited

You are completely missing the point.

clipboardz · 03/10/2025 21:33

H&M are mildly annoying but Harry is way more relatable than William, in hindsight, if the British public and media hadn't been so Racist, H&M could have "saved" the Royals. They were always cooler than the other two.

They had far more impact as a foursome, too late now.

TheRealGoose · 03/10/2025 21:36

clipboardz · 03/10/2025 21:33

H&M are mildly annoying but Harry is way more relatable than William, in hindsight, if the British public and media hadn't been so Racist, H&M could have "saved" the Royals. They were always cooler than the other two.

They had far more impact as a foursome, too late now.

I don’t find Harry or Megan remotely relatable, and I say that as someone who lost my mother very young, I find the selling trash talk on your family for money reprehensible, the desire for fame, bemusing, the need to be with a listers cringe worthy, the lying toe curling. I don’t find William and Katherine particularly relatable, but I admire their dedication to their family, and duty, those two will be working till they drop,

clipboardz · 03/10/2025 21:38

I wasn't speaking for everyone 🤷🏻‍♀️

DontCallMeLenYouLittleBollix · 03/10/2025 21:40

BettysRoasties · 01/10/2025 16:40

I’m no royalist however I do feel having elderly people as king or queen is just funny. Obviously love the departed queen she just lived forever. But for an elderly man to inherit king is just so weird.

Kings and queens should be younger not pensioners.

If a vote was head on keep Charlie boy and dissemble the royal family or William take over and it be more like a job with the king and queen stepping back and handing over the reigns once old. I’d vote to hand over to William.

If the vote was purely keep Charlie or dissemble. I’d vote dissemble.

I think it works better with older people! Disclaimer, not a monarchist and no love for the institution, but I'd say the optics of all that deference are better with an older woman in particular. Obviously there comes a point when someone is too infirm, but 60-80 feels like a good bracket.

Rhaidimiddim · 03/10/2025 23:00

LidlAmaretto · 03/10/2025 15:35

I'd rather have a famous local author open a library for example that a minor Royal. Most people could spare an afternoon to do that alongside actually achieving things. He could invite his cousins to garden parties if he liked.

Show quote history

EXACTLY! Or the kid who won the county cross country, or the ordinary person who raised mega bucks for charity.

PrincessSophieFrederike · 13/10/2025 02:12

MrsLeonFarrell · 01/10/2025 08:32

I don't believe the decline in popularity started with Harry and Meghan leaving, but I'd expect Jack Royston to write that.

The problem with articles like this is that they seem to believe removing the monarchy is as simple as Charles being told he isn't King anymore. But it isn't. It's a constitutional monarchy and, as the name suggests, it is tightly woven into many many part of our constitution, both those bits that are written and those that are precedent. To remove the monarchy requires a lot of planning and legal work.

Since Brexit we have seen the dangers of jumping into an enormous constitutional change without sufficient planning and forethought. I don't believe that many people are keen to repeat that experience.

Monarchy, by its very nature, plays a long game. Without overwhelming political will nothing is going to change and they can afford to wait for attitudes to change, as they historically have, both for and against. In the grand scheme of things whether we have a monarchy is small potatoes compared to the very present problems facing this country. But I do believe that part of the drop in popularity is related to those problems. For some reason there seems to be a narrative that if you remove the King fairness and justice and equality for all will reign and there will no longer be rich and powerful people with influence in the country. Which would be lovely but isn't true.

I agree it wouldn't solve a lot of issues. And it certainly shouldn't be

Personally I feel the whole family is tainted. I don't trust Charles, I'm not very impressed by William so far (though he might improve) & I think the Queen was far less positive than we've traditionally believed she was.

I would be open to a much more transparent royal family but not if sexual abuse, financial & foreign scandals continue into Willism & George's reigns. The leash needs to be much tighter if they are to reign.

The monarchs of Spain used to have the people pledge the oath 'we, who are as good as you swear to you, who who are no better than us, that we will accept you and your rule, but if not, not.' I need to check the exact words, but the point is I want that sentiment to be our attitude. They are not our masters. They are our servants. They are not here to cavort with paedophiles & corrupt foreign rulers, or abet child abuse (Andrew Lownie is doing a new documentary on Mountbatten's abuse- I fear the royals were very complicit in letting it happen).

PrincessSophieFrederike · 13/10/2025 02:13

I also feel it's morally wrong for personal things like marital fidelity and children to be state matters in this day and age. How can it be right to have a child born into a role? Yes, George could abdicate but that would force Louis or Charlotte to do itm

PrincessSophieFrederike · 13/10/2025 02:14

Rhaidimiddim · 03/10/2025 23:00

EXACTLY! Or the kid who won the county cross country, or the ordinary person who raised mega bucks for charity.

Show quote history

This

PrincessSophieFrederike · 13/10/2025 02:16

wordler · 03/10/2025 18:09

That's exactly what half in, half out means. Using the royal status to make commercial endorsements. And the late Queen was firmly against it, so everyone in her 'team' had to play by her rules as she was the boss.

Also, I'd rather the heir spends his pre-reign time learning about the constitution, the government, foreign affairs and diplomacy, how to manage a budget, how to be a leader etc. All the skills needed for a head of state who will be representing the country and using diplomacy to further the interests of the country.

Not really interested in a TikTok influencer-style monarch-lite.

Show quote history

Yes that would be 🤮

PrincessSophieFrederike · 13/10/2025 02:37

Dustyhem952 · 02/10/2025 11:37

M’y dc are of university age and they and their friends could not be less interested in the RF.

Show quote history

The 'cool' response isn't harmless. These aren't celebrities. These are people being showered with wealth to do a serious job. So are they doing it? And what ELSE are they doing?

There need to be serious questions asked about how far Mountbatten's paedophilia, other misdeeds of Andrew, Sarah, Charles too were covered up.

Badger32 · 13/10/2025 02:43

I'd vote to get rid of them
All that wealth and greed ,
I hate seeing stories about them ,like they are someone important
I especially dislike Andrew and family , clinging on by his coat tails

Letmeoutodhere · 13/10/2025 06:09

clipboardz · 03/10/2025 21:33

H&M are mildly annoying but Harry is way more relatable than William, in hindsight, if the British public and media hadn't been so Racist, H&M could have "saved" the Royals. They were always cooler than the other two.

They had far more impact as a foursome, too late now.

Harry relatable? Come on now.

Dustyhem952 · 13/10/2025 09:25

PrincessSophieFrederike · 13/10/2025 02:37

The 'cool' response isn't harmless. These aren't celebrities. These are people being showered with wealth to do a serious job. So are they doing it? And what ELSE are they doing?

There need to be serious questions asked about how far Mountbatten's paedophilia, other misdeeds of Andrew, Sarah, Charles too were covered up.

Show quote history

That’s actually a very good point!

Dustyhem952 · 13/10/2025 09:32

PrincessSophieFrederike · 13/10/2025 02:12

I agree it wouldn't solve a lot of issues. And it certainly shouldn't be

Personally I feel the whole family is tainted. I don't trust Charles, I'm not very impressed by William so far (though he might improve) & I think the Queen was far less positive than we've traditionally believed she was.

I would be open to a much more transparent royal family but not if sexual abuse, financial & foreign scandals continue into Willism & George's reigns. The leash needs to be much tighter if they are to reign.

The monarchs of Spain used to have the people pledge the oath 'we, who are as good as you swear to you, who who are no better than us, that we will accept you and your rule, but if not, not.' I need to check the exact words, but the point is I want that sentiment to be our attitude. They are not our masters. They are our servants. They are not here to cavort with paedophiles & corrupt foreign rulers, or abet child abuse (Andrew Lownie is doing a new documentary on Mountbatten's abuse- I fear the royals were very complicit in letting it happen).

Show quote history

This is a really great post. 👏

I always think that our national anthem sets a very poor tone. Most other countries talk about the people and unity and our dirge is largely focused on God preserving the monarch “long to reign over us”. It’s wierdly subservient in this day and age,

LidlAmaretto · 13/10/2025 09:40

Dustyhem952 · 13/10/2025 09:32

This is a really great post. 👏

I always think that our national anthem sets a very poor tone. Most other countries talk about the people and unity and our dirge is largely focused on God preserving the monarch “long to reign over us”. It’s wierdly subservient in this day and age,

Show quote history

Absolutely. Its all very well talking about ' a life of service' and the press falling over themselves to fawn over them when they say it, but they need to ' show nit tell' as the saying goes. They need to be completely transparent. Totally agree about the National Anthem. Its one of the most awful anthems musically anyway, then the words are humiliating in a 'national anthem' yet just about one person ' reigning over us'.
We need to demand our politicians to tell us why they cover up for them so much and what they
I think republicanism is a distraction really as its so abstract and will probably not happen in our lifetimes. What can and should happen is what should have been happening all along. Proper scrutiny of what they are doing and why. Want exemptions from legislation? Fine. Tell Parliament why you need it and if its debated openly and passed then you can have it. Want tax exemptions? Tell us why. No 'voluntary' payments of tax if you then want public money to 'do your duty'. No 'Ooh its soo complicated handwringing as to why they have to rake in as much as they possibly can from the Duchies yet dont have the same responsibilities. What benefit do politicians get from not discussing them in Parliament if it isnt the RF pressure/disapproval/lobbying?

inamo · 13/10/2025 10:03

I'd like a thorough look at those behind the scenes in the Firm, and what power/influence they have to steer things in certain ways. PR, taxes, cover ups, finance, internal power struggles, you name it.

The rest of the RF are probably just nodding donkeys.