The Prince of Wales

[Louis VI the Fat]

The Prince of Wales was the subject of some disagreement in another thread. Recently, I have come to appreciate him. I think Prince Charles is one of the most underrated and foresighted men in Britain. A pity he hasn't had his time on the throne yet.

Crown him soon, lest I turn monarchist and offer to make Charles King of the French!


Prince Charles protecting London's architecture. Again. As he has been doing for some thirty odd years:

What are the royals for if not to protect our heritage? He's meddling, you say, but the Prince is at his best when he becomes involved. The neighbours never wanted these glass and steel high-tech residential towers stuffed with £50million flats. But they had no influence over the combined might of Lord Rogers, Gulf State money and the Candys (who have two other vast projects in the capital) and who are held in awe by London's planning committees.

Prince Charles could do something. He pulled rank and wrote a letter to his friend, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani, the ruler of Qatar, who was backing the project. The arrogance of architects has been trumped by the arrogance of princes.

In fact, Charles is always right. He is just too far ahead of his time:

Over the past 40 years, the meddling Prince Charles has had an uncanny knack of championing causes decades before they became popular. The former Cabinet minister Charles Clarke once derided him as “old-fashioned and out of time” but he is curiously prescient for a man surrounded by flunkeys and courtiers.

He was still experimenting with cherry brandy when he first talked about the environment. He was derided for instigating a bottle bank at Buckingham Palace years before councils thought of recycling. David Cameron now espouses his call for more localism, Tesco is catching up with his views on organic food. Long before 9/11, he was talking about Islam and the need to understand the underlying religious tensions in this country. With his Prince's Trust he was years ahead of Sir Alan Sugar in encouraging young people to start their own businesses.

He has set up projects to embrace his beliefs about social deprivation, community cohesion, urban planning and Britishness, firing off letters to ministers suggesting the elderly may not be having a nice time in hospital.

Linky.

To which I would like to add:
Charles had an early appreciation for Britain's industrial heritage. Before it became fashionable. Those beautiful 19th century canals, wharehouses, factories. Appreciation for a century and an Empire wrought of iron and steel.


Poll added because I like clicking things and assume others do too.

[Sheogorath]

Hey, if the French get royalty then we'll have to get some too. Maybe Japan will let us have the woman who was supposed to inherit until they finally got a male heir.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Oh!


How do you get two whales in a minivan?

Across the Severn Bridge!

[KukriKhan]

I've luffed the guy since he admitted to schoolboy Tobacco use, and elsewhere (I can't so far find a link) defended cigarette use among the poor, as 'their only pleasure' or words to that effect.

Given his stance, and his own boys' use of the weed, I'm inclined to listen to his archi, arche-, (koff koff) structural commentary.

p.s. Note to poll-makers: Making a poll, and not voting in it oneself might be miscontrued.

[CountArach]

Is there a single member of the royal family who is not a useless twit?

[Furunculus]

I think his views on Climate Change are ridiculous, though i approve of his more general environmental stance, for example buying up tracts of rainforest.

But most importantly I recognise that he works very hard and is keen to make a difference before he assumes the non-controversial role as head of state.

[Furunculus]

Is there a single member of the royal family who is not a useless twit?

you could start with the Queen,

then move on to Phil,

next would be Charlie,

and I'm fairly sure that there are at least half a dozen royals who harder day in day out then you or I EVER will.

[CountArach]

you could start with the Queen,

then move on to Phil,

next would be Charlie,

You have yet to convince me.

and I'm fairly sure that there are at least half a dozen royals who harder day in day out then you or I EVER will.

You are indeed correct. They won't work.

[HoreTore]

you could start with the Queen,

then move on to Phil,

next would be Charlie,

and I'm fairly sure that there are at least half a dozen royals who harder day in day out then you or I EVER will.

Yes, putting on your pants when you have a zillion hereditary disabilities due to centuries of inbreeding is rather hard... Luckily, they have a ton of tax-paid servants to do it for them

The only good king is a dead king. Second best is one without any influence whatsoever. Any other option is hell.

[Furunculus]

ah, these cultural differences that are apparently of so little importance within a federal europe, so easy to paper over, and otherwise dissolve through re-education. :D

[Adrian II]

The Prince of Wales was the subject of some disagreement in another thread.

Not at all, you French provocateur. We were all in agreement about Charles being the perfect sort of idiot for the job. The self-conscious sort of idiot who knows that the joke is on us, not him. If this thread is meant to demonstrate the latter, you have already succeeded...

[Beskar]

If Prince Charles dissolves the Monarchy as his first act of King it would be the only time I would go around wearing Che Guevara style T-Shirt of him and have a ton of respect for the person.

But as long as he is a monarch, I would never fully approve of him in any way.

[miotas]

Where's the "they're a bunch of useless twits but we still love 'em" option? Haven't you fellas seen Dr Who? The haemophilia in the royal family is actually because they're werewolves.

[InsaneApache]

Talking of big ears.....

Why do elephants have big ears?






















Cos Noddy won't pay the ransom.

[Husar]

In fact, Charles is always right. He is just too far ahead of his time

So you think Tribesman is actually prince Charles?

[Louis VI the Fat]

So you think Tribesman is actually prince Charles?

Duh! Tribesman is obviously a royalist and a loyalist.

I've luffed the guy since he admitted to schoolboy Tobacco use, and elsewhere (I can't so far find a link) defended cigarette use among the poor, as 'their only pleasure' or words to that effect.

p.s. Note to poll-makers: Making a poll, and not voting in it oneself might be miscontrued.

I would vote, but I'd have to click all five options, making it rather moot.


I actually suspect Charles - and I find this shocking and hard to admit - I suspect Charles of having a sense of humour.

Those letters to Camilla! 'I wish I were your Tampax'. Genius.

[InsaneApache]

Those letters to Camilla! 'I wish I were your Tampax'. Genius.

Another old joke beckons but this time I'll give you the punchline and let you work out the preamble.

'Uptight, outta sight, in a groove...'

[Pannonian]

Another old joke beckons but this time I'll give you the punchline and let you work out the preamble.

'Uptight, outta sight, in a groove...'

Have you heard about the religious conservative with a taste for disco?

[Cute Wolf]

Although not a Brit... I could tell he was basically a good guy when I meet and shake his hand on his tour of duty to Indonesia... Everybody could made mistakes, just try to give him a second chance to approve himself...

[Fragony]

Doubt this is funny for non-dutchies but seems like a good place to put it (about our crownprince)



(translation just in case you want it; is it finally prince blabla moment)

[HoreTore]

Although not a Brit... I could tell he was basically a good guy when I meet and shake his hand on his tour of duty to Indonesia... Everybody could made mistakes, just try to give him a second chance to approve himself...

Bah. It's not just the man, it's the very institution itself.

Monarchy makes a mockery of our democratic system and values. We teach that everyone is born equal in standing. We elect our leaders and our representatives. Our society is based on the notion that the hard-working and smart people end up at the top, and noone will get far without hard work.

A king is born into his position. He has no need for any qualification whatsoever, from the moment he is born, he is chosen to be king. It really is shameful for our society to behave in this way.

[Cute Wolf]

Doubt this is funny for non-dutchies but seems like a good place to put it (about our crownprince)



(translation just in case you want it; is it finally prince blabla moment)

Hey frag... a man who can't have a decent ammount honor his own leader, no matter what they did as "wrong things" can't become a good leader themself.... and yet.... ashaming your own royal family is a symbol of disloyalty..... Poor Royal family... not everyone understands them... and many depises them...

[Cute Wolf]

Bah. It's not just the man, it's the very institution itself.

Monarchy makes a mockery of our democratic system and values. We teach that everyone is born equal in standing. We elect our leaders and our representatives. Our society is based on the notion that the hard-working and smart people end up at the top, and noone will get far without hard work.

A king is born into his position. He has no need for any qualification whatsoever, from the moment he is born, he is chosen to be king. It really is shameful for our society to behave in this way.

Any kind of government is originally intended for the good on its own people... even those "undemocratic monarch" that you've seen is actually someone who his ancestors were "elected" to made his lineage leaders for (hopefully) countless generations. At least, they should have some sense of duty, and your "real decision - maker" is the Prime Minister, who was elected, right? so denying monarchy rights of their title and institution, is basically the same thing when you rob a rich, but innocent man, all his riches, and then let him die nude in cold slums... If they still stand, it was because God still wants them to a good efffects... And to say they are useless, you just prove of your "disloyalty"...

[Fragony]

Hey frag... a man who can't have a decent ammount honor his own leader, no matter what they did as "wrong things" can't become a good leader themself.... and yet.... ashaming your own royal family is a symbol of disloyalty..... Poor Royal family... not everyone understands them... and many depises them...

Damn straight I despise them, royalty has no place in a modern society.

[CountArach]

ashaming your own royal family is a symbol of disloyalty..... Poor Royal family... not everyone understands them... and many depises them...

Wow... so dissenting opinions make me disloyal to my country? The very nature of free speech is that my idea is heard and I am allowed to express it To suggest that this weakens the nation as a whole is just pathetic. Any nation that relies on a figurehead who was born into his position to keep itself going deserves a lot of criticism.

[Adrian II]

Damn straight I despise them, royalty has no place in a modern society.

That's funny. We're thoroughly modern in Holland. The Brits are thoroughly modern, too. So are the Danes, the Spaniards. Yet they all have figurehead kings and queens, with the wholehearted support of their populations.

What does it mean, eh? It means quite simply that these figureheads are popular precisely because they're not modern. Ha! And since we're on about it, does Bach have a place in modern society? Does Jesus? King Arthur?

Could it be, dear Fragony, that people are not overly enthusiastic about your modern society?

[Fragony]

If they were, how would they vote away the queen?

[Adrian II]

If they were, how would they vote away the queen?

Two-thirds majority, change the constitution, bye bye Beatrix & Co.

[Fragony]

Two-thirds majority, change the constitution, bye bye Beatrix & Co.

I stand corrected. Would be interesting to know how many people support the royals.

[Adrian II]

I stand corrected. Would be interesting to know how many people support the royals.

How about 85%. It's been a constant for decades, maybe a hundred years.

BTW this is why republican movements never succeed in convincing people.



"The royals are outdated."

"Yup!"

"I mean, I know they're symbols..."

"Uh-huh."

"... Even so, it's the symbol of inequality, inherited wealth, everything obsolete."

"Yup!"

"Whatcha mean, 'yup'"?

"That's why we like them."

"But that's not rational!"

"Nope."

"So?"

'So what?"