Glad I wasn't the only one drawn to his magnificent beard. Noticed he was there to open the door on the King's arrival at the abbey, went on ahead obviously.
He shouldn't even be in the Royal Family, he should have been removed from it.
Well he has been, that's why he's not in military uniform unlike the others.
He's still at his mother's funeral though. Can't be stripped of that.
Charles called her Mummy too.
But really take a good hard look at yourself. He is a grieving son. Not a working Royal. Your unkind remarks at such a time about a man in mourning - like the unkind remarks people make about the Sussexes or others - say more about those making the remarks (and not in a good way) than about the targets.
A bit of common politeness would not go amiss. And if you can't be polite, try silence. Good manners cost nothing.
This isn't a funeral. It's a c***s' carnival, a big show of power using splendour and religion and pomp. The family could have decided to hold only a private funeral, and to pay for it out of their own pockets. Grieve for the old bag. Bury or cremate her carcass. Few anti-royalists would have much of a problem with that. But they don't, do they? They get their lackeys to talk about "the kingdom" and all that sh*t. Don't talk about manners. They're the rudest most vulgar scum in the country. Royalism is the apotheosis of exclusion and filthy manners, of all that is muck, worthless, surface, ludicrous, vomit, idiotic, with massive chips on its shoulders but you can't see that.
Yes but I am sure you would have been at Stalin's funeral crying your eyes out wouldn't you?
No complaints about the scale and power projection there!
Impressive in its own way that even when there's no traffic they're still going the right way round the roundabout even though it's three times as far!
I assumed parts of the winding route are to let various bits of the procession get eyeshot of the others to make sure they're not getting out of sync.
He shouldn't even be in the Royal Family, he should have been removed from it.
Well he has been, that's why he's not in military uniform unlike the others.
He's still at his mother's funeral though. Can't be stripped of that.
Charles called her Mummy too.
But really take a good hard look at yourself. He is a grieving son. Not a working Royal. Your unkind remarks at such a time about a man in mourning - like the unkind remarks people make about the Sussexes or others - say more about those making the remarks (and not in a good way) than about the targets.
A bit of common politeness would not go amiss. And if you can't be polite, try silence. Good manners cost nothing.
This isn't a funeral. It's a c***s' carnival, a big show of power using splendour and religion and pomp. The family could have decided to hold only a private funeral, and to pay for it out of their own pockets. Grieve for the old bag. Bury or cremate her carcass. Few anti-royalists would have much of a problem with that. But they don't, do they? They get their lackeys to talk about "the kingdom" and all that sh*t. Don't talk about manners. They're the rudest most vulgar scum in the country. Royalism is the apotheosis of exclusion and filthy manners, of all that is muck, worthless, surface, ludicrous, vomit, idiotic, with massive chips on its shoulders but you can't see that.
Don't worry, when Putin accidentally falls out of a window next month, I'm sure your nation's funeral for him will be much more restrained and cut back.
Why do you call this person a Russian troll when he's not said anything pro-Russia? Just because you don't like what he says.
Because he's the latest in a string of Russian trolls, with a very distinctive style. Like one of his nation's nesting dolls, there'll be another along soon no doubt.
What has he said that is pro Russia?
He doesn't like the monarchy, you don't like the monarchy. Are you a Russian troll?
Apparently the plan is to go from Hyde Park Corner to Windsor by road in the royal hearse. But according to Google maps a lot of the roads are closed today.
Each toll of the bell underpinned by the sub-bass thud of the gun salute.
It's sublime
It's perfect.
Also, how they went under the arch into Horseguard with inches to spare on either side, but in perfect time and precision.
Her His Majesty's United Kingdom - most of its citizens subjects are in huge debt from when they're 18 until they're about 50, Oxford Street has to call in "American Candy Stores" because it's better than having everything boarded up, 454 British lives were lost fighting an unwinnable 20 year war in Afghanistan (from which they couldn't even manage to withdraw in good order), but f*ck, can that kingdom wheel a coffin underneath an arch!
The Queen had the respect even of the anti-monarchists. Charles does not. So either he very quickly starts hacking away at the firm to make it fit for the fuure, or he will lose the people.
Wrong. Think about QWERTY keyboard layouts and driving on the left. The arguments against both are completely and utterly irrefutable, which is what makes Dynamo's rants so pointless, because he thinks he is telling us something we don't know. In all cases embedness beats the absolute shit out of all the counterarguments. We aren't going to change the system, except as a side effect of something else. i can't think what something else would be.
He shouldn't even be in the Royal Family, he should have been removed from it.
Well he has been, that's why he's not in military uniform unlike the others.
He's still at his mother's funeral though. Can't be stripped of that.
Charles called her Mummy too.
But really take a good hard look at yourself. He is a grieving son. Not a working Royal. Your unkind remarks at such a time about a man in mourning - like the unkind remarks people make about the Sussexes or others - say more about those making the remarks (and not in a good way) than about the targets.
A bit of common politeness would not go amiss. And if you can't be polite, try silence. Good manners cost nothing.
This isn't a funeral. It's a c***s' carnival, a big show of power using splendour and religion and pomp. The family could have decided to hold only a private funeral, and to pay for it out of their own pockets. Grieve for the old bag. Bury or cremate her carcass. Few anti-royalists would have much of a problem with that. But they don't, do they? They get their lackeys to talk about "the kingdom" and all that sh*t. Don't talk about manners. They're the rudest most vulgar scum in the country. Royalism is the apotheosis of exclusion and filthy manners, of all that is muck, worthless, surface, ludicrous, vomit, idiotic, with massive chips on its shoulders but you can't see that.
Excellent value for money though; compared to oligarchies like contemporary Russia
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
The Queen had the respect even of the anti-monarchists. Charles does not. So either he very quickly starts hacking away at the firm to make it fit for the fuure, or he will lose the people.
I suspect he is fully aware of this and knows the challenge ahead. One of his ideas is a more slimmed down Monarchy for example.
I wonder how many of the decisions made in the last week and a half will get reversed. Andrew can't be let anywhere near a role, surely?
Apparently the plan is to go from Hyde Park Corner to Windsor by road in the royal hearse. But according to Google maps a lot of the roads are closed today.
And with the GPS blocking, how is google maps going to find an alternative route? Disaster.
The Queen had the respect even of the anti-monarchists. Charles does not. So either he very quickly starts hacking away at the firm to make it fit for the fuure, or he will lose the people.
Wrong. Think about QWERTY keyboard layouts and driving on the left. The arguments against both are completely and utterly irrefutable, which is what makes Dynamo's rants so pointless, because he thinks he is telling us something we don't know. In all cases embedness beats the absolute shit out of all the counterarguments. We aren't going to change the system, except as a side effect of something else. i can't think what something else would be.
Internal royal crisis is the big thing, always the possibility individuals can cock up, but it is not massively likely in the short term, and they can seek to self correct if that happens.
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
TBF, I don't think he's Russian. Just a stereotypical nasty stupid Communist stuck in about 1931 who thinks everything the Soviets and their heirs do is amazing and everything his own country does is evil because he thinks of them as evil.
In a sense, that makes it worse. If he were paid to spout his nonsense at least that would be comprehensible if still reprehensible.
Of course, he may be a parody, out to get Russian sympathisers a bad name. But it seems unlikely especially given how incredibly abusive he gets.
Watching as the trumpets play and the organ chimes in, and then the bagpipes start sounding I’m struck by how exotic Britain is.
It’s easy to imagine yourself a foreign viewer today wondering at the sheer differentness of this country and its national rituals.
I'm not really convinced by that.
Every country has their own ceremonial, often rooted in tradition, or reinvented versions of tradition.
See for example, funeral ceremonies held in the Reichstag or the Requiem Mass for French Presidents.
Or, for sheer differentness, try Chile with their pickelhaube and goosesteps inherited from the Prussian Military who retrained their armed forces more than a century ago. I think Sweden still do Pickelhaube.
Or as DA pointed out the other day, the Greeks with their interesting ceremonial uniforms.
New countries recreate their own, and to me that feels more incongruous than something developed from an historical tradition, which I put under the "life's rich tapestry" label.
Consider the sheer breadth of exoticism on display today though. Not just funny uniforms.
We have dozens of full time cathedral choirs with cassocked choristers, something that scarcely exists elsewhere except in a handful of large cities. Singing English choral music that nobody foreign will recognise.
Bagpipes, immediately transporting the viewer to some craggy highland moor.
A whole panoply of funny uniforms with their own stories. I noticed the beefeaters were there for example.
A royal family with celebrity members.
As well as driving on the left, pubs and all the other stuff.
Not beefeaters. I've got 24 Wikipedia tabs open so far.
Yes Beefeaters. Saw them yesterday when I REDACTED REDACTED
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
Could we have a separate grouping of people who would vote for a Republic if given the option, but don't think it's worth the energy and political carnage to actually have a referendum?
The Queen had the respect even of the anti-monarchists. Charles does not. So either he very quickly starts hacking away at the firm to make it fit for the fuure, or he will lose the people.
Wrong. Think about QWERTY keyboard layouts and driving on the left. The arguments against both are completely and utterly irrefutable, which is what makes Dynamo's rants so pointless, because he thinks he is telling us something we don't know. In all cases embedness beats the absolute shit out of all the counterarguments. We aren't going to change the system, except as a side effect of something else. i can't think what something else would be.
I'm not a staunch republican so that isn't want I am arguing for. I agree that the system - a monarchy - will not change. But The Firm can change. A new CEO, with very different circumstances to when the previous CEO took over the firm all those decades ago.
Charles will have to make significant changes to the firm or see it scandalled out of public affections with all the penalties that incurs.
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
TBF, I don't think he's Russian. Just a stereotypical nasty stupid Communist stuck in about 1931 who thinks everything the Soviets and their heirs do is amazing and everything his own country does is evil because he thinks of them as evil.
In a sense, that makes it worse. If he were paid to spout his nonsense at least that would be comprehensible if still reprehensible.
That's a bit of half a dozen instead of six though.
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
Could we have a separate grouping of people who would vote for a Republic if given the option, but don't think it's worth the energy and political carnage to actually have a referendum?
Each toll of the bell underpinned by the sub-bass thud of the gun salute.
It's sublime
It's perfect.
Also, how they went under the arch into Horseguard with inches to spare on either side, but in perfect time and precision.
Her His Majesty's United Kingdom - most of its citizens subjects are in huge debt from when they're 18 until they're about 50, Oxford Street has to call in "American Candy Stores" because it's better than having everything boarded up, 454 British lives were lost fighting an unwinnable 20 year war in Afghanistan (from which they couldn't even manage to withdraw in good order), but f*ck, can that kingdom wheel a coffin underneath an arch!
Unemployment in the UK also lowest since 1974, Bin Laden was still removed and killed in Afghanistan which we did after 67 British lives and almost 3,000 lives overall were lost on 9/11
I like the style of marching at events like this. Synchronised, but not excessively so in the self-parodic North Korean fashion. The French are good at that too.
The weather has behaved impeccably.
It might be the dramatic flourishes and perfection of NK style presentation that for some reason makes it seem a little unnatural, like there's no way even very well trained and choreographed troops should be so robotically in sync.
Sure, the royalist British regime gets its ceremonial act just so right. Not too perfect, mind you. It's not like in North Korea where ceremonial training is technically better. And that's what makes it so natural. It's better than anything any parliamentary republic could possibly muster. It's a wonderful loveliness that brings together the splendid and the real. In every way, it's just right. Even when it's less than right, that's something that makes it even righter. Bravo. God save the king.
Listen to yourself.
Her Majesty's life was one of unremitting SERVICE, do you hear?
Unrelatedly, she gave royal warrants to Dubonnet, Bacardi (for Martini Vermouth), Gordon's gin, Berry Bros & Rudd, and SEVEN Champagne houses – Bollinger, Mumm, Krug, Lanson, Roederer, Moët & Chandon and Veuve Clicquot.
Watching as the trumpets play and the organ chimes in, and then the bagpipes start sounding I’m struck by how exotic Britain is.
It’s easy to imagine yourself a foreign viewer today wondering at the sheer differentness of this country and its national rituals.
I'm not really convinced by that.
Every country has their own ceremonial, often rooted in tradition, or reinvented versions of tradition.
See for example, funeral ceremonies held in the Reichstag or the Requiem Mass for French Presidents.
Or, for sheer differentness, try Chile with their pickelhaube and goosesteps inherited from the Prussian Military who retrained their armed forces more than a century ago. I think Sweden still do Pickelhaube.
Or as DA pointed out the other day, the Greeks with their interesting ceremonial uniforms.
New countries recreate their own, and to me that feels more incongruous than something developed from an historical tradition, which I put under the "life's rich tapestry" label.
Consider the sheer breadth of exoticism on display today though. Not just funny uniforms.
We have dozens of full time cathedral choirs with cassocked choristers, something that scarcely exists elsewhere except in a handful of large cities. Singing English choral music that nobody foreign will recognise.
Bagpipes, immediately transporting the viewer to some craggy highland moor.
A whole panoply of funny uniforms with their own stories. I noticed the beefeaters were there for example.
A royal family with celebrity members.
As well as driving on the left, pubs and all the other stuff.
Not beefeaters. I've got 24 Wikipedia tabs open so far.
Yes Beefeaters. Saw them yesterday when I REDACTED REDACTED
He shouldn't even be in the Royal Family, he should have been removed from it.
Well he has been, that's why he's not in military uniform unlike the others.
He's still at his mother's funeral though. Can't be stripped of that.
Charles called her Mummy too.
But really take a good hard look at yourself. He is a grieving son. Not a working Royal. Your unkind remarks at such a time about a man in mourning - like the unkind remarks people make about the Sussexes or others - say more about those making the remarks (and not in a good way) than about the targets.
A bit of common politeness would not go amiss. And if you can't be polite, try silence. Good manners cost nothing.
This isn't a funeral. It's a c***s' carnival, a big show of power using splendour and religion and pomp. The family could have decided to hold only a private funeral, and to pay for it out of their own pockets. Grieve for the old bag. Bury or cremate her carcass. Few anti-royalists would have much of a problem with that. But they don't, do they? They get their lackeys to talk about "the kingdom" and all that sh*t. Don't talk about manners. They're the rudest most vulgar scum in the country. Royalism is the apotheosis of exclusion and filthy manners.
I won't talk about manners.
What I will talk about is that Head of State funerals are generally paid for by the State, whetever the type of state. So it is a bit silly to think the individual would pay.
Glad you recognise the splendour though.
I presume the Russian government will be paying for Putin’s funeral. Can you pass on your insider knowledge, please @Dynamo?
The Queen had the respect even of the anti-monarchists. Charles does not. So either he very quickly starts hacking away at the firm to make it fit for the fuure, or he will lose the people.
I suspect he is fully aware of this and knows the challenge ahead. One of his ideas is a more slimmed down Monarchy for example.
I wonder how many of the decisions made in the last week and a half will get reversed. Andrew can't be let anywhere near a role, surely?
I think that is the plan.
I think Anne will get more of a role (she was the most hardest working royal out of them all anyway but her and Charles appear to be close). Edward and Sophie will I think take on more of a role.
But primarily it will all go through Charles to William and his children.
Each toll of the bell underpinned by the sub-bass thud of the gun salute.
It's sublime
It's perfect.
Also, how they went under the arch into Horseguard with inches to spare on either side, but in perfect time and precision.
Her His Majesty's United Kingdom - most of its citizens subjects are in huge debt from when they're 18 until they're about 50, Oxford Street has to call in "American Candy Stores" because it's better than having everything boarded up, 454 British lives were lost fighting an unwinnable 20 year war in Afghanistan (from which they couldn't even manage to withdraw in good order), but f*ck, can that kingdom wheel a coffin underneath an arch!
Unemployment in the UK also lowest since 1974, Bin Laden was still removed and killed in Afghanistan which we did after 67 British lives and almost 3,000 lives overall were lost on 9/11
It was 67, to be exact, which I believe is still the single greatest number of British lives lost in any one terrorist attack.
I like the style of marching at events like this. Synchronised, but not excessively so in the self-parodic North Korean fashion. The French are good at that too.
The weather has behaved impeccably.
It might be the dramatic flourishes and perfection of NK style presentation that for some reason makes it seem a little unnatural, like there's no way even very well trained and choreographed troops should be so robotically in sync.
Sure, the royalist British regime gets its ceremonial act just so right. Not too perfect, mind you. It's not like in North Korea where ceremonial training is technically better. And that's what makes it so natural. It's better than anything any parliamentary republic could possibly muster. It's a wonderful loveliness that brings together the splendid and the real. In every way, it's just right. Even when it's less than right, that's something that makes it even righter. Bravo. God save the king.
Listen to yourself.
Her Majesty's life was one of unremitting SERVICE, do you hear?
Unrelatedly, she gave royal warrants to Dubonnet, Bacardi (for Martini Vermouth), Gordon's gin, Berry Bros & Rudd, and SEVEN Champagne houses – Bollinger, Mumm, Krug, Lanson, Roederer, Moët & Chandon and Veuve Clicquot.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
You're absolutely right that Britain still has soft power. And a monarch on the throne with a direct link all the way back to the war was always going to pull in dignitaries - as Mandela did, as Churchill did, as other giants of history do.
Our problem was that in the past our undoubted soft power was combined with hard power. Our ability to govern much of the globe has gone, as now has our relevance as a global player. Yes I expect the next government's u-turn on petulant twattery towards the EU will reverse some of the current decline, but not all of it.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
This is the great problem with Britain, though, isn't it? We cannot decide who or what we want to be after jumping off the imperialist bus?
It's a country with a massive identity crisis. Brexiteer versus remainer. Monarchist versus republican. Union versus nationanalist. Declinist versus booster. Military hawk versus military dove. Singapore on Thames versus Northern Hemisphere Venezuela.
The Queen had the respect even of the anti-monarchists. Charles does not. So either he very quickly starts hacking away at the firm to make it fit for the fuure, or he will lose the people.
Wrong. Think about QWERTY keyboard layouts and driving on the left. The arguments against both are completely and utterly irrefutable, which is what makes Dynamo's rants so pointless, because he thinks he is telling us something we don't know. In all cases embedness beats the absolute shit out of all the counterarguments. We aren't going to change the system, except as a side effect of something else. i can't think what something else would be.
I'm not a staunch republican so that isn't want I am arguing for. I agree that the system - a monarchy - will not change. But The Firm can change. A new CEO, with very different circumstances to when the previous CEO took over the firm all those decades ago.
Charles will have to make significant changes to the firm or see it scandalled out of public affections with all the penalties that incurs.
He is, it was he who persuaded the Queen to remove Andrew as a working royal with William. Charles will strip the monarchy and working royals down to just him, Camilla, Anne, Edward and the Cambridges now.
Buckingham Palace will be opened all year round, he will live at Clarence House and just have an office there. Balmoral will also be opened to the public as a memorial museum to his mother.
He will also have a smaller scale coronation than his mother did next year, even the service today had full representation of all Christian denominations in the prayers not just the C of E and he will be defender of faith broadly.
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
Could we have a separate grouping of people who would vote for a Republic if given the option, but don't think it's worth the energy and political carnage to actually have a referendum?
There's a wide range. Just a few:
Die hard monarchists - it is divinely ordained and must be no matter waht Conditional monarchists - So long as its sticks to its role and works, let's keep it The unbothered - Why are you asking me? The footy's on, leave me alone. Instinctive republicans - Monarchy doesn't make much sense, but meh, no need to push things DIe hard republicans - This is an outrage, you damn serfs!
The Queen had the respect even of the anti-monarchists. Charles does not. So either he very quickly starts hacking away at the firm to make it fit for the fuure, or he will lose the people.
I suspect he is fully aware of this and knows the challenge ahead. One of his ideas is a more slimmed down Monarchy for example.
I wonder how many of the decisions made in the last week and a half will get reversed. Andrew can't be let anywhere near a role, surely?
I think that is the plan.
I think Anne will get more of a role (she was the most hardest working royal out of them all anyway but her and Charles appear to be close). Edward and Sophie will I think take on more of a role.
But primarily it will all go through Charles to William and his children.
Hes trying to exclude non working royals so Harry, Andrew, Beatrice out and it would be Camilla Wiiliam Edward Anne Plus most senior over 21 grandchild from Andrew, Edward, Anne lines taking on formal royal duties until George is 21
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
Could we have a separate grouping of people who would vote for a Republic if given the option, but don't think it's worth the energy and political carnage to actually have a referendum?
That's literally where I am
Not really - you seem to really care about it.
I'm just enjoying the spectacle, the music and - most especially - the history.
I wonder if the driver of the hearse will be ordered to step on it to make up time? Maybe get @Dura_Ace to drive part of the way? He is an ex-naval officer, after all.
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
Could we have a separate grouping of people who would vote for a Republic if given the option, but don't think it's worth the energy and political carnage to actually have a referendum?
We have to have a head of state, and with our parliamentary system such a figure is going to be largely symbolic. Whilst there is clearly still an argument for choosing that person by accident of birth, there are other arguments for other systems.
Our problem is that our biggest constitutional problem is NOT should we have a King. And until we completely refound the UK framework to be fit for the future, there is zero point looking at the non divine-right options for HoS.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
We do but when the Queen came to the throne we were still just about a superpower alongside the US and USSR with Churchill as PM and we still had a large Empire.
Now we are a middle ranking power only, the only true global superpowers now are the USA still and China.
People also admire Sweden, Ireland, Canada etc but none of them are superpowers either
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
TBF, I don't think he's Russian. Just a stereotypical nasty stupid Communist stuck in about 1931 who thinks everything the Soviets and their heirs do is amazing and everything his own country does is evil because he thinks of them as evil.
In a sense, that makes it worse. If he were paid to spout his nonsense at least that would be comprehensible if still reprehensible.
That's a bit of half a dozen instead of six though.
In a way, that's the point.
Russian trolls mostly aren't trying to persuade anyone that Putinist Russia is good. After all, that's a fool's errand. What they do well is stir up division by bigging up both ghastly extremes.
I see that online politics is back to its normal self. Ho-hum.
Here's a vid of an "innocent" in-line skater being grabbed and pulled down by police just before a motorcade I think with KCIII arrives, in London. The version being retweeted by outrage bots, with a couple of million "views":
An here's a longer video from across the road showing him skating straight through a security checkpoint about 4 seconds earlier, where he failed to stop:
The Queen had the respect even of the anti-monarchists. Charles does not. So either he very quickly starts hacking away at the firm to make it fit for the fuure, or he will lose the people.
Wrong. Think about QWERTY keyboard layouts and driving on the left. The arguments against both are completely and utterly irrefutable, which is what makes Dynamo's rants so pointless, because he thinks he is telling us something we don't know. In all cases embedness beats the absolute shit out of all the counterarguments. We aren't going to change the system, except as a side effect of something else. i can't think what something else would be.
I'm not a staunch republican so that isn't want I am arguing for. I agree that the system - a monarchy - will not change. But The Firm can change. A new CEO, with very different circumstances to when the previous CEO took over the firm all those decades ago.
Charles will have to make significant changes to the firm or see it scandalled out of public affections with all the penalties that incurs.
He is, it was he who persuaded the Queen to remove Andrew as a working royal with William. Charles will strip the monarchy and working royals down to just him, Camilla, Anne, Edward and the Cambridges now.
Buckingham Palace will be opened all year round, he will live at Clarence House and just have an office there. Balmoral will also be opened to the public as a memorial museum to his mother.
He will also have a smaller scale coronation than his mother did next year, even the service today had full representation of all Christian denominations in the prayers not just the C of E and he will be defender of faith broadly.
If he does all that he will make a fine King. If. Will the powers that be let him...?
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
This is the great problem with Britain, though, isn't it? We cannot decide who or what we want to be after jumping off the imperialist bus?
It's a country with a massive identity crisis. Brexiteer versus remainer. Monarchist versus republican. Union versus nationanalist. Declinist versus booster. Military hawk versus military dove. Singapore on Thames versus Northern Hemisphere Venezuela.
To an extent, though I think it is overplayed. Several of those are day to day political options which are not a sign of an identity crisis, just healthy political discourse.
On the declinist vs booster thing I think there is more confusion, but even there I don't think things are as start as some think. For instance, whilst there stereotypical 'We used to rule the globe and by jingo we should be powerful again' types do exist, it seems far more common than when people hearken back, as it were, they are thinking superficial elements of culture, not a desire to unreaslitically regain a place of international superpower status. Indeed, some of the most nostalgic in style are more isolationist, accepting that we are a power, not a great power.
I think people are generally happy that we are still a middling power - on global terms we have a reasonably high population and wealth - though they disagree how assertive we should be within that status.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
You're absolutely right that Britain still has soft power. And a monarch on the throne with a direct link all the way back to the war was always going to pull in dignitaries - as Mandela did, as Churchill did, as other giants of history do.
Our problem was that in the past our undoubted soft power was combined with hard power. Our ability to govern much of the globe has gone, as now has our relevance as a global player. Yes I expect the next government's u-turn on petulant twattery towards the EU will reverse some of the current decline, but not all of it.
If we are irrelevant as a global player then there are at most two countries that are relevant as such. Which seems possible, though a trifle absurd.
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
Could we have a separate grouping of people who would vote for a Republic if given the option, but don't think it's worth the energy and political carnage to actually have a referendum?
We have to have a head of state
That said, Switzerland seems to manage fine without one.
Think those same 8 guardsmen(?) have done every transfer of the coffin. They must be so proud and now relieved. And deserve all the beer they want tonight.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
We do but when the Queen came to the throne we were still just about a superpower alongside the US and USSR with Churchill as PM and we still had a large Empire.
British “Superpower” status disappeared at some point in WWII - the fall of Singapore is as good a marker as any - as we found out to our cost during Suez. Having not been defeated it made it psychologically easier for us to give up our Empire than other European colonial powers - imagine what would have happened if we’d tried what the Dutch did in Indonesia or the French in Vietnam. We remained a significant power - as we still do, but as George Bernard Shaw remarked at the start of the war - there will be two winners, the USA & the USSR.
Think those same 8 guardsmen(?) have done every transfer of the coffin. They must be so proud and now relieved. And deserve all the beer they want tonight.
Are they going to have a different team at Windsor then?
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
TBF, I don't think he's Russian. Just a stereotypical nasty stupid Communist stuck in about 1931 who thinks everything the Soviets and their heirs do is amazing and everything his own country does is evil because he thinks of them as evil.
In a sense, that makes it worse. If he were paid to spout his nonsense at least that would be comprehensible if still reprehensible.
That's a bit of half a dozen instead of six though.
In a way, that's the point.
Russian trolls mostly aren't trying to persuade anyone that Putinist Russia is good. After all, that's a fool's errand. What they do well is stir up division by bigging up both ghastly extremes.
Anything to undermine quiet Western consensus.
Which is bloody stupid and self-defeating. Because the lack of consensus and the fact that we are our own biggest critics is the West's greatest strength, not a weakness.
Too much ''consensus" in Russia leads to catastrophes like the war in Ukraine with a Potemkin military because nobody dared to break the consensus and say what a terrible idea it is.
We will be fine as long as no external threat or enemy can challenge us more than we challenge ourselves.
I see that online politics is back to its normal self. Ho-hum.
Here's a vid of an "innocent" in-line skater being grabbed and pulled down by police just before a motorcade I think with KCIII arrives, in London. The version being retweeted by outrage bots, with a couple of million "views":
An here's a longer video from across the road showing him skating straight through a security checkpoint about 4 seconds earlier, where he failed to stop:
I saw that in the flesh. He came very fast round the corner from the Abbey. One policeman stuck his arms out to stop him but the guy went round, then 4 police slammed him in the barrier.
He obviously knew what he was doing. You'd have to be completely stupid not to wonder why the roads were empty and all these people were standing round
I wonder if the driver of the hearse will be ordered to step on it to make up time? Maybe get @Dura_Ace to drive part of the way? He is an ex-naval officer, after all.
I've been to enough funerals. I won't be going to any more.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
We do but when the Queen came to the throne we were still just about a superpower alongside the US and USSR with Churchill as PM and we still had a large Empire.
British “Superpower” status disappeared at some point in WWII - the fall of Singapore is as good a marker as any - as we found out to our cost during Suez. Having not been defeated it made it psychologically easier for us to give up our Empire than other European colonial powers - imagine what would have happened if we’d tried what the Dutch did in Indonesia or the French in Vietnam. We remained a significant power - as we still do, but as George Bernard Shaw remarked at the start of the war - there will be two winners, the USA & the USSR.
France or the Netherlands never had the Empire on the scale we did and as you say we were not defeated in WW2. Obviously post WW2 the US was the supreme power, hence trying to ignore them was folly as in Suez but we were still in the top 3 with the US and USSR. Now we are not in the top 3, currently it is probably the US, China and maybe the EU with India a rising superpower too.
We are still a medium ranked, top 10 power which is generally a prosperous and liberal and free nation but we are not and likely never will again be a superpower as we were at the start of the late Queen's reign
We have a head of state and a prime minister who both have no democratic legitimacy.
And dissent is heavily cracked down on.
This is an intolerable state of affairs.
Not quite sure how Charles is less legitimate than his mother was. And as for Truss, she is the elected leader of the party who have enough seats at Westminster to pass legislation.
As Gordon Brown had when he took over between elections.
I succumbed and dipped in for a bit. It's all extremely impressive - not just the event, but the organisation/logistics of it, which must have been a nightmare - but so far, so good. It must have cost a bomb.
But it has made me think - if we can run something like this, why does it seem to be beyond our wit, as a nation, to organise an efficient and timely ambulance service, or cut the NHS backlog more rapidly?
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
We do but when the Queen came to the throne we were still just about a superpower alongside the US and USSR with Churchill as PM and we still had a large Empire.
British “Superpower” status disappeared at some point in WWII - the fall of Singapore is as good a marker as any - as we found out to our cost during Suez. Having not been defeated it made it psychologically easier for us to give up our Empire than other European colonial powers - imagine what would have happened if we’d tried what the Dutch did in Indonesia or the French in Vietnam. We remained a significant power - as we still do, but as George Bernard Shaw remarked at the start of the war - there will be two winners, the USA & the USSR.
I would have said the withdrawal from Greece in 1947 marked the moment Britain abdicated superpower status. That was the instant when it accepted it wasn't possible to act as the world's policeman any more and literally handed that over to the Americans.
Suez was an attempt to put the clock back, with unfortunate results.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
This is the great problem with Britain, though, isn't it? We cannot decide who or what we want to be after jumping off the imperialist bus?
It's a country with a massive identity crisis. Brexiteer versus remainer. Monarchist versus republican. Union versus nationanalist. Declinist versus booster. Military hawk versus military dove. Singapore on Thames versus Northern Hemisphere Venezuela.
That is not really true, majorities of Remainers and Leavers, Tories and LD voters and even pluralities of Scots and Labour voters want to retain the monarchy.
It divides us far less than arguments over Brexit did or Scottish independence do or Labour statist v Tory free market do.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
We do but when the Queen came to the throne we were still just about a superpower alongside the US and USSR with Churchill as PM and we still had a large Empire.
Now we are a middle ranking power only, the only true global superpowers now are the USA still and China.
People also admire Sweden, Ireland, Canada etc but none of them are superpowers either
No, the steam had gone out of it by then. In the 1930's arguably we were still a superpower, but WW2 finished us off.
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
No, he's being called out for being a Russian troll as he's a Russian troll.
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
Could we have a separate grouping of people who would vote for a Republic if given the option, but don't think it's worth the energy and political carnage to actually have a referendum?
We have to have a head of state, and with our parliamentary system such a figure is going to be largely symbolic. Whilst there is clearly still an argument for choosing that person by accident of birth, there are other arguments for other systems.
Our problem is that our biggest constitutional problem is NOT should we have a King. And until we completely refound the UK framework to be fit for the future, there is zero point looking at the non divine-right options for HoS.
Do we have to have a head of state? We could say that sovereignty is vested in each of us equally, all 70 million of us. If someone is required to meet President Biden off the plane, lots can be drawn.
I succumbed and dipped in for a bit. It's all extremely impressive - not just the event, but the organisation/logistics of it, which must have been a nightmare - but so far, so good. It must have cost a bomb.
But it has made me think - if we can run something like this, why does it seem to be beyond our wit, as a nation, to organise an efficient and timely ambulance service, or cut the NHS backlog more rapidly?
Because they are *massively* larger and more intractable problems.
Think those same 8 guardsmen(?) have done every transfer of the coffin. They must be so proud and now relieved. And deserve all the beer they want tonight.
Are they going to have a different team at Windsor then?
Genuinely don't know. I assumed they wouldnt travel there.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
We do but when the Queen came to the throne we were still just about a superpower alongside the US and USSR with Churchill as PM and we still had a large Empire.
British “Superpower” status disappeared at some point in WWII - the fall of Singapore is as good a marker as any - as we found out to our cost during Suez. Having not been defeated it made it psychologically easier for us to give up our Empire than other European colonial powers - imagine what would have happened if we’d tried what the Dutch did in Indonesia or the French in Vietnam. We remained a significant power - as we still do, but as George Bernard Shaw remarked at the start of the war - there will be two winners, the USA & the USSR.
France or the Netherlands never had the Empire on the scale we did and as you say we were not defeated in WW2. Obviously post WW2 the US was the supreme power, hence trying to ignore them was folly as in Suez but we were still in the top 3 with the US and USSR. Now we are not in the top 3, currently it is probably the US, China and maybe the EU with India a rising superpower too.
We are still a medium ranked, top 10 power which is generally a prosperous and liberal and free nation but we are not and likely never will again be a superpower as we were at the start of the late Queen's reign
We have different powers now; soft powers. We should continue to develop them.
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
We do but when the Queen came to the throne we were still just about a superpower alongside the US and USSR with Churchill as PM and we still had a large Empire.
Now we are a middle ranking power only, the only true global superpowers now are the USA still and China.
People also admire Sweden, Ireland, Canada etc but none of them are superpowers either
No, the steam had gone out of it by then. In the 1930's arguably we were still a superpower, but WW2 finished us off.
We were still certainly top 3 in the early 1950s, now we are not even if still top 10
Today has been an amazing spectacle even the most cynical should accept and it has shown our country at its best
I expect it has benefitted the monarchy and the union
The coronation next year will be another spectacular event
It will but it will not be on this scale, certainly not globally. Nor on the scale of the Queen's own coronation in 1953.
She was truly our last imperial monarch. Charles, William and George will be monarchs more in the style of the Scandinavian, Dutch and Spanish monarchies
Enough of your declinist drivel
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
We do but when the Queen came to the throne we were still just about a superpower alongside the US and USSR with Churchill as PM and we still had a large Empire.
British “Superpower” status disappeared at some point in WWII - the fall of Singapore is as good a marker as any - as we found out to our cost during Suez. Having not been defeated it made it psychologically easier for us to give up our Empire than other European colonial powers - imagine what would have happened if we’d tried what the Dutch did in Indonesia or the French in Vietnam. We remained a significant power - as we still do, but as George Bernard Shaw remarked at the start of the war - there will be two winners, the USA & the USSR.
I would have said the withdrawal from Greece in 1947 marked the moment Britain abdicated superpower status. That was the instant when it accepted it wasn't possible to act as the world's policeman any more and literally handed that over to the Americans.
Suez was an attempt to put the clock back, with unfortunate results.
Suez appears now to have been an indicator of the extent to which our power had diminished. It wasn't a cause in itself, it just made our status obvious.
I like the style of marching at events like this. Synchronised, but not excessively so in the self-parodic North Korean fashion. The French are good at that too.
The weather has behaved impeccably.
It might be the dramatic flourishes and perfection of NK style presentation that for some reason makes it seem a little unnatural, like there's no way even very well trained and choreographed troops should be so robotically in sync.
Sure, the royalist British regime gets its ceremonial act just so right. Not too perfect, mind you. It's not like in North Korea where ceremonial training is technically better. And that's what makes it so natural. It's better than anything any parliamentary republic could possibly muster. It's a wonderful loveliness that brings together the splendid and the real. In every way, it's just right. Even when it's less than right, that's something that makes it even righter. Bravo. God save the king.
Listen to yourself.
Her Majesty's life was one of unremitting SERVICE, do you hear?
Unrelatedly, she gave royal warrants to Dubonnet, Bacardi (for Martini Vermouth), Gordon's gin, Berry Bros & Rudd, and SEVEN Champagne houses – Bollinger, Mumm, Krug, Lanson, Roederer, Moët & Chandon and Veuve Clicquot.
Austerity.
Don't forget my gran's fave (though you may want to) Croft's Original.
Comments
No complaints about the scale and power projection there!
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4081686#Comment_4081686
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4080301#Comment_4080301
We seem to be calling out a Russian troll despite the fact he's not said anything pro Russian, just that they hate the monarchy.
Is TSE a Russian troll?
Yes, the Empire has gone. It went 50 years ago, and probably not before time
And yet we still live in a remarkable country, which influences the world in innumerable ways, far and beyond military or economic power
Indeed: As the free world faces Putin and China my guess is that a nation like Great Britain will gain in symbolic power: as we embody incredible tradition plus ongoing freedom. As we see here
People admire Britain because we are free and fair. And ancient. Not because we have nuclear missiles. Learn this
Dozens of people here are anti-monarchy. The difference is, we're not Russian trolls.
He doesn't seem to be saying anything more than what I've said.
In a sense, that makes it worse. If he were paid to spout his nonsense at least that would be comprehensible if still reprehensible.
Of course, he may be a parody, out to get Russian sympathisers a bad name. But it seems unlikely especially given how incredibly abusive he gets.
Charles will have to make significant changes to the firm or see it scandalled out of public affections with all the penalties that incurs.
Versus
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yeomen_Warders
You're new to PB, will let you off.
I think Anne will get more of a role (she was the most hardest working royal out of them all anyway but her and Charles appear to be close). Edward and Sophie will I think take on more of a role.
But primarily it will all go through Charles to William and his children.
Just as you called me out for something and then didn't call somebody else out for the same thing, because they agree with what you think.
You're one of the most partisan posters here, you target people for political reasons.
Our problem was that in the past our undoubted soft power was combined with hard power. Our ability to govern much of the globe has gone, as now has our relevance as a global player. Yes I expect the next government's u-turn on petulant twattery towards the EU will reverse some of the current decline, but not all of it.
It's a country with a massive identity crisis. Brexiteer versus remainer. Monarchist versus republican. Union versus nationanalist. Declinist versus booster. Military hawk versus military dove. Singapore on Thames versus Northern Hemisphere Venezuela.
Buckingham Palace will be opened all year round, he will live at Clarence House and just have an office there. Balmoral will also be opened to the public as a memorial museum to his mother.
He will also have a smaller scale coronation than his mother did next year, even the service today had full representation of all Christian denominations in the prayers not just the C of E and he will be defender of faith broadly.
Die hard monarchists - it is divinely ordained and must be no matter waht
Conditional monarchists - So long as its sticks to its role and works, let's keep it
The unbothered - Why are you asking me? The footy's on, leave me alone.
Instinctive republicans - Monarchy doesn't make much sense, but meh, no need to push things
DIe hard republicans - This is an outrage, you damn serfs!
Camilla
Wiiliam
Edward
Anne
Plus most senior over 21 grandchild from Andrew, Edward, Anne lines taking on formal royal duties until George is 21
And there is nobody on this forum more tribal than yourself when it comes to politics
I'm just enjoying the spectacle, the music and - most especially - the history.
I have so much Wikipedia to get through.
I wonder if the driver of the hearse will be ordered to step on it to make up time? Maybe get @Dura_Ace to drive part of the way? He is an ex-naval officer, after all.
https://twitter.com/newschambers/status/1571835754753531905
Our problem is that our biggest constitutional problem is NOT should we have a King. And until we completely refound the UK framework to be fit for the future, there is zero point looking at the non divine-right options for HoS.
Now we are a middle ranking power only, the only true global superpowers now are the USA still and China.
People also admire Sweden, Ireland, Canada etc but none of them are superpowers either
Russian trolls mostly aren't trying to persuade anyone that Putinist Russia is good. After all, that's a fool's errand. What they do well is stir up division by bigging up both ghastly extremes.
Anything to undermine quiet Western consensus.
Here's a vid of an "innocent" in-line skater being grabbed and pulled down by police just before a motorcade I think with KCIII arrives, in London. The version being retweeted by outrage bots, with a couple of million "views":
"Why are you strangling me? I didn't know!"
A teenager is manhandled by police for innocently rollerblading in the direction of the Royal convoy in London.
https://twitter.com/Lowkey0nline/status/1571601636551958530
An here's a longer video from across the road showing him skating straight through a security checkpoint about 4 seconds earlier, where he failed to stop:
This longer video of him clearly shows he knowingly goes past multiple officers & very clear signage. What exactly did he expect? Police aren't going to take any chances here
https://twitter.com/fearandlothians/status/1571625283832188934
On the declinist vs booster thing I think there is more confusion, but even there I don't think things are as start as some think. For instance, whilst there stereotypical 'We used to rule the globe and by jingo we should be powerful again' types do exist, it seems far more common than when people hearken back, as it were, they are thinking superficial elements of culture, not a desire to unreaslitically regain a place of international superpower status. Indeed, some of the most nostalgic in style are more isolationist, accepting that we are a power, not a great power.
I think people are generally happy that we are still a middling power - on global terms we have a reasonably high population and wealth - though they disagree how assertive we should be within that status.
That is some constitution they are demonstrating.
They've done bloody well today.
deserve all the beer they want tonight.
Too much ''consensus" in Russia leads to catastrophes like the war in Ukraine with a Potemkin military because nobody dared to break the consensus and say what a terrible idea it is.
We will be fine as long as no external threat or enemy can challenge us more than we challenge ourselves.
He obviously knew what he was doing. You'd have to be completely stupid not to wonder why the roads were empty and all these people were standing round
I wonder how many thousands of times it was played for her in the 70 years and seven months of her reign? Must have been a lot.
And dissent is heavily cracked down on.
This is an intolerable state of affairs.
We've never had a President.
We are still a medium ranked, top 10 power which is generally a prosperous and liberal and free nation but we are not and likely never will again be a superpower as we were at the start of the late Queen's reign
And as for Truss, she is the elected leader of the party who have enough seats at Westminster to pass legislation.
As Gordon Brown had when he took over between elections.
We do not have a presidential system in the U.K.
But it has made me think - if we can run something like this, why does it seem to be beyond our wit, as a nation, to organise an efficient and timely ambulance service, or cut the NHS backlog more rapidly?
Suez was an attempt to put the clock back, with unfortunate results.
It divides us far less than arguments over Brexit did or Scottish independence do or Labour statist v Tory free market do.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2022/09/king-charles-queen-elizabeth-funeral-death/671457/