Prince Andrew on a net minus 79% in latest Royal Ratings – politicalbetting.com

System

Prince Andrew on a net minus 79% in latest Royal Ratings – politicalbetting.com

Read the full story here

Mexicanpete

How come? It's not like he has done anything really, really wicked like Meghan and Harry.

HYUFD

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

partypoliticalorphan

Who are the 1 in 100 who view Prince Andrew very positively?

dixiedean

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

HYUFD

partypoliticalorphan said:

Who are the 1 in 100 who view Prince Andrew very positively?

Male Leavers over 25 on the above poll

Theuniondivvie

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

I for one may have to think about whether I would vote for King Chuck and his missus.

HYUFD

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

It does to some extent, certainly in terms of the line of succession and the next generation and royal titles and who are kept as paid working royals and who are removed.

Very unpopular monarchs have occasionally been removed eg James IInd or Monarchs forced to abdicate eg Edward VIIIth

rcs1000

When is the next Royal election?

rcs1000

partypoliticalorphan said:

Who are the 1 in 100 who view Prince Andrew very positively?

They're probably liberal Democrats

Theuniondivvie

rcs1000 said:

When is the next Royal election?

Depends if Andy gets his ‘special’ magazines.

kle4

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

I see this suggestion put out from time and it never makes any sense to me. Monarchists know that if people despise the monarchy - system or individual at the top in particular - it would make its continuance much harder.

If Andrew were king right now, for instance, that would probably have a pretty negative effect on the institution as a whole.

'Public opinion doesn't matter' re the monarchy is one of those slogans to stick it to monarchists (for supposedly being silly) that might look sensible at first glance, but is actually nonsense. Public support for the monarchy, or at least apathetic disinclination to remove it, is in fact absolutely essential.

kle4

HYUFD said:

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

It does to some extent, certainly in terms of the line of succession and the next generation and royal titles and who are kept as paid working royals and who are removed.

Very unpopular monarchs have occasionally been removed eg James IInd or Monarchs forced to abdicate eg Edward VIIIth

I agree with you on this point. But I do wonder if you might extend your logic on it to some other matters where public opinion does not legally matter, but may still be significant.

HYUFD

kle4 said:

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

I see this suggestion put out from time and it never makes any sense to me. Monarchists know that if people despise the monarchy - system or individual at the top in particular - it would make its continuance much harder.

If Andrew were king right now, for instance, that would probably have a pretty negative effect on the institution as a whole.

'Public opinion doesn't matter' re the monarchy is one of those slogans to stick it to monarchists that might look sensible at first glance, but is actually nonsense. Public support for the monarchy, or at least apathetic disinclination to remove it, is in fact absolutely essential.

Indeed, if Andrew were King right now (which assumes Charles had never been born or died before he had William and Harry) then Parliament would have forced his abdication a la Edward VIII. In reality he never would have become King at all and Parliament would probably have made Beatrice Queen on the death of the Queen and at the Accession Council and removed Andrew from the line of succession

HYUFD

kle4 said:

HYUFD said:

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

It does to some extent, certainly in terms of the line of succession and the next generation and royal titles and who are kept as paid working royals and who are removed.

Very unpopular monarchs have occasionally been removed eg James IInd or Monarchs forced to abdicate eg Edward VIIIth

I agree with you on this point. But I do wonder if you might extend your logic on it to some other matters where public opinion does not legally matter, but may still be significant.

In terms of other matters public opinion only matters outside UK general elections if strongly positive or negative either way, split down the middle can be ignored (as indeed it can be for the Monarchy)

dixiedean

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

I see this suggestion put out from time and it never makes any sense to me. Monarchists know that if people despise the monarchy - system or individual at the top in particular - it would make its continuance much harder.

If Andrew were king right now, for instance, that would probably have a pretty negative effect on the institution as a whole.

'Public opinion doesn't matter' re the monarchy is one of those slogans to stick it to monarchists that might look sensible at first glance, but is actually nonsense. Public support for the monarchy, or at least apathetic disinclination to remove it, is in fact absolutely essential.

Indeed, if Andrew were King right now (which assumes Charles had never been born or died before he had William and Harry) then Parliament would have forced his abdication a la Edward VIII. In reality he never would have become King at all and Parliament would probably have made Beatrice Queen on the death of the Queen and removed Andrew from the line of succession

Well.
That means it isn't a Monarchy then.
It is something else.
Something reliant on popular consent.

kle4

Meghan and Harry in net positive territory with 18-24 year olds. Probably too young to be fans of Suits like I am, I'd be interested to see a 25-34 breakdown rather than 25-49.

HYUFD

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

I see this suggestion put out from time and it never makes any sense to me. Monarchists know that if people despise the monarchy - system or individual at the top in particular - it would make its continuance much harder.

If Andrew were king right now, for instance, that would probably have a pretty negative effect on the institution as a whole.

'Public opinion doesn't matter' re the monarchy is one of those slogans to stick it to monarchists that might look sensible at first glance, but is actually nonsense. Public support for the monarchy, or at least apathetic disinclination to remove it, is in fact absolutely essential.

Indeed, if Andrew were King right now (which assumes Charles had never been born or died before he had William and Harry) then Parliament would have forced his abdication a la Edward VIII. In reality he never would have become King at all and Parliament would probably have made Beatrice Queen on the death of the Queen and removed Andrew from the line of succession

Well.
That means it isn't a Monarchy then.
It is something else.
Something reliant on popular consent.

Our constitution is based on Crown in Parliament, correct, not Crown Supreme and that has been the case since the English Civil War and Glorious Revolution of 1688.

We are a constitutional not absolute hereditary monarchy

HYUFD

kle4 said:

Meghan and Harry in net positive territory with 18-24 year olds. Probably too young to be fans of Suits like I am, I'd be interested to see a 25-34 breakdown rather than 25-49.

That is the only reason I wouldn't cut them off completely (though Kate still has a higher net rating than Meghan even with 18 to 24s, though Harry has the same positive rating with under 25s as William and a 2% higher net rating)

kle4

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

I see this suggestion put out from time and it never makes any sense to me. Monarchists know that if people despise the monarchy - system or individual at the top in particular - it would make its continuance much harder.

If Andrew were king right now, for instance, that would probably have a pretty negative effect on the institution as a whole.

'Public opinion doesn't matter' re the monarchy is one of those slogans to stick it to monarchists that might look sensible at first glance, but is actually nonsense. Public support for the monarchy, or at least apathetic disinclination to remove it, is in fact absolutely essential.

Indeed, if Andrew were King right now (which assumes Charles had never been born or died before he had William and Harry) then Parliament would have forced his abdication a la Edward VIII. In reality he never would have become King at all and Parliament would probably have made Beatrice Queen on the death of the Queen and removed Andrew from the line of succession

Well.
That means it isn't a Monarchy then.
It is something else.
Something reliant on popular consent.

I don't think that really tracks. Monarchs have always faced difficulties if they became very unpopular, though unpopular with whom and what reaction they would face was quite different back in the day. Didn't make it less of a monarchy because a lack of popularity led to their ousting.

I mean, didn't Bill of Rights stating in its preamble that the monarch vacated his throne by, in essence, doing things his people did not find popular (at least with those 'lawfully and freely representing all the estates of the people of this realm').

northern_monkey

FPT:

dixiedean said:

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

DJ41 said:

dixiedean said:

No snow round here.
But it has been brassick for days. Unfortunately, it warmed up just enough to have a Biblical downpour of rain for about an hour Sunday afternoon. Which of course froze.
The pavements are about as treacherous as I ever can remember.
-5°C right now.

What is "brassick"? I was hoping it might be a form that cold water could take, cf. graupel or hoar frost. Seems not, though.

Assume related to Brass Momkeys having their testicles frozen off?

I've never heard of "brassick" and wonder if this is a misconstrual

I HAVE heard of "brassic" or "boracic", it is slightly effortful Cockney Rhyming Slang from the 1970-80s meaning Skint, from Boracic Lint - Skint

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=brassic

I'd never heard of it meaning skint till I moved to London.
It was a fairly common slang word for cold in Lancashire in the 70's.
Maybe it is just two regional slang words for different things.

https://manchestersouvenirs.co.uk/the-mancunian-alphabet/#:~:text=Brassic,Poor, skint, without money.

In my head it’s ‘brassic’, to me it has two different meanings:

‘I’m brassic’ = ‘I’m fucking skint’

‘It’s brassic’ = ‘It’s fucking freezing’

There’s lots of Geordies and Scots round here - W. Yorks. - cos of the pits so the meanings could come from God knows where, but that’s what that word has always meant to me in those contexts, and everybody round here would understand you when you used it in those ways.

Tres

kle4 said:

Meghan and Harry in net positive territory with 18-24 year olds. Probably too young to be fans of Suits like I am, I'd be interested to see a 25-34 breakdown rather than 25-49.

I wonder what Harry was thinking about when he said 'they' were happy to lie about his brother. Poor Catherine.

Pagan2

FPT

Omnium said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

M45 said:

turbotubbs said:

M45 said:

turbotubbs said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Foxy said:

Some weird anti-charity misanthropy on here today.

Provided the Trustees and Charity Commission are happy with its operations then it is a free market. Charity is by definition voluntary, no one being obliged to give. We each have our favourite causes and others not our cup of tea.

I've donated to Amnesty every month since I became student, stopped donating this year when they wrote some utter bollocks about Ukraine.

The RNLI are my main charity this year.

Careful now, they’ll just waste it on lifeboats for rich yachties…

You are getting silly now. The stats are easily found. But yes, why waste money on African children being cured of blindness and malaria when there's English accountants need a tow back to port?

All about priorities.

The RNLI rescue lots of people, from all kinds of backgrounds.

Even really common BMW owners?

Like I say, the stats are out there. Also, I spend about 8 weeks a year sailing in mainly UK waters so I know a bit about RNLI capabilities.

Sightsavers don't deal with people from all kinds of backgrounds at all, they are all dead poor. Very uninclusive of them.

You still haven't explained the point about the bloke who wouldn't give you money. It seems to be one of those sophisticated nod and wink jokes which go without saying between posh blokes.

The RNLI volunteers risk their lives to save anyone in distress at sea and any suggestion otherwise is a disgraceful slur on the organisation, and in my case personally against my son, who is proud to serve as sea going crew of Llandudno RNLI

They don't really take many risks though. The intent of the volunteers is without doubt, but they're straightened out from that.

fuck you blind....tell that to mousehole that lifeboat crews dont take many risks. Stop being a c**t

kle4

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

HYUFD

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

HYUFD

'Meghan Markle is less popular in America than Prince William, Kate Middleton and Prince Harry, according to polling for Newsweek...Meghan fared better than King Charles III, however, and significantly better than Camilla, the Queen Consort.

Newsweek's poll suggests that both Meghan and Harry may in fact be liked by a smaller percentage of Americans now than the percentage of Britons who viewed them favorably in October 2019, the last YouGov poll before their decision to quit Britain to escape the storm of negativity towards them.'

https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-less-popular-america-prince-william-kate-middleton-prince-harry-1765877

Theuniondivvie

Christ, even without the flabby man titties, what an utter c**tfest.



https://twitter.com/mrbill11/status/1602441475257663488?s=61&t=_gZ8XqotLUCr8_Xi9M4nWQ

williamglenn

USA Damian Williams: Earlier this evening, Bahamian authorities arrested Samuel Bankman-Fried at the request of the U.S. Government, based on a sealed indictment filed by the SDNY. We expect to move to unseal the indictment in the morning and will have more to say at that time.

https://twitter.com/sdnynews/status/1602451395910803457

DecrepiterJohnL

northern_monkey said:

FPT:

dixiedean said:

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

DJ41 said:

dixiedean said:

No snow round here.
But it has been brassick for days. Unfortunately, it warmed up just enough to have a Biblical downpour of rain for about an hour Sunday afternoon. Which of course froze.
The pavements are about as treacherous as I ever can remember.
-5°C right now.

What is "brassick"? I was hoping it might be a form that cold water could take, cf. graupel or hoar frost. Seems not, though.

Assume related to Brass Momkeys having their testicles frozen off?

I've never heard of "brassick" and wonder if this is a misconstrual

I HAVE heard of "brassic" or "boracic", it is slightly effortful Cockney Rhyming Slang from the 1970-80s meaning Skint, from Boracic Lint - Skint

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=brassic

I'd never heard of it meaning skint till I moved to London.
It was a fairly common slang word for cold in Lancashire in the 70's.
Maybe it is just two regional slang words for different things.

https://manchestersouvenirs.co.uk/the-mancunian-alphabet/#:~:text=Brassic,Poor, skint, without money.

In my head it’s ‘brassic’, to me it has two different meanings:

‘I’m brassic’ = ‘I’m fucking skint’

‘It’s brassic’ = ‘It’s fucking freezing’

There’s lots of Geordies and Scots round here - W. Yorks. - cos of the pits so the meanings could come from God knows where, but that’s what that word has always meant to me in those contexts, and everybody round here would understand you when you used it in those ways.

Boracic lint = skint. It would have been in your gran's first aid kit.

Andy_JS

Con + Reform are averaging 33% in the most recent opinion polls.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2022

Gardenwalker

Jacinda Ardern lost a by-election in a famous bell-wether seat (Hamilton West) on Saturday.

The right wing opposition party, National, won about 45% of the vote on low turnout. Labour were back in second place with around 30%.

Labour continue to lag National in the polls.

The next election must be held before January 24.

Andy_JS

There's a by-election tonight in Canada in the Mississauga—Lakeshore division, which is a key marginal.

Polls close in about 20 minutes.

https://twitter.com/EricGrenierTW/status/1602460795358658563

Result last time was:

Lib 44.9%
Con 38.7%
NDP 9.8%
People's 4.2%
Green 2.3%

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississauga—Lakeshore#Election_results

StillWaters

Theuniondivvie said:

rcs1000 said:

When is the next Royal election?

Depends if Andy gets his ‘special’ magazines.

Did you hear about the time he gave an edible top to an unsuspecting chalet girl?

StillWaters

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

dixiedean said:

HYUFD said:

Meghan too now has a 26% more negative rating than Camilla.

Astonishingly good result for the Queen Consort to now be on +12% with the British public considering how unpopular she was at the time of Diana's death. Charles also has a solid 68% approval rating. William and Kate still lead the way though with over 70% positive. Harry now 59% negative and almost as unpopular as his wife.

If I were Charles I would wait until his coronation then restrict the title of Prince and Princess to the children of the British monarch who are also working royals, thus removing any royal title from both Harry and Andrew, they already having lost their HRH

It's a Monarchy. Public opinion doesn't matter. Monarchists, at least, ought to grasp that point.

I see this suggestion put out from time and it never makes any sense to me. Monarchists know that if people despise the monarchy - system or individual at the top in particular - it would make its continuance much harder.

If Andrew were king right now, for instance, that would probably have a pretty negative effect on the institution as a whole.

'Public opinion doesn't matter' re the monarchy is one of those slogans to stick it to monarchists that might look sensible at first glance, but is actually nonsense. Public support for the monarchy, or at least apathetic disinclination to remove it, is in fact absolutely essential.

Indeed, if Andrew were King right now (which assumes Charles had never been born or died before he had William and Harry) then Parliament would have forced his abdication a la Edward VIII. In reality he never would have become King at all and Parliament would probably have made Beatrice Queen on the death of the Queen and removed Andrew from the line of succession

Well.
That means it isn't a Monarchy then.
It is something else.
Something reliant on popular consent.

You have elected monarchies

It’s the old Bretwalda system

StillWaters

Tres said:

kle4 said:

Meghan and Harry in net positive territory with 18-24 year olds. Probably too young to be fans of Suits like I am, I'd be interested to see a 25-34 breakdown rather than 25-49.

I wonder what Harry was thinking about when he said 'they' were happy to lie about his brother. Poor Catherine.

They refers to the British media not the palace

The_Woodpecker

northern_monkey said:

FPT:

dixiedean said:

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

DJ41 said:

dixiedean said:

No snow round here.
But it has been brassick for days. Unfortunately, it warmed up just enough to have a Biblical downpour of rain for about an hour Sunday afternoon. Which of course froze.
The pavements are about as treacherous as I ever can remember.
-5°C right now.

What is "brassick"? I was hoping it might be a form that cold water could take, cf. graupel or hoar frost. Seems not, though.

Assume related to Brass Momkeys having their testicles frozen off?

I've never heard of "brassick" and wonder if this is a misconstrual

I HAVE heard of "brassic" or "boracic", it is slightly effortful Cockney Rhyming Slang from the 1970-80s meaning Skint, from Boracic Lint - Skint

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=brassic

I'd never heard of it meaning skint till I moved to London.
It was a fairly common slang word for cold in Lancashire in the 70's.
Maybe it is just two regional slang words for different things.

https://manchestersouvenirs.co.uk/the-mancunian-alphabet/#:~:text=Brassic,Poor, skint, without money.

In my head it’s ‘brassic’, to me it has two different meanings:

‘I’m brassic’ = ‘I’m fucking skint’

‘It’s brassic’ = ‘It’s fucking freezing’

There’s lots of Geordies and Scots round here - W. Yorks. - cos of the pits so the meanings could come from God knows where, but that’s what that word has always meant to me in those contexts, and everybody round here would understand you when you used it in those ways.

Its simple.

Brass = money. Brassic = skint.

Brass monkey weather = cold.

Brassicas = horrible vegetables.

Andy_JS

Live stream of the Canadian by-election with election expert Éric Grenier

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZsJqOCRdMc

Nigelb

rcs1000 said:

When is the next Royal election?

Are you thinking of standing ?

Nigelb

northern_monkey said:

FPT:

dixiedean said:

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

DJ41 said:

dixiedean said:

No snow round here.
But it has been brassick for days. Unfortunately, it warmed up just enough to have a Biblical downpour of rain for about an hour Sunday afternoon. Which of course froze.
The pavements are about as treacherous as I ever can remember.
-5°C right now.

What is "brassick"? I was hoping it might be a form that cold water could take, cf. graupel or hoar frost. Seems not, though.

Assume related to Brass Momkeys having their testicles frozen off?

I've never heard of "brassick" and wonder if this is a misconstrual

I HAVE heard of "brassic" or "boracic", it is slightly effortful Cockney Rhyming Slang from the 1970-80s meaning Skint, from Boracic Lint - Skint

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=brassic

I'd never heard of it meaning skint till I moved to London.
It was a fairly common slang word for cold in Lancashire in the 70's.
Maybe it is just two regional slang words for different things.

https://manchestersouvenirs.co.uk/the-mancunian-alphabet/#:~:text=Brassic,Poor, skint, without money.

In my head it’s ‘brassic’, to me it has two different meanings:

‘I’m brassic’ = ‘I’m fucking skint’

‘It’s brassic’ = ‘It’s fucking freezing’

There’s lots of Geordies and Scots round here - W. Yorks. - cos of the pits so the meanings could come from God knows where, but that’s what that word has always meant to me in those contexts, and everybody round here would understand you when you used it in those ways.

Presumably because brassic = zero cent. in either context ?

Urban dictionary agrees with you, as do I.

Nigelb

williamglenn said:

USA Damian Williams: Earlier this evening, Bahamian authorities arrested Samuel Bankman-Fried at the request of the U.S. Government, based on a sealed indictment filed by the SDNY. We expect to move to unseal the indictment in the morning and will have more to say at that time.

https://twitter.com/sdnynews/status/1602451395910803457

Musk demonstrating his deep analysis of current affairs.

SBF was a major Dem donor, so no investigation
https://mobile.twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1591822387267665921

Heathener

Personally I think the royal family is an anachronism that is no longer even quaint to go with it.

Either cut them down drastically or do away with them and their houses altogether. As a concession to the monarchists I'd keep Charles and his wife, the next in line and his or her children. End. The rest can lose all royal titles and go and get jobs.

Oh and the honours system is stuff and nonsense. That needs to go lock, stock, and barrel.

Vive la Revolution!

Foxy

partypoliticalorphan said:

Who are the 1 in 100 who view Prince Andrew very positively?

Nonces.

Cyclefree

Well, I've been awake for 2 hours reading.

There is much cleaning and sorting out to be done in the house. So I'd better get on with it.

Chris

Let's hope Harry and Meghan were hoping for money rather than popularity from their antics.

Nigelb

Cyclefree said:

Well, I've been awake for 2 hours reading.

There is much cleaning and sorting out to be done in the house. So I'd better get on with it.

Insomnia snap.

darkage

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

Casino_Royale

People will ultimately tire of Harry and Meghan.

The only way they have to keep garnering attention is to turn up the outrage dial, but even that will run out eventually.

Edit: the only difference between them and Andrew is that why the former still have some support (largely driven by opposition to those who profess not to like them) absolutely no-one likes Andrew.

darkage

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

Casino_Royale

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

They are utterly self-absorbed and self-pitying people.

They want to have their cake and eat it, on their own terms, and if they can't then that's the fault of others who deserve everything that's coming to them.

darkage

Casino_Royale said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

They are utterly self-absorbed and self-pitying people.

They want to have their cake and eat it, on their own terms, and if they can't then that's the fault of others who deserve everything that's coming to them.

They are just human at the end of the day. But I think that their decision to pursue their grievances in public means that they will be mired in contradictions and absurdity for the rest of their lives. Especially as it is obvious that there is no 'smoking gun' revelation.

Chris

This may already have been posted, but I see that UnHerd has a piece on the criticisms of Ngozi Fulani's charity Sistah Space, prompted by the Twitter thread discussed yesterday:
It’s important to note that, at present, we have not seen all the documentary evidence ‘James’ appears to have collected, although they have made a start on showing their working in a second thread. It may be that some or all of it is mistaken, or that a formal investigation finds good explanations for the supposed discrepancies.
But unless the charge sheet has been invented out of whole cloth, it is remarkable that an organisation in a regulated sector could conduct itself in this way, and only get rumbled because its leader secured saturation coverage in the national media.
https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

Foxy

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

Sistah Space weren't gatecrashers, they were invited to the reception by the Palace.

Leon

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

Sistah Space weren't gatecrashers, they were invited to the reception by the Palace.

Looks like they stole our money. They got busted. That’s it

Foxy

Leon said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

Sistah Space weren't gatecrashers, they were invited to the reception by the Palace.

Looks like they stole our money. They got busted. That’s it

Yes, offending the establishment is dangerous.

Chris

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

I'm just curious. Have you read what is being claimed about the activities of the charity or not? If so, are you assuming it is not true, or do you think - if it is true - that there is no cause for concern?

squareroot2

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Foxy

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Foxy

Chris said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

I'm just curious. Have you read what is being claimed about the activities of the charity or not? If so, are you assuming it is not true, or do you think - if it is true - that there is no cause for concern?

I have no idea what Sistah Space have been up to, but that is a matter for its Trustees and the Charity Commission.

If you don't like Scocial Media hate mobs, then rather like free speech it should apply to people you disagree with too.

Malmesbury

Foxy said:

Leon said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

Sistah Space weren't gatecrashers, they were invited to the reception by the Palace.

Looks like they stole our money. They got busted. That’s it

Yes, offending the establishment is dangerous.

Walking out into the limelight while wearing a costume suggested by the Emperor is bold move. Courageous even.

kamski

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

Surely, if they succeeded in getting the monarchy abolished they would have a lot more significance than supporting cast in a 2nd-rate soap opera, which is what they are now.

Heathener

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah me too. They're okay.

She's quite an attention seeker and the recent series was boring imho but I think they have a point or two to make. Harry's a damaged individual. I bet the racist allegations are true. The royal family treated Diana despicably. Charles was evidently never in love with her and carried on with Camilla all the way through. The Queen protected Andrew more than Harry and Meghan. History keeps repeating itself.

So I don't have any problem with Harry and Meghan deciding to get out and have a decent life outwith the corrupt royals.

Chris

Foxy said:

Chris said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

I'm just curious. Have you read what is being claimed about the activities of the charity or not? If so, are you assuming it is not true, or do you think - if it is true - that there is no cause for concern?

I have no idea what Sistah Space have been up to, but that is a matter for its Trustees and the Charity Commission.

If you don't like Scocial Media hate mobs, then rather like free speech it should apply to people you disagree with too.

It sounds as though you are abusing someone online as a "social media hate mob" without having a clue about what they have actually said.

Perhaps you have had your sense of irony surgically removed?

Malmesbury

Foxy said:

Chris said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

I'm just curious. Have you read what is being claimed about the activities of the charity or not? If so, are you assuming it is not true, or do you think - if it is true - that there is no cause for concern?

I have no idea what Sistah Space have been up to, but that is a matter for its Trustees and the Charity Commission.

If you don't like Scocial Media hate mobs, then rather like free speech it should apply to people you disagree with too.

Are the activities of Michelle Mone a matter for the police and the Serious Farce Office, only?Or should journalists/citizens be allowed to look at them?

Free speech, at its core, is really about the communication of truths that people would rather not hear.

Heathener

However, I did give up on the latest series 10 minutes in. Deleted all three episodes. It was so self-obsessed and, I dunno, there was I wrapped in a blanket freezing my butt off because I can't afford to heat the house and Harry and Meghan's endless selfies didn't exactly inspire in me a loving response.

Leon

Foxy said:

Chris said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

I'm just curious. Have you read what is being claimed about the activities of the charity or not? If so, are you assuming it is not true, or do you think - if it is true - that there is no cause for concern?

I have no idea what Sistah Space have been up to, but that is a matter for its Trustees and the Charity Commission.

If you don't like Scocial Media hate mobs, then rather like free speech it should apply to people you disagree with too.

The guy who wrote that remarkable thread - apparently exposing the criminality of Sistah Space - was not a “hate mob”. He did a diligent job, painstakingly exposing wrongdoing, and probably saving us all considerable money. And restoring trust to the charity sector

But you haven’t read any of this so how would you know? Whereof you cannot speak, thereof you should shut up

Malmesbury

Chris said:

Foxy said:

Chris said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

I'm just curious. Have you read what is being claimed about the activities of the charity or not? If so, are you assuming it is not true, or do you think - if it is true - that there is no cause for concern?

I have no idea what Sistah Space have been up to, but that is a matter for its Trustees and the Charity Commission.

If you don't like Scocial Media hate mobs, then rather like free speech it should apply to people you disagree with too.

It sounds as though you are abusing someone online as a "social media hate mob" without having a clue about what they have actually said.

Perhaps you have had your sense of irony surgically removed?

The Upper 10,000 is divided, for some, into The Establishment and The New Establishment.

The New Establishment includes, but is not completely composed of Anti Establishment figures.

Both groups are sacred to their followers - even the phrases used to deflect unpleasant truths resemble each other.

OnlyLivingBoy

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah they lead a privileged and cosseted life in lots of ways but they seem like nice people who are trying to protect themselves and their family from the meat grinder of the tabloid press. Fair play to them.

Andy_JS

Result of the Canadian by-election in Mississauga—Lakeshore.

Lib 12,194
Con 8,873

https://enr.elections.ca/ElectoralDistricts.aspx?lang=e

Good result for Trudeau, bad for the Conservatives.

squareroot2

Heathener said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah me too. They're okay.

She's quite an attention seeker and the recent series was boring imho but I think they have a point or two to make. Harry's a damaged individual. I bet the racist allegations are true. The royal family treated Diana despicably. Charles was evidently never in love with her and carried on with Camilla all the way through. The Queen protected Andrew more than Harry and Meghan. History keeps repeating itself.

So I don't have any problem with Harry and Meghan deciding to get out and have a decent life outwith the corrupt royals.

You obviously think.its okay to betray your own family. I think their behaviour is excreable

OnlyLivingBoy

Leon said:

Foxy said:

Chris said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

I'm just curious. Have you read what is being claimed about the activities of the charity or not? If so, are you assuming it is not true, or do you think - if it is true - that there is no cause for concern?

I have no idea what Sistah Space have been up to, but that is a matter for its Trustees and the Charity Commission.

If you don't like Scocial Media hate mobs, then rather like free speech it should apply to people you disagree with too.

The guy who wrote that remarkable thread - apparently exposing the criminality of Sistah Space - was not a “hate mob”. He did a diligent job, painstakingly exposing wrongdoing, and probably saving us all considerable money. And restoring trust to the charity sector

But you haven’t read any of this so how would you know? Whereof you cannot speak, thereof you should shut up

It's just a load of innuendo and what look like fairly minor failures to comply with paperwork, which are not that uncommon for small charities. I am sure that if they've done anything wrong the Charity Commission will be onto it. It's just an establishment punishment beating for someone who had the temerity to go public with an account of an unpleasant racist interaction (the lifting of the hair really says it all). Presumably the message has been received - if you go against the establishment, they will come after you until they find something to get you with: shut up and know your place.

Foxy

squareroot2 said:

Heathener said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah me too. They're okay.

She's quite an attention seeker and the recent series was boring imho but I think they have a point or two to make. Harry's a damaged individual. I bet the racist allegations are true. The royal family treated Diana despicably. Charles was evidently never in love with her and carried on with Camilla all the way through. The Queen protected Andrew more than Harry and Meghan. History keeps repeating itself.

So I don't have any problem with Harry and Meghan deciding to get out and have a decent life outwith the corrupt royals.

You obviously think.its okay to betray your own family. I think their behaviour is excreable

Well, that all hinges on who you think are your family, and who betrayed whom.

Presumably you agree that the King betrayed Harry's mother, and behaved excreably?

turbotubbs

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah they lead a privileged and cosseted life in lots of ways but they seem like nice people who are trying to protect themselves and their family from the meat grinder of the tabloid press. Fair play to them.

I’m not convinced that trying to protect yourself and your family from the meat grinder of the tabloid press by doing inflammatory 6h TV shows on Netflix to be honest. We all know that some or indeed many celebrities use the tabloids to further their careers. How do the photographers know where X will be? Usually because X has told them…

Andy_JS

"Sam Bankman-Fried arrested in Bahamas ahead of US criminal charges" (via G search)

https://www.ft.com/content/2068b928-cc17-485c-890c-3b5c2c00093c

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/dec/13/sam-bankman-fried-arrest-ftx-cryptocurrency-exchange-what-happens-next

DecrepiterJohnL

Why did Microsoft just buy fiber optic cable company Lumenisity?
When every nanosecond of latency counts, improvements in the physical layer matter
https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/13/microsoft_acquires_lumenisity/

And another British tech company is sold to America. Lumenisity was spun off from Southampton University five years ago. We need urgently to answer the question why homegrown industry can flourish in France, Germany or America but not this country.

Theuniondivvie

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

Sistah Space weren't gatecrashers, they were invited to the reception by the Palace.

Ironic that H & M are accused of trying to chase the Woke zeitgeist while Charlie sausage fingers and his elder sprog appear to be doing exactly the same, and in the case of Sistah Space got right royally bitten on the arse. Perhaps the moral of the tale is not to hang with the kidz if it’s only for pr purposes.

Stuartinromford

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Why did Microsoft just buy fiber optic cable company Lumenisity?
When every nanosecond of latency counts, improvements in the physical layer matter
https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/13/microsoft_acquires_lumenisity/

And another British tech company is sold to America. Lumenisity was spun off from Southampton University five years ago. We need urgently to answer the question why homegrown industry can flourish in France, Germany or America but not this country.

Collectively, we'd rather take the money and spend it on ourselves now.

IanB2

There's an orange spaceship on the horizon this morning, where the sun usually is

CarlottaVance

Private Eye takes the mickey out of the SNP “Once in a Generation “ falsehood.
Why is there no one in Scotland who sees the comic potential of the SNP?



https://twitter.com/GeorgeFoulkes/status/1602291846092390401

OnlyLivingBoy

turbotubbs said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah they lead a privileged and cosseted life in lots of ways but they seem like nice people who are trying to protect themselves and their family from the meat grinder of the tabloid press. Fair play to them.

I’m not convinced that trying to protect yourself and your family from the meat grinder of the tabloid press by doing inflammatory 6h TV shows on Netflix to be honest. We all know that some or indeed many celebrities use the tabloids to further their careers. How do the photographers know where X will be? Usually because X has told them…

I'm guessing they're doing it to give what they see as their side of the story and to earn some money to pay for the security they need. I saw the first programme and it was interesting in places although slightly nauseating - Americans are way too into talking about their feelings.

Heathener

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

Heathener said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah me too. They're okay.

She's quite an attention seeker and the recent series was boring imho but I think they have a point or two to make. Harry's a damaged individual. I bet the racist allegations are true. The royal family treated Diana despicably. Charles was evidently never in love with her and carried on with Camilla all the way through. The Queen protected Andrew more than Harry and Meghan. History keeps repeating itself.

So I don't have any problem with Harry and Meghan deciding to get out and have a decent life outwith the corrupt royals.

You obviously think.its okay to betray your own family. I think their behaviour is excreable

Well, that all hinges on who you think are your family, and who betrayed whom.

Presumably you agree that the King betrayed Harry's mother, and behaved excreably?

Indeed

Foxy

Theuniondivvie said:

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

Sistah Space weren't gatecrashers, they were invited to the reception by the Palace.

Ironic that H & M are accused of trying to chase the Woke zeitgeist while Charlie sausage fingers and his elder sprog appear to be doing exactly the same, and in the case of Sistah Space got right royally bitten on the arse. Perhaps the moral of the tale is not to hang with the kidz if it’s only for pr purposes.

If Fulani is such an obvious panto villain it certainly doesn't show the Palace vetting system in a very good light.

After the Netflix series and his book, H and M should move on. Harry has some interesting things to say for veterans, on mental health, on losing a mother at a crucial age, on being a mixed race family in both the USA and UK, on being a male role model, combining bravery and compassion.

CarlottaVance

Anyone hear this?

Astonishing exchange there between @MishalHusain
and the RMT's Mick Lynch. She deserves credit for not responding to the insults she received for asking a reasonable question

https://twitter.com/MattGarrahan/status/1602574529901076480

Mick Lynch complaining furiously that R4 is putting the govt’s lines to him for a response. Not sure that interview particularly helped his case tbh

https://twitter.com/JenWilliams_FT/status/1602574428847611904

Lynch unable to explain why he’s losing support for strikes from his own membership.

Calls it propaganda and starts babbling about the super rich.

Accuses BBC of taking lines from Network Rail and the Sun.

Rattled!

https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1602573686808219649

NickPalmer

turbotubbs said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah they lead a privileged and cosseted life in lots of ways but they seem like nice people who are trying to protect themselves and their family from the meat grinder of the tabloid press. Fair play to them.

I’m not convinced that trying to protect yourself and your family from the meat grinder of the tabloid press by doing inflammatory 6h TV shows on Netflix to be honest. We all know that some or indeed many celebrities use the tabloids to further their careers. How do the photographers know where X will be? Usually because X has told them…

I instinctively like Harry and Meghan, who strike me as doing their best (yes, including putting their case through Netflix and books) to make their own way in a system which actively discourages any such thing. But to be honest I basically can't be bothered with the whole saga - it's like having dysfunctional distant cousins warring with each other, you wish them well and hope they'll make up, but in the end you don't really want the details.

NerysHughes

Gardenwalker said:

Jacinda Ardern lost a by-election in a famous bell-wether seat (Hamilton West) on Saturday.

The right wing opposition party, National, won about 45% of the vote on low turnout. Labour were back in second place with around 30%.

Labour continue to lag National in the polls.

The next election must be held before January 24.

New Zealand does mirror whats happening here

Theuniondivvie

Mick Lynch tearing the Today programme a new one this morning, most refreshing.

Malmesbury

Stuartinromford said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Why did Microsoft just buy fiber optic cable company Lumenisity?
When every nanosecond of latency counts, improvements in the physical layer matter
https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/13/microsoft_acquires_lumenisity/

And another British tech company is sold to America. Lumenisity was spun off from Southampton University five years ago. We need urgently to answer the question why homegrown industry can flourish in France, Germany or America but not this country.

Collectively, we'd rather take the money and spend it on ourselves now.

It’s culture - Proper Business is sell now and report a pile of cash to the shareholders.

It’s not just in the U.K.

I was presenting some stuff this week (non U.K. company) - for continuous load, having your own cloud is cheaper above a certain scale. That is, if you using computers continuously, in a big way, it’s cheaper to own them, than to rent. Renting from Amazon etc is great when you are really small, or have a massively variable load.

Up comes the bleat - “Not our core business”

Essentially, money men frightened by having to manage anything other than contracts.

paulyork64

BETTING POST

Late in the day for a Strictly tip but here goes.

365 have a market for top female and I've just backed Fleur at 10/1.

Now I don't think she wins but if Hamza does we are left with a 3 way tie for second between Helen, Molly and Fleur. A painful conversation with 365 customer support got the answer that they go with the official BBC result. Unless they change the format from the last 4-way final in 2020 the order of 2nd 3rd 4th is never revealed.

Hamza is rated about a 65pc chance to win. So I reckon the value of my £30 bet is

0.65 x 0.33 x 330 (full odds to third stake for 3 way dead heat) =£71.5.

DYOR. They shouldn't still be offering this market and not at these prices so there is always the danger of the bet being cancelled.

squareroot2

Heathener said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

Heathener said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah me too. They're okay.

She's quite an attention seeker and the recent series was boring imho but I think they have a point or two to make. Harry's a damaged individual. I bet the racist allegations are true. The royal family treated Diana despicably. Charles was evidently never in love with her and carried on with Camilla all the way through. The Queen protected Andrew more than Harry and Meghan. History keeps repeating itself.

So I don't have any problem with Harry and Meghan deciding to get out and have a decent life outwith the corrupt royals.

You obviously think.its okay to betray your own family. I think their behaviour is excreable

Well, that all hinges on who you think are your family, and who betrayed whom.

Presumably you agree that the King betrayed Harry's mother, and behaved excreably?

Indeed

That was a marriage breakdown... altogether different We can argue about that and his behaviour but we can also discuss hers.
Harry's betrayal is imho on much greater plane.

RochdalePioneers

Heathener said:

Personally I think the royal family is an anachronism that is no longer even quaint to go with it.

Either cut them down drastically or do away with them and their houses altogether. As a concession to the monarchists I'd keep Charles and his wife, the next in line and his or her children. End. The rest can lose all royal titles and go and get jobs.

Oh and the honours system is stuff and nonsense. That needs to go lock, stock, and barrel.

Vive la Revolution!

^This^

It is 2022. My response to polls about Prince Andrew is to wonder why Andrew York can't be arrested and investigated for deviance like you or I would be. Why Harry and Megan matter one little bit - its a reality TV show (and plenty of those happen without the need to be royal). And why anyone has a hereditary title.

Stuartinromford

#DespitenotBrexiting

Interesting chart by @davidautor, @arindube & @AnnieMcGrew1: in the US, real hourly wages for low-paid workers are ~7% above Feb 2020 levels, but are below pre-pandemic levels for higher-paid workers.

https://twitter.com/MattCowgill/status/1602477165999624192

CarlottaVance

Theuniondivvie said:

Mick Lynch tearing the Today programme a new one this morning, most refreshing.

Recollections may vary......

Mick Lynch losing the plot on R4

https://twitter.com/ExStrategist/status/1602573354338328577

Absurdly belligerent and counter-productive attitude taken by Mick Lynch in his interview on @BBCr4today just now. The question she was asking - is there a fall in support from members for the strike - is a fair one, to which Lynch only had to explain why he thinks there isn’t.

https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1602575991481802752

malcolmg

northern_monkey said:

FPT:

dixiedean said:

Leon said:

turbotubbs said:

DJ41 said:

dixiedean said:

No snow round here.
But it has been brassick for days. Unfortunately, it warmed up just enough to have a Biblical downpour of rain for about an hour Sunday afternoon. Which of course froze.
The pavements are about as treacherous as I ever can remember.
-5°C right now.

What is "brassick"? I was hoping it might be a form that cold water could take, cf. graupel or hoar frost. Seems not, though.

Assume related to Brass Momkeys having their testicles frozen off?

I've never heard of "brassick" and wonder if this is a misconstrual

I HAVE heard of "brassic" or "boracic", it is slightly effortful Cockney Rhyming Slang from the 1970-80s meaning Skint, from Boracic Lint - Skint

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=brassic

I'd never heard of it meaning skint till I moved to London.
It was a fairly common slang word for cold in Lancashire in the 70's.
Maybe it is just two regional slang words for different things.

https://manchestersouvenirs.co.uk/the-mancunian-alphabet/#:~:text=Brassic,Poor, skint, without money.

In my head it’s ‘brassic’, to me it has two different meanings:

‘I’m brassic’ = ‘I’m fucking skint’

‘It’s brassic’ = ‘It’s fucking freezing’

There’s lots of Geordies and Scots round here - W. Yorks. - cos of the pits so the meanings could come from God knows where, but that’s what that word has always meant to me in those contexts, and everybody round here would understand you when you used it in those ways.

certainly used in Scotland for being skint

Theuniondivvie

CarlottaVance said:

Anyone hear this?

Astonishing exchange there between @MishalHusain
and the RMT's Mick Lynch. She deserves credit for not responding to the insults she received for asking a reasonable question

https://twitter.com/MattGarrahan/status/1602574529901076480

Mick Lynch complaining furiously that R4 is putting the govt’s lines to him for a response. Not sure that interview particularly helped his case tbh

https://twitter.com/JenWilliams_FT/status/1602574428847611904

Lynch unable to explain why he’s losing support for strikes from his own membership.

Calls it propaganda and starts babbling about the super rich.

Accuses BBC of taking lines from Network Rail and the Sun.

Rattled!

https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1602573686808219649

Reassuring when the media rallies round to support the..er..media.
Circle the wagons..

Theuniondivvie

CarlottaVance said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Mick Lynch tearing the Today programme a new one this morning, most refreshing.

Recollections may vary......

Mick Lynch losing the plot on R4

https://twitter.com/ExStrategist/status/1602573354338328577

Tim not a fan of left wing union leaders, who’d have thunk?
They’ve turned the centrist dad ne plus ultra against us!

Carnyx

This thread has had the fate of Charles* and his Malignants.

*1649, just to avoid any ambiguity.

Andy_JS

Theuniondivvie said:

Mick Lynch tearing the Today programme a new one this morning, most refreshing.

He sounds unreasonable to me.

rcs1000

squareroot2 said:

Heathener said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah me too. They're okay.

She's quite an attention seeker and the recent series was boring imho but I think they have a point or two to make. Harry's a damaged individual. I bet the racist allegations are true. The royal family treated Diana despicably. Charles was evidently never in love with her and carried on with Camilla all the way through. The Queen protected Andrew more than Harry and Meghan. History keeps repeating itself.

So I don't have any problem with Harry and Meghan deciding to get out and have a decent life outwith the corrupt royals.

You obviously think.its okay to betray your own family. I think their behaviour is excreable

Wait.

Are you saying it's never ok to betray your family?

Theuniondivvie

Andy_JS said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Mick Lynch tearing the Today programme a new one this morning, most refreshing.

He sounds unreasonable to me.

I’m not surprised.

Foxy

rcs1000 said:

squareroot2 said:

Heathener said:

Foxy said:

squareroot2 said:

darkage said:

HYUFD said:

kle4 said:

Personally I'd like to see Harry come out a declare he wants to bring an end to the monarchy entirely. I mean, he obviously hates the institution from his experience of it, and it's not as though former royals have never won elected office before, and being in a low key war with your own brother about unconscious bias in the royal household and negative briefing to the press etc is not going to sustain our thirst for royalist entertainment for that long. All out war, come on.

Why would he? If he ceased to have any royal connections Netflix would cancel all deals and their big paid speech engagements end. Without his place in the line of succession he is just a low ranked ex army officer with poor A Levels and not even top rank in the Spencer family who married a C-list actress who wanted to advance her social status

Douglas Murray brilliantly pointed out the contradiction of Harry and Meghan's position; they try and appeal to the 'woke' zeitgeist; yet in the end, the royal family and everything the monarchy stands for is the absolute antithesis of it, because it represents a system of unearned privilege. The logical conclusion of their position is, as kle4 says, abolition; yet that would mean the destruction of the whole basis of their celebrity and popular appeal.

I don't believe so many people think positively about Harry and Meghan. I havent met anyone who does.

Mrs Foxy and I are in that minority.

Yeah me too. They're okay.

She's quite an attention seeker and the recent series was boring imho but I think they have a point or two to make. Harry's a damaged individual. I bet the racist allegations are true. The royal family treated Diana despicably. Charles was evidently never in love with her and carried on with Camilla all the way through. The Queen protected Andrew more than Harry and Meghan. History keeps repeating itself.

So I don't have any problem with Harry and Meghan deciding to get out and have a decent life outwith the corrupt royals.

You obviously think.its okay to betray your own family. I think their behaviour is excreable

Wait.

Are you saying it's never ok to betray your family?

Isn't this a family website?

darkage

Foxy said:

darkage said:

It is worth having a read of the 'research' going on about Sistah space.

https://unherd.com/thepost/now-ngozi-fulanis-charity-faces-the-spotlight/

If the monarchy can be sent in to a spiral of panic by people/organisations like this and the claims they make in the press, cancelling its staff etc; then the reality is that it has just lost all its power, influence and credibility. This is true irrespective of what your political opinions are.

So, Social Media lynch mobs are fine and dandy, provided that they choose targets that have offended the establishment?

Sistah Space weren't gatecrashers, they were invited to the reception by the Palace.

This wasn't the point I was making, it was to do with the relative powerlessness of the palace. If they just fall over in the face of this type of accusation, then they don't have any power.

Regarding the lynch mob thing, it is just a case that the right are now adopting the same tactics as the left. The left have 'racist', the right have 'groomer'. It was always obvious to me that this is how it would end up. It is a sad state of affairs and we urgently need to move past it.

In terms of the accusations against Sistah space, they seem a bit pedantic, but charitable organisations should expect this type of scrutiny, they need to be able to explain where the £12k given from GLA has gone, when it is asked etc. They should just get a free pass, particularly as resources towards domestic violence are limited. It isn't really a lynch mob thing, it is just amateur auditing/sleuthing/muckraking which public authorities have to deal with all the time.

DecrepiterJohnL

RochdalePioneers said:

Heathener said:

Personally I think the royal family is an anachronism that is no longer even quaint to go with it.

Either cut them down drastically or do away with them and their houses altogether. As a concession to the monarchists I'd keep Charles and his wife, the next in line and his or her children. End. The rest can lose all royal titles and go and get jobs.

Oh and the honours system is stuff and nonsense. That needs to go lock, stock, and barrel.

Vive la Revolution!

^This^

It is 2022. My response to polls about Prince Andrew is to wonder why Andrew York can't be arrested and investigated for deviance like you or I would be. Why Harry and Megan matter one little bit - its a reality TV show (and plenty of those happen without the need to be royal). And why anyone has a hereditary title.

In Britain, shagging 17-year-olds is legal (there's some small print about teachers, scoutmasters and the like). In America, there is no Prince Andrew to arrest and he'd be well-advised to keep it that way. I expect his denial that he slept with anyone underage is technically correct, at least here, but perhaps not the whole truth.