AIBU to think the King’s speech was completely irrelevant to most of us

[CoastalGrey]

I know he’s head of the church but he’s also head of the country in general and religion is not a top priority for the vast majority of the people he supposedly represents. If the RF want to stay relevant it’s about time they used their positions for something more useful than spouting a bunch of fairy stories that cause many of the world’s biggest problems.

a war so long ago that although it is important, it doesn’t feel that relevant to most people

Which is precisely the point he was making. Just because it was a long time ago and there are fewer people alive who lived through it, doesn't mean we should forget it and the reasons it was fought.

And there will be many younger people whose lives have been shaped, even though they might not know it, by the experiences of their grandparents and great grandparents in both world wars.

(And he's not just talking to Britain, he's speaking to the Commonwealth.)

Of course you are correct. There's nothing to disagree with in what you have said.

We don’t forget it. It’s remembered through Remembrance Sunday, VE Day etc

You ignored everything else and picked this out though. The fact remains, he and his family don’t practise what they preach. They use the war to appeal to the older generation but they are becoming irrelevant to younger generations. They need to address that and all the other issues I listed and that others have talked about in the many threads discussing the RF as they’ll continue to be hypocrites, alienate young people and become more irrelevant. I have family in Australia and friends in India, they’ve grown tired of the RF with the racism Andrew cover up and them not practicing what they preach about respect and inclusivity.

You make an excellent point. I think it helps to remember that the King is speaking not just to the UK, but to the whole Commonwealth — many of whom are Christians or people of faith. In that light, drawing on Christian language and themes can make sense. Even if, as @CoastalGrey notes, some feel the content wasn’t directly relevant to the UK, the speech is meant for a wider audience, and we can also see it as an attempt to speak to their hearts while reflecting his own guiding convictions.

I didn't watch it, but I gather that "pulling together" was it it.

With his wealth, what does he know about "pulling together"?
And in a previous year, what does he know about "working tirelessly"?

So you don't think it's immoral for the royal family to not pay the same taxes that everyone else has to pay and to also be funded by taxpayers who themselves are struggling to afford to pay their bills.

They are in effect benefit scroungers.

What on earth gives them the right or authority to preach to the rest of us? They're no better than anyone else and some of them are a whole lot worse.

TBH anyone can spout Human Values, as you ve pointed out.

He doesn't and never has lived by these values.

& as for his Green credentials.. what a fucking hypocrite.

So praising the “great diversity of our communities” and urging us to all “cherish the values of compassion and reconciliation” is of no relevance to anyone, particularly when the world seems to be going to hell in a handcart just now?

Ha I missed this gem from @Myoldbear

Nobody is confused about anything. The content of a message, or rather its authenticity, can be completely dependent upon who is delivering that message. In this case, a pampered pooch who wants for nothing and doesn't pay his (massive) bills while the people of his country are suffering and many impoverished, should possibly avoid trying to preach to the masses about pulling together and finding the positive etc etc. It's a great message, but coming from anybody in the RF is patronising and lacking in sincerity.

I'm not going to argue your opinion but I do think the language you used to describe a man in his late 70s (I'm not going to play the cancer ard) was vile and unpleasant. Again, my opinion.

But whether it is 'sincere' is a different question. You're switching the goalposts.

The OP said 'irrelevant' - but it seems to.me (and other posters) what he said (the content) was relevant.

Whether the concept of 'royalty' is relevant is a different question to whether the content of a speech is relevant.

As to sincerity - well, it follows the themes he seems to have lived by, multi-faith co-operation while being Christian himself etc. But the only person who can really know whether he genuinely believes what he is saying is the man himself.

Then no doubt Australia and India will leave the Commonwealth, which they are free to do.

After all, the history of British colonisation/ imperialism is all that brings members together, i can completely understand why anyone would choose to repudiate that. It's a bit weird why any country wants to be a member. Yet apparently they do... odd.

What does his age have to do with it? Do you become exempt from tax in your 70s?

He doesn't pay his taxes, he had a marital affair and yet he thinks he's got the moral authority over the rest of us to stand there and preach about values?

I wonder if they do, or whether their leaders enjoy having photo ops with The King? Particularly some of the dodgier and more corrupt. Im not sure what the Comonwealth does. It hasnt stopped Chinas ' belt and road' initiative across Africa, which seems to be a modern Empire building operation similar to Britains East India Company blueprint.

He had an affair 30 years ago. So did his wife.

He has been married for 20 years, apparently faithfully. So appears to have learned from his mistakes and changed.

I shop.lifted once, 40 years ago. Never since. Does that still make me morally unacceptable?

I am reminded of the 'let he/she who.is without sin cast the first stone'.

Are you claiming to be morally pure and perfect? Or is an affair - not a regular pattern of behaviour, unlike Diana and the men she pursued - so beyond the pale there is no return to 'acceptability'?

It makes you a poor candidate to stand in front of millions of people who haven't shoplifted and preach about the importance of honesty, integrity and respecting other people's property.

No I'm not switching the goalposts. These things are all intrinsically linked.

He hasn't lived by the values he preaches. He has dodged his taxes while millions of people suffer and carried on a decades long affair, marrying his affair partner only after he'd secured his "heir and spare" from a suitable woman who was treated as nothing more than a brood mare. These aren't Christian values.

So unless you are morally perfect and financially poor you shouldn't talk to others about what you believe in or try to encourage people at a very difficult time?

A purity spiral means that no one can do anything or say anything and the status quo remains. I'd rather people with a public platform (even those with not money than me or who have made mistakes in their lives) speak positively and encourage us all to look after each other and foster community than have to listen and read the divisive and dangerous lies some politicians and some members of the press build their careers and money on.

I think that it’s very relevant to the issues we have in Britain for the head of the church the flag shaggers claim to belong to to talk about the holy family’s ethnicity and status and how it’s a religion of inclusivity and peace. Bet Tommy Robinson hated it-which is a win.

Didn't watch it, don't care.

Don't understand people queuing to see them, they're just people.

Talk is ALL it is .

I have never watched this nonsense and never would - but if you say he was preaching about compassion I’ll take your word for it . It sounds like the sort of bare faced hypocrisy which the Windsors expect us to tolerate

Where is the compassion for Andrew’s victims ? And Mountbatten’s ? And Peter Ball’s ?
Where is his compassion for the people relying on public services like the NHS which he’s happy to rip off
Come to that , if any of the Windsors an ounce of genuine compassion they would happily pay all taxes due to the country.

But thankfully OP is right . Whatever was scripted for this out of touch billionaire, grown immensely rich off our backs, only a tiny minority was interested .
And that tiny minority is literally dying.
Just like the corrupt institution they support .

There's an enormous chasm between poverty and hoarding billions. No, I don't think people who do the latter should be preaching to the masses whose lives are made worse by them declining to pay their taxes. Likewise "moral perfection". No, nobody is perfect. But to preach values you are famous for not living by is hypocrisy.

I don't think anybody expects perfection. That doesn't mean we have to accept hypocrisy.

How would you say it has?

Oh no, not the fucking 'brood mare' cliche again. It's as boring as the sweating joke.