Should King Charles abdicate?

[catspyjamas1]

His health.
Harry and Megan back in the UK.
The book from Diana's brother.

Should the King abdicate?

Charles Spencer is on his 4th marriage with seven children to three different wives- say no more!

I wouldn't believe anything he says,

The whole of the Spencer family were and are dysfunctional, Diana included. I really don't understand all the comments on social media declaring her to be an angel and a wonderful person and an amazing mother. Can people not see beyond the facade?

Diana did some good things, yes. But I believe she also caused a lot of damage to her sons and the Royal Family. Charles was naive in marrying her to believe that she could handled was suitable for life as a Queen, and he wasn't strong enough to push back against the pressure he was under to find a wife. Diana may have been very young when she married him but there was some calculation behind that- but she was also naive at the time to think it would work to marry a man who she knew was in love with someone else. She wasn't, however, the sweet and meek girl she was portrayed as, or presented herself as. She was very emotionally manipulative in my guess. very volatile, and unstable. She was also far more ruthless than any of us probably imagine.

I think william will have to take over soon in some form. charles doesnt look well and i doubt he'll be able to carry on much longer. In fact i think it would be cruel to make him as he seems old for his age. The timing has all been wrong. He had some good ideas but came to the throne so late that he doesnt have the ooomph left to carry it out. Camilla looks tired too. It's too much for them ..I would like to see a system where the monarch retires at 67 like everybody else. Expecting them to go out day after day in their 70s and 80s is ridiculous.

Yes and of course a headline grabbing line is required otherwise no one would talk about his book.

No.
The Queen never abdicated and look at the shit she went through.

Don't think Charlie makes any political decisions

Yes, he should abdicate. They all should. Get rid of the bunch of parasites.

The lineage of the Saxe-Coburg-Gothas isn't really that representative of the UK, is it?

how do you know so much about the inner workings of their family?

Why do you care?

@catspyjamas1- Harry and Meghan being back being a reason the King should abdicate, why? Do you think he should have stripped his adult son of his British citizenship like that Isis bride?! Is his crime of “being a complete dick and slagging off his family” comparable?! Why is the fact Harry and Meghan have moved back to the UK (into a property that’s not funded by the King, without royal roles or security) seen as a failing of the King?

Id say any attempt by the king to stop them would have been a serious overreach and that would have been a reason for him to go. Doing nothing about it is actually a better position.

King Charles pulled off what has been widely hailed as a diplomatic master class with his speech to US Congress
I don’t think William has the gravitas to do this yet. So no, I don’t think KCIII should abdicate as long as he feels healthy enough to carry on.

H&M, Earl Spencer’s book etc are just compared to the impact King Charles can have on international affairs.

I well imagine that he’s trying to follow in her footsteps to honour her legacy

You think you know it too

It was an excellent speech well delivered. Good choice of scriptwriters. Not much to show for 70 years of life, though!

I don't believe Charles should abdicate, and if he did, then William (who is next in line) would become King.
Whether we should have a Monarchy at all is another question altogether, and I suspect over time, the public consensus for a monarchy will diminish, and then it would require an Act of Parliament to separate out the Monarchy from being the Head of State. (What I mean is that I am assuming we don't use a guillotine, and therefore the actual people (King, etc) would still exist, but with no formal role.
I think at the moment, the Gov quite like the 'soft power' that the Royals have and that they are a continuation of a history of Royals in the UK. If abolition were on the agenda, then I think separating out State and private ownership of various artefacts / houses could be difficult.
Of all the current royals, then William has had a job with the Air Ambulance, etc, and I thnk he would very easily be able to earn a living. (At the moment, they derive an income from ownership of land and property - Duchy of Lancaster and Cornwall.)
Any elected President would immediately become political. The farce that they would be above politics is unlikely. As soon as there is an alection (with opposing contestants), then there is a political agenda.

I think that all of the monarchy should be gotten rid of. Not because of the reason the op has listed just because it is such an outdated concept.

So would I. Think of President Blair as an example.

I really doubt that H&M's children are going to get to know their first cousins very well. I imagine W&C won't be inviting his brother and family over and they won't be seeing Charles at Highgrove together.

Sources said father and son wanted to meet this week and the King was keen to make time to see his two young grandchildren.

The Palace described the meeting at the King's private home in Gloucestershire as a "private family occasion".

They may or may not have seen each other since; it’s really not any of our concern as will be treated a private just as the king seeing any of his other grandchildren will be.

Harry visits King with Meghan and children for first time in four years https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj4g79exkzlo

unlikely as children , but as they grow older they can make their own decisions.

Id imagine both sets of parents are emotionally mature enough not to project their own issues on to the children.

Certainly one set of parents will be king and queen in the not too distant future. They have examples to set.

I'd take King Charles and his recent predecessors over any of the Prime Ministers!

No, he shouldn't abdicate as he needs to prove the principle of hereditary monarchy still holds, and not just quit it like an ordinary job.

I'd be delighted if they all abdicated for ever, but given his position, it wouldn't make sense for him to do so right now.

Don’t be daft.

No unless he becomes too ill to continue. But he seems to be managing fine

No - he waited years and years to fulfil his destiny, and I think he is making a good job of it so far.

Spencer is a bloody spiteful troublemaker and not a very nice man, by all accounts.

H&M are non-entities as far as the LoS is concerned.