God Save The King

[Admiral Yi]

The ceremony at St. James reminded me of the Kentucky Derby.

Guardsmen would look so much cooler if they went back to the Enfield.

[Sheilbh]

Politico EU has an article up that has an interesting take on Elizabeth's life:
https://www.politico.eu/article/the-short-unhappy-life-of-elizabeth-windsor-queen-elizabeth-ii-obituary/

Think there's a bit to that - they've not spoken about it in a while. But at the start of the coverage on the BBC there were a few moments when they were talking about how we know Prince Charles' views on various issues and how he'll behave as king and a few times the host said something like "of course, he'll be allowed to keep some of his personality".

It's sort of an inhuman thing to say about someone - but that's the job.

Having said that I think the monarchy will use Charles and William's environmentalism. I think that will be allowed and will also be the way they try to bridge the gap with younger people. An interesting one is the Commonwealth and confronting Britain's imperial legacy. In remarks he's given I think Charles kind of gets it and probably wants to say something. I imagine this government would rather he didn't so that will be a constraint tension of how far the palace can go in his remarks.

Edit: I mean given that Charles' views are a sort of mix of esoteric, conservative, conservationist, traditionalist, quasi de-growthing thought with a real fondness for Sufism and Eastern Orthodoxy, it's probably for the best that he's only allowed some of them now

[OttoVonBismarck]

There's some overlap between views of guys like E.F. Schumacher who basically espoused the ideas of decentralization and "human-scale" economies and King Charles.

I have to say, while I mostly held vaguely positive feelings towards the British monarchy, despite being against it in concept, I was surprised with how virulently...wrong, I felt it was to watch a video of the House of Commons all obsequiously pledging undying and absolute loyalty to King Charles. I understand the theory that this is really a pledge to the "British State", through Charles, but as an American steeped in the long tradition that none of us (including our military) swear oaths to the President, it just rubbed me the wrong way.

[Sheilbh]

There's some overlap between views of guys like E.F. Schumacher who basically espoused the ideas of decentralization and "human-scale" economies and King Charles.

Yes for sure. There's also all the stuff that Charles' charities do to fund "traditional" artisans and craftsmen etc. I think weirdly it ties to his possibly wanting to go further on talking about colonialism because Charles has written books about needing to break out of the "modernist" mindset and instead learn from traditional artisan, craftsmen, small farmers - which I think very much includes indigenous communities and seeing colonialism as part of that. He has set up a school funding, say, traditional crafts in the UK, Islamic world, South-East Asia etc.

It is quite a contrast with Liz Truss who, according to her speeches, is all about growth and maximising the economy.

I have to say, while I mostly held vaguely positive feelings towards the British monarchy, despite being against it in concept, I was surprised with how virulently...wrong, I felt it was to watch a video of the House of Commons all obsequiously pledging undying and absolute loyalty to King Charles. I understand the theory that this is really a pledge to the "British State", through Charles, but as an American steeped in the long tradition that none of us (including our military) swear oaths to the President, it just rubbed me the wrong way.

It's mad - it is the swearing in they do when they take their seats. There's no need for them to do it now (as it's to "their heirs" as well), but I believe it's just become tradition that they take the oath to a new monarch. Historically parliament used to dissolve and we'd have an election - which, while I'm not a fan of Liz Truss, I think would have been unfair. Famously a few republicans like Dennis Skinner used to take the oath with their fingers crossed behind their back.

On the other hand I think you can see the other side in Charles meeting with the PM yesterday, the cabinet and the leaders of the main opposition parties (in Westminster) today - he'll do the same in Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast in the next few days. Which in theory is about that idea of loyal opposition and politics as between opponents not enemies:

[mongers]

Rather impressed by the significant number of the Dundee onlookers who were wearing formal black attire, including black armbands.

[Tamas]

There's some overlap between views of guys like E.F. Schumacher who basically espoused the ideas of decentralization and "human-scale" economies and King Charles.

I have to say, while I mostly held vaguely positive feelings towards the British monarchy, despite being against it in concept, I was surprised with how virulently...wrong, I felt it was to watch a video of the House of Commons all obsequiously pledging undying and absolute loyalty to King Charles. I understand the theory that this is really a pledge to the "British State", through Charles, but as an American steeped in the long tradition that none of us (including our military) swear oaths to the President, it just rubbed me the wrong way.

For what it's worth, my citizenship ceremony had effectively two oaths, one to the state, the other to the monarch and her heirs, i.e. it felt like a distinction was made between the two in a way and I was expected to swear loyalty to both.

[viper37]

[The Larch]

UFC PPV starts off with a moment of silence in remembrance of Queen Elizabeth, which is met with boos and then a USA chant.

[Tamas]

UFC PPV starts off with a moment of silence in remembrance of Queen Elizabeth, which is met with boos and then a USA chant.

Fans of brutal fighting sport are dumb aggressive morons. Film at 11.

[Josquius]

Best take I've seen -

So they want a MAN to be the next queen. This woke nonsense has gone too far.

[Iormlund]

[Sheilbh]

[Malthus]

It

There's some overlap between views of guys like E.F. Schumacher who basically espoused the ideas of decentralization and "human-scale" economies and King Charles.

I have to say, while I mostly held vaguely positive feelings towards the British monarchy, despite being against it in concept, I was surprised with how virulently...wrong, I felt it was to watch a video of the House of Commons all obsequiously pledging undying and absolute loyalty to King Charles. I understand the theory that this is really a pledge to the "British State", through Charles, but as an American steeped in the long tradition that none of us (including our military) swear oaths to the President, it just rubbed me the wrong way.

It isn't really different from pledging allegiance to the flag.

Most understand that the real object of allegiance is the nation, as symbolized by the flag, and not to a mere inanimate bit of nylon ... but some Americans take the whole flag idolatry thing a step too far, so that it seems that the flag itself is an object of allegiance. Which can seem a bit odd.

In the case of the monarch, he or she is mostly (but not entirely) an office place-holder, with a small but important constitutional role to play; there is a certain value in separating the head of state from the executive - it avoids, or at least lessens, people mistaking blind following of the executive with "patriotism". A weakness of the American system, as the events surrounding Trump has demonstrated - though, at least so far, Trump hasn't been able to exploit this weakness to ruin American democracy, it hasn't been for what of trying.

[grumbler]

 

[grumbler]

It isn't really different from pledging allegiance to the flag.

Most understand that the real object of allegiance is the nation, as symbolized by the flag, and not to a mere inanimate bit of nylon ... but some Americans take the whole flag idolatry thing a step too far, so that it seems that the flag itself is an object of allegiance. Which can seem a bit odd.

No one pledges allegiance to the flag.  They mouth the nonsense words to show that they are slavishly conformational, but the actual words spoken are meaningless.