Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Tamas]

Oh and Royal Family + diversity czar.

I wonder if the monarchy survives the Queen (may long she reign, though!  ). Austria-Hungary was creaking and cracking under all the forces pushing it apart, but it survived until the living symbol of it for most of its inhabitants (Franz Joseph, remember most people alive at that point never had another Emperor) did.

[Sheilbh]

Oh and Royal Family + diversity czar.

I saw that

I mean really they should just bring back the re-animated corpse of the Queen Mother - her cabal was all gay men. Probably quite racist though

There's so many layers to it I love - that they're calling/positioning it as a diversity "czar" which just seems questionable in an actual royal family. But also that it could, maybe work for the staff around them (and that would be valuable) - ultimately there's not much a diversity and inclusion department can do about a hereditary monarchy that they've not already fucked up

[Syt]

My outsider's perspective is that people would probably be ok with William being king. Charles, not a spring chicken himself, comes with a lot of baggage of scandals etc., whereas Will & Kate play better with younger demographic, I suppose?

[garbon]

I wondered if perhaps Amy Lamé could be given the role.

[Tamas]

Oh and Royal Family + diversity czar.

I saw that

I mean really they should just bring back the re-animated corpse of the Queen Mother - her cabal was all gay men. Probably quite racist though

There's so many layers to it I love - that they're calling/positioning it as a diversity "czar" which just seems questionable in an actual royal family. But also that it could, maybe work for the staff around them (and that would be valuable) - ultimately there's not much a diversity and inclusion department can do about a hereditary monarchy that they've not already fucked up

Are you sure an increase of black/Asian butlers is what they need?

[Tamas]

My outsider's perspective is that people would probably be ok with William being king. Charles, not a spring chicken himself, comes with a lot of baggage of scandals etc., whereas Will & Kate play better with younger demographic, I suppose?

Maybe my colleagues at the two jobs I have worked here are wrong samples but indifference to the royals in 20-30s somethings appear absolute. It feels like scandals are created and sustained by the media, as opposed to reacting to it, if that makes sense.

[Sheilbh]

I wonder if the monarchy survives the Queen (may long she reign, though!  ). Austria-Hungary was creaking and cracking under all the forces pushing it apart, but it survived until the living symbol of it for most of its inhabitants (Franz Joseph, remember most people alive at that point never had another Emperor) did.

I don't think it survives in, say, Australia or Canada or New Zealand or the various Caribbean states where she's head of state (though I low-key love the idea of Harry becoming King of Canada living in the country ).

As a republican much as I love to think next time we will finally throw off the shackles and embrace our future I slightly doubt it'll ever happen. People will tolerate Charles for 20 years of his dotage, but become distracted by the lives and scandals of the George, Charlotte etc. Will and Kate will take over in their unpopular middle age - but by then George and Charlotte be about the age of Will and Harry now, so we'll have royal weddings and new princes and princesses and maybe new divorces and scandals to entertain us.

It is weird how the medieval anachronism of having a family/dynasty in charge works so well in the age of reality TV.

[Sheilbh]

My outsider's perspective is that people would probably be ok with William being king. Charles, not a spring chicken himself, comes with a lot of baggage of scandals etc., whereas Will & Kate play better with younger demographic, I suppose?

There's a bit of that but Charles is not as unpopular as he once was and, in the UK, even Camilla's been rehabilitated a bit. I think it's more of an issue outside the UK - Canada etc.

I think there's more recognition that maybe a lot of his scandals was actually caused by the institution not allowing him to marry the woman he loved and instead forcing him to marry a woman he didn't - every generation has a big royal scandal: Wallace Simpson, Group Captain Townsend/Margaret, Diana/Charles/Camilla. I think basically as many people want Charles to succeed as want William to succeed. And if the monarchy just ditches the tradition/principle of hereditary descent I'm not really sure what it's for

Plus a lot of the things that used to make Charles controversial - that he was being too political in raising green issues/sustainability, suggesting that he should be the "Defender of Faith" not "Defender of the Faith" recognise modern Britain - are now commonplace and uncontroversial.

Maybe my colleagues at the two jobs I have worked here are wrong samples but indifference to the royals in 20-30s somethings appear absolute. It feels like scandals are created and sustained by the media, as opposed to reacting to it, if that makes sense.

But again I think it's maybe always been that way. 20-30s don't buy newspapers and particularly don't buy the ones that care about the royals and the 20-30s sympathise with the young royals chafing against the structure they're born into. Again as a republican I'm very pessimistic and don't expect my generation to keep their indifference as they age, just like I don't expect them to keep on being anti-Tory or terribly pro-Europe - I think like every previous generation they'll grow more conservative etc

Are you sure an increase of black/Asian butlers is what they need?

I mean more more the whole private secretaries and advisors. They come from a very small, narrow world I think largely ex-services which may not always be attuned to changes around it.

[Josquius]

The sums just don't add up for getting rid of the monarchy and we've far more important issues to deal with. So Meh for me.

[Grey Fox]

Canada is not getting rid of the Monarchy. There's a possibility, very slim, that when the Queen passes we pick someone different from the UK choice. But getting rid of the Monarchy would require a modification of our constitution & no one is crazy enough to try do that again.

[The Larch]

Canada is not getting rid of the Monarchy. There's a possibility, very slim, that when the Queen passes we pick someone different from the UK choice. But getting rid of the Monarchy would require a modification of our constitution & no one is crazy enough to try do that again.

Can Canada actually choose a different HoS than whoever becomes King upon Lizzie's passing? Can they say "Nah, we don't like Charles, we'll take William instead"?

[Sheilbh]

Can Canada actually choose a different HoS than whoever becomes King upon Lizzie's passing? Can they say "Nah, we don't like Charles, we'll take William instead"?

I'm not sure - I know when the UK changes succession rules (which it last did to remove male preference in 2015) it requires the consent of all the other countries who have the Queen as head of state because I think they apply to everyone. I think the big issue would be whether the relevant royal would want to become, say, King of Canada while also being Prince of Wales (or how this would work).

If they wanted to keep the monarchy but one of their own it feels like the best option would be a bit like when Norway found a royal family (or slightly like Brazil) and someone not in the immediate line of succession was offered - e.g. Prince Harry.

[Grey Fox]

Canada is not getting rid of the Monarchy. There's a possibility, very slim, that when the Queen passes we pick someone different from the UK choice. But getting rid of the Monarchy would require a modification of our constitution & no one is crazy enough to try do that again.

Can Canada actually choose a different HoS than whoever becomes King upon Lizzie's passing? Can they say "Nah, we don't like Charles, we'll take William instead"?

I am not a lawyer or a Constitution expert. We have an act called Succession to the Throne Act, 2013, that just says the UK act called "A Bill to Make succession to the Crown not depend on gender; to make provision about Royal Marriages; and for connected purposes" comes into force. I think it is therefore possible that parliament votes in a different act to govern who is the head representative of the Crown in Canada.

[Valmy]

I just want to point out that if the 2013 act was in force in 1900, Kaiser Wilhelm II would have held Germany and the UK in a Personal Union

[Syt]

Andy Ngo/Spectator weighs in on the Bristol riots:

https://spectator.us/topic/bristol-britain-portland-antifa-police/

Bristol is Britain's Portland

Rioters dressed in black bloc as they set dumpsters on fire to block streets

Last night, Bristol's city center erupted in violence as far-left rioters smashed up the police station, assaulted police — breaking some officers' bones — and set vehicles on fire. The scenes of violence and arson were familiar to me. It looked like any night out of Portland, Oregon, where I'm from. Since May 2020, Black Lives Matter-antifa rioters have regularly carried out similar organized acts of carnage targeting courthouses and police stations.

Some of the rioters in Bristol last night were dressed in black bloc as they set dumpsters on fire to block streets and used barricades as battering rams to attack police. They also came armed with explosive mortar fireworks, a favorite projectile weapon among antifa to disorientate, deafen, blind and injure cops.

Though the protest-turned-riot was ostensibly organized to oppose the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, which would allow police to impose more conditions on protests and increase penalties for those convicted of vandalizing statues, among other things, the demonstration had all the hallmarks of a far-left gathering.

The 'Kill the Bill' protest was promoted by the Bristol chapters of a Black Lives Matter-style group, Extinction Rebellion and Momentum, the hard-left wing within the Labour party. Unsurprisingly, British antifa groups also encouraged their comrades to support the violence.

'Be careful about sharing footage with people's faces who aren't wearing masks,' warned one antifa group. 'Solidarity with all the comrades out there in Bristol fighting the bill and facing hard repression,' tweeted Brighton Antifascists. 'Spread the fire,' they urged. And the fire spread.

Hundreds of protesters had gathered earlier in the city center carrying hammer and sickle flags, symbols of anarchist-communism, and signs against racism and fascism. The most frequent message spray-painted on vehicles and buildings at the riot? Antifa's adopted slogan of 'ACAB' — all cops are bastards.

I recently visited Bristol. I noticed immediately that the leftist student politics of the University of Bristol and other colleges seemed to define the city's wider political culture. That is, Bristol is a left-wing political monoculture, much like Portland.

'Black Lives Matter' signs are plastered over many buildings and windows, and antifa stickers are easily found around the city. Given Bristol's political and social culture, it is no surprise that this is where rioters felt empowered to topple a statue of Edward Colston in an American-style George Floyd protest in June 2020. The protesters then rolled the bronze statue down the street where they dumped it into the harbor. The police just watched and did not intervene.

The parallels between Bristol and Portland only go so far, of course. Bristol is nowhere near as bad or grim as my hometown. However, if British law enforcement continue to turn a blind eye to far-left political violence in the city, yesterday's riots will indeed become a daily norm. Antifa are already calling for it to become so.