New series on the royals with Dimbleby

[MeNotMyselfAndI]

Anyone watching? Just watched Ep 2 on royal finances - it’s unbelievable. Greedy greedy fuckers! 🤬

Because that is the established tradition for crowning the new monarch. It doesn't imply at all that anybody believes in Divine Right, and it certainly isn't proof that the incumbent is there because of Divine Right.

It is just the ceremony that happens. Like getting married in a church when you don't believe in God.

It is just a ritual.

Divine Right died with Charles 1, and we now have a constitutional monarchy where, if the bloodline throws up someone unsuitable, we get rid, rather than endure them because God Says So.

Edit: Last paragraph expanded, and a typo corrected

It’s about fairness not equality. And it’s about ending the utter nonsense that the family you are born into gives you unfettered power and wealth. It’s about having a grown up democracy fit for the 21st century.

The family you are born into - whether rich or poor - absolutely affects your future wealth and power.

The privilege of wealth as you grow up, inheritances, your gene and DNA profile, your family dynamics - all these things provide either advantage or disadvantage.

Nothing changes in societies which don’t have a monarchy.

You can’t even have a nominally communist society without birth privileges affecting your whole life.

The Royal family do not have unfettered power. If we want a grown up democracy for the 21st century we need to start by using factual rather than emotional points in our discussions around it.

Spot on RainbowBagels. Excellent post. This is exactly the nub of the issue.

I’m so glad that more light is being shed on these matters publically; really great timing by the Beeb and Dimbleby. It’s up to us to lobby our politicians and it’s up to our representatives in the H of C to grow a spine and do their jobs.

The amount of power the Monarch wields is always minimised. And yes, as the late Queen’s inability to stop Boris Johnson proroguing Parliament demonstrated, constitutionally, their powers are very limited.

However, no one seems to have been checking the enormous power the Monarch has to be able to avoid financial accountability, exempt themselves from laws that apply to every other British citizen, and create enormous wealth for themselves.

Oh I don’t know. Charles and Camilla go on a lot of private holidays to their health spa in Bangalore India. And their visits to vast Spanish hunting estates such as La Garganta, owned by the Duke of Westminster.

And did you spot the “privately owned” Monet hanging on the wall behind Camilla’s head during the programme? Was that at Windsor?

There has been lots of reporting on recent times about the then Prince Charles, now King, being enormously busy and I always wonder if he is busy doing charity work or managing his vast portfolio of assets?

What the programme confirmed, the bit we always knew really, is that what we have been fed about the Royals by the press, is no less than propaganda . As Dimbleby says, the press needs the Royals to boost their finances, as much as the Royals depend on public visibility and the press reporting on their activities, in order to survive.

Much more than that though, returning to RainbowBagels’s point, is that, precisely because of this toxic co-dependency, the press although pretty scurrilous, won’t ultimately endanger the goose that lays the golden egg, which is why they are not holding the monarchy to account about the things that really matter.

However, no one seems to have been checking the enormous power the Monarch has to be able to avoid financial accountability, exempt themselves from laws that apply to every other British citizen, and create enormous wealth for themselves.

This is the crux of the matter AFAIC

@BustingBaoBun
Exactly. To those who have much, more will be given (or taken by them)!

I'm delighted the series highlighted the perpetuity edits demanded by the palace. I think it's probably been a relatively litte known interference until now.

Quite wrong the palace feels able to dictate content to the national broadcaster however innocuous the edits appear to be on the surface.

I agree. What does it matter if Sophie was holding a handkerchief? Or George touched his nose?

The royal family are very weird at times.

The veer from wanting to appear like an ordinary family to wanting to be something very special and not like us at all.

Some edits are good though. I remember when Louise was a bridesmaid, can't remember which wedding but she was probably a mid teenager, I was watching live and the wind caught her dress and blew it right up. I'm glad that was edited out for any future use of the footage. Likewise I don't need to see the royals crying at funerals on repeat. There should be some privacy when every family moment is filmed.

Having said that I wouldn't support every edit and I'm not sure why the removal of the crown jewels was necessary.

Yep. There is very little criticism of them in any press - the fawning over Charles’ “environmental credentials” is a good case in point. They report on them without a trace of irony that the man probably has a carbon footprint the size of a small country 🙄. And the BBC’s breathless sycophancy is horrendous - I can’t watch or listen to their nauseating coverage.

I don’t understand this argument - how is an apolitical HoS the same as inherited one? Every man and woman in the country should have the right to stand for election as the HoS, that’s the only democratic way to work.

I don’t doubt at all that Charles oversees all the money grabbing himself - the idea that he’s ignorant of what is going on is nonsense. He would have seen the press coverage and could change it in a heartbeat but he doesn’t want to because he doesn’t think he should. Kings have stolen from their peasants since the dawn of time - royalists love tradition and this is one tradition Charles supports wholeheartedly 🤬

Maybe unfettered was an exaggeration but they have a staggering amount of unchecked and hidden power so I think focusing on the use of one word is disingenuous. It’s oft repeated that they have no power but they have astonishing levels of power to influence legislation - the fact they don’t choose to use some of it is irrelevant.

Exactly. In Ireland, all you have to do to be eligible is to be an Irish citizen aged 35 or older. To run, you need to support of a certain number of city/county councils, or a certain number of members of the Oireachtas.

You don’t need to be a politician. You don’t need to have previously had any kind of public profile. We’ve had charity sector people, journalists, business people, academics etc put their hats in the ring. There nothing to stop David Attenborough/other national treasure running.

Everyone gets to vote, and the term is seven years. The salary is pegged to the top of the civil servant salary payscale, plus stuff, and the use of a house, car, plane, security etc.

Totally agree on the Louise edit. And of course they are allowed their privacy and don't have to be seen blubbing
But George touching his nose and Sophie holding a hankie seems extreme, as the bit showing the crowns which seems bizarre

I wonder what would happen if the BBC refused some of the more outlandish requests.

This sounds good.

There should be a ban on those who've been PM (in this country I mean).

What do you propose doing about the Duke of Westminister, and all the other titled landownets who sit in the House of Lords?

One step at a time

Likewise I don't need to see the royals crying at funerals on repeat. There should be some privacy when every family moment is filmed.

There was (quite rightly) a prior agreement there wouldn't be intrusive or insensitive coverage of family members.

The edits referred to didn't breach those conditions.

Every man and woman in the country should have the right to stand for election as the HoS, that’s the only democratic way to work.

I agree and I'd include each and every Windsor in that.

Stick 'em on a podium and let the electorate decide.

I'm currently anticipating the TV debate 😛

BBC iPlayer

You are correct but I think my point is more that its a pretty pointless job as it stands. Its more or less 'busywork' with the occasional diplomatic handshaking of dignitaries and smiling politely and some creepy pervert elected President of the Free World preens at you. You may as well have a family of dimwits breed them! Also I think the chances of the Monarchy being abolished anytime soon is remote ( although as I have said before, I don't think the Monarchy will survive past Georges generation) something needs to be done before that. Otherwise people talk about Republicanism and its just a distraction because its far too difficult to do probably psychologically as much as practically. It would be far easier to keep a Monarch but strip it back hugely and make the person there far more accountable.