UK United Kingdom Royal Family / Royal Families Drama General Thread - formerly "Prince Harry and Meghan to step back as senior royals"

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
1613740615135.png

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have announced they will step back as "senior" royals and work to become financially independent.

_110441486_hi059012660.jpg


In a statement, Prince Harry and Meghan also said they plan to split their time between the UK and North America.

The BBC understands no other royal - including the Queen or Prince William - was consulted before the statement and Buckingham Palace is "disappointed".

Senior royals are understood to be "hurt" by the announcement.

In their unexpected statement on Wednesday, also posted on their Instagram page, the couple said they made the decision "after many months of reflection and internal discussions".

"We intend to step back as 'senior' members of the Royal Family and work to become financially independent, while continuing to fully support Her Majesty The Queen."

They said they plan to balance their time between the UK and North America while "continuing to honour our duty to the Queen, the Commonwealth, and our patronages".

"This geographic balance will enable us to raise our son with an appreciation for the royal tradition into which he was born, while also providing our family with the space to focus on the next chapter, including the launch of our new charitable entity."

A Buckingham Palace spokeswoman said discussions with the duke and duchess on their decision to step back were "at an early stage", adding: "We understand their desire to take a different approach, but these are complicated issues that will take time to work through."

The couple's announcement on Wednesday comes two months after the Duke of York withdrew from public life after a BBC interview about his ties to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who killed himself in August.

www.bbc.co.uk

Harry and Meghan to step back as senior royals

No other royals were consulted before the couple's announcement, the BBC understands.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
Last edited:
Click to expand...
The Demon Pimp of Razgriz said:
Besides removing outdated idols to aristocracy and class division, which is, by itself, its own reward? How about removing the need to maintain and support a largely pointless institution? Or opening the door to reforming the government along more modern lines to be more responsive to its citizenry? Or curtailing the powers of parliament by creating a government with actual checks and balances between the different branches of government? Or encouraging the idea that the government in the U.K. belongs to its people, and not to a monarch who is put on a pedestal above them
Click to expand...
So, I'm not a royalist. I don't like the royals. It is an old fashioned nonsense set of affairs that should have been left in the 19th century. I like that I get extra bank holidays and an excuse to put up Union Jack bunting, but that's about it.

My country's politics have spent the majority of a decade getting derailed by Brexit. Should we have stayed in the EU? Should we have left it? At this point, who gives a shit? It poisoned our ability to do any fucking politics and is the direct reason we ended up with the honking pudding Boris Johson in charge, because oh look people were sick of talking about Brexit and he said he'd get it done. And that shitshow meant nothing properly got done about anything that mattered.

So I have absolutely zero appetite for "Rexit". What's the point? What's the benefit to someone like me? Do you know what happened when they tried to do election reform last time?
1000025764.jpg

Regardless of what you think of proportional representation, whether you think it's good or bad, that's what we dealt with. "You could spend this money on the NHS". That's a shit argument... but when it comes to deposing the Royals? Yeah, actually, I'd rather the money and resources it takes to become a Republic instead went towards our schools, or our hospitals, or our police force.

I don't want another decade of bullshit culture wars derailing our ability to do anything about our declining living standards. Why should we waste our time vacillating about the Royals because symbolically it belongs them instead of the People? Who gives a shit about symbols? I'd much rather we got on with things. Whether or not we're a monarchy is so irrelevant to the material reality of living in the UK.
 
Romulus augustulus said:
Most Americans don't like the word monarchy, but when you get down to it the president is a king in all but name, and people want them and expect a president to rule like one.
Click to expand...
Except he isn't because he has actual power, and is not merely the head of state (as is Charles) but is both the head of state and the head of the government. If you mean like an ancient monarch, he isn't a bit like one. Even someone with autocratic aspirations like Trump had his shit blocked at every turn and had to deal with stonewalling both from in and outside his party. Many Presidents end up "lame ducks" with virtually no ability to do anything.
WelperHelper99 said:
The American revolution succeeded only because of our militias and great quantities of firearms.
Click to expand...
And because we knew our own territory intimately and the British basically knew our ports and bigger cities and their intel was otherwise damn near garbage because they didn't care about where the little people lived. So the initial stages of their attempt to put the Revolution down, by invading ports like Baltimore, they had tremendous success because they both had a certain degree of support and their naval supremacy was nothing we could match.

They could probably have held the port cities indefinitely, but that wouldn't have ended the Revolution.

Once they started getting into the interior they started getting their asses handed to them.
 
Last edited:
Stop fighting over which is better, democracy or monarchy, because both countries are retarded now. I'm sure I can be stabbed by someone brown in either US or UK and get arrested for it while I bleed to death.
 
AnOminous said:
Except he isn't because he has actual power, and is not merely the head of state (as is Charles) but is both the head of state and the head of the government. If you mean like an ancient monarch, he isn't a bit like one. Even someone with autocratic aspirations like Trump had his shit blocked at every turn and had to deal with stonewalling both from in and outside his party. Many Presidents end up "lame ducks" with virtually no ability to do anything.
Click to expand...
A president by design is both strong and weak. Closest I could describe it would be a brass gear, a wear part. The machine will run, it might even have some tricks, but eventually that brass geer grinding against the other steel gears wears out and gets replaced (term limits).
 
William Murderface said:
Parliament didn't even want the war. It was expensive and unpopular with the English, even before the shooting started, because of how much the self-imposed embargo on buying finished British goods the Colonists were doing had cost the British merchants, and once the shooting started just how much it was costing the British in new taxes and dead Redcoats. It was basically George III and Lord North wanting to bring the Americans to heel instead of saying "you know, they might have a point. Let's just give them a few seats in Parliament to shut them up."
Click to expand...
They couldn't give the Colonies any seats. Lord North's Parliamentary majority was solely as a result of rotten boroughs that hadn't been redrawn for literal centuries. And since a place like Manchester that had rapidly grown into a city of its own would want a seat in Parliament, they'd need to redraw the maps at home, too. Considering that 88 out of 400 seats in Parliament were each decided by less than 50 votes, I'm sure you can guess how absolutely catastrophic such a revision might be to the entrenched political classes. So rather than deal with the political headache at home of political reform, easier to just blame the colonists for everything and send in the troops.

And Parliament still didn't fix their districting until over fifty fucking years later in 1832.
AnOminous said:
And because we knew our own territory intimately and the British basically knew our ports and bigger cities and their intel was otherwise damn near garbage because they didn't care about where the little people lived. So the initial stages of their attempt to put the Revolution down, by invading ports like Baltimore, they had tremendous success because they both had a certain degree of support and their naval supremacy was nothing we could match.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but how long did their takeover of Boston last? The whole damn colony was in armed rebellion against the British on account of their constant dickbaggery, and with just one way out of the place by land we parked a few artillery pieces and some riflemen on some hills and shot at anyone who tried to leave.
 
Last edited:
AnOminous said:
And because we knew our own territory intimately and the British basically knew our ports and bigger cities and their intel was otherwise damn near garbage because they didn't care about where the little people lived. So the initial stages of their attempt to put the Revolution down, by invading ports like Baltimore, they had tremendous success because they both had a certain degree of support and their naval supremacy was nothing we could match.

They could probably have held the port cities indefinitely, but that wouldn't have ended the Revolution.

Once they started getting into the interior they started getting their asses handed to them.
Click to expand...
That was the downfall really: the American colonial project only lasted as long as it did because we played nice and they didn't ask too many questions about where the cotton was coming from. Once that arrangement stopped around 100 years later, they stomped in, unprepared for a land they knew little about other than (on paper) they owned it.
Snekposter said:
Yeah, but how long did their takeover of Boston last? The whole damn colony was in armed rebellion against the British on account of their constant dickbaggery, and with just one way out of the place by land we parked a few artillery pieces and some riflemen on some hills and shot at anyone who tried to leave.
Click to expand...
Boston was actually a pretty long siege on account of it being a island. The British bombarded the hell out of it and so did we.
 
A Sentient Cloud said:
Kate please release another fake photo, it's getting retarded in here.
Click to expand...
I really just want to imagine that one of the lizard people tore their human suit and the tailoring is taking longer than expected and that is why they are releasing bad Photoshop.

I don't want to read a thread about in which country are you more likely to get stabbed/shot by the local PoC.

Could we maybe pivot to which of our countries has scarier lizard people instead of the current slap fight?
 
Feline Supremacist said:
Nigger this is a thread about the bong Royals you derailed sperging about Murrica.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot to mention George III, an utter maniac who constantly had seizures, forcing people to kneel on him to keep him from injuring himself from thrashing around, his contemporaries described him as ranting and raving until he was literally foaming at the mouth, and on top of that he was a blithering idiot who loaned Jefferson the money to buy Louisiana, so he could buy it from the French who then used it to wage war on England.

George the Turd was the dumbest most insane motherfucker in the British Royal Family.

But should we get into other absolutely retarded English lolcow kings?

Sure!

I mean we got Henry VI, a literal retard who set off the absolutely pointless war known as The War of the Roses, which if you read about it at all you think what the fuck was even wrong with these goddamn idiots, why was this even a war? I don't even understand it, but everyone involved were absolute idiots.

And then we have Victoria, who had to have been one of the most absolutely useless whores who ever existed. What the fuck were her accomplishments other than just living a long time and being utterly useless for what, 60+ years?

That said I have a pretty high opinion of both Elizabeths, although the first one genuinely rocked.
 
AnOminous said:
Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot to mention George III, an utter maniac who constantly had seizures, forcing people to kneel on him to keep him from injuring himself from thrashing around, his contemporaries described him as ranting and raving until he was literally foaming at the mouth, and on top of that he was a blithering idiot who loaned Jefferson the money to buy Louisiana, so he could buy it from the French who then used it to wage war on England.

George the Turd was the dumbest most insane motherfucker in the British Royal Family.

But should we get into other absolutely retarded English lolcow kings?

Sure!

I mean we got Henry VI, a literal retard who set off the absolutely pointless war known as The War of the Roses, which if you read about it at all you think what the fuck was even wrong with these goddamn idiots, why was this even a war? I don't even understand it, but everyone involved were absolute idiots.

And then we have Victoria, who had to have been one of the most absolutely useless whores who ever existed. What the fuck were her accomplishments other than just living a long time and being utterly useless for what, 60+ years?

That said I have a pretty high opinion of both Elizabeths, although the first one genuinely rocked.
Click to expand...
Your forgot Richard II, the OG poofter of England.
 
AnOminous said:
The War of the Roses
Click to expand...
I went and looked that shit up on Wikipedia, and I haven't even made it out of the summary and I'm wondering just what the fuck these people were thinking.

Unsurprisingly it doesn't end until all the men in Lancaster and York wind up dying of one thing or another, leading to a marriage that unites both houses under the Tudors which then takes the throne. What a goddamn clusterfuck.
 
I guess minge and whinge content must be thin on the ground if we're re-litigating the last act of the English civil wars.

Ace of Clubs said:
You regularly LARP as a smart person on this forum. So seeing this come out of you is supprising.
Click to expand...
No no, he LARPs as an angry person. Being smart is more of a side hustle.
 
I fell asleep reading this thread and literally woke up and forgot what thread I was in, thought I was in a political sperging thread about jews and niggers and immigrants and wondered why I had started reading it...
 
Ace of Clubs said:
Her struggles with trannys are the same as Rowling's, she is unwilling to strike at a target and make it hurt enough that they fuck off and look for another one.. It has 0 to do with your argument. To that matter, i say. Find a target and do a public lambasting of them. No shortage of degenerate trannys to put a face to the degenerate behaviour. The problem with Farrow, is that she is unwilling to stoop to that level when, the trannys have free rule to fuck with her as much as they can. It is really annoying when the best thing a person under attack from progressives can say is "at least i am not them". Good your not them, i will write on your tombstone.
Click to expand...
Started off good here and then devolved into complete and utter nonsense 🌙
 
AnOminous said:
Except he isn't because he has actual power, and is not merely the head of state (as is Charles) but is both the head of state and the head of the government. If you mean like an ancient monarch, he isn't a bit like one. Even someone with autocratic aspirations like Trump had his shit blocked at every turn and had to deal with stonewalling both from in and outside his party. Many Presidents end up "lame ducks" with virtually no ability to do anything
Click to expand...

Surely you're contradicting yourself here?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom