Prince Philip 1921-2021

[Cockney Sparrow]

It was inevitable that his public role of walking two steps behind the Queen would be seen as his only role by the majority of people, and many of the comments I have read and heard suggest that his life was as a consequence one long jolly, and not worth commemorating. The idea that he had a life aside from that role just doesn't enter the consciousness, but in some respects that doesn't matter since he himself wasn't after plaudits, and those who benefited in whatever field knew and they were the ones who mattered, not the world's press.

I agree with you very much. I'm not a Royal Admirer, but neither a particular detractor. They fulfil a role, they are easy targets, but far, far preferable to any alternative which would be some politician, semi-retired or otherwise.

He had a hard start in life, although never threatened with poverty. The more I read about him, the more respect for what he did, and within the confines of the role he took on. And just because that context was the wealth and benefits of the position of the Royal family for which - agreed - he settled, doesn't in my eye justify him being a target for adverse judgement.

[Serial_Apologist]

It'[s the institution, isn't it? - its role and function in our kind of society, and the expectations invested in its personnel, are where one's criticism has to be directed.

[muzzer]

The prog on the iPlayer In His Own Words about him and his role at Windsor I’ve not seen before, and it’s the best possible advert. The way he rattles on to Robert Hardman in his Land Rover he could have had his own chat show. I’d never have thought I’d find him so endearing.

[french frank]

It'[s the institution, isn't it? - its role and function in our kind of society, and the expectations invested in its personnel, are where one's criticism has to be directed.

Except that, like it or not, the monarchy does represent 'our kind of society'. I, somewhat inaccurately, pointed out, a hereditary monarchy doesn't in itself preclude democracy (I should have mentioned Denmark also among the democratic monarchies). Reform of our electoral system would do far more to improve democracy/equality than abolishing the monarchy, yet strangely many of the advocates of republicanism have been less than enthusiastic about changing the voting system.

But, yes, surely this latest ceremony has done far more to bring out the humanity of the royals, that in the end they are just human beings. And they can be very likeable human beings the more we know about them and the less we judge them as privileged vermin.

[Joseph K]

Except that, like it or not, the monarchy does represent 'our kind of society'.

How so - do we still live in a feudal society?

But, yes, surely this latest ceremony has done far more to bring out the humanity of the royals, that in the end they are just human beings. And they can be very likeable human beings the more we know about them and the less we judge them as privileged vermin.

I'd say whether they're likeable or not is totally irrelevant.

[cloughie]

How so - do we still live in a feudal society?




I'd say whether they're likeable or not is totally irrelevant.

OK JK what’s your solution. Do you want a Trump? a Macron? a Putin? a Johnson?

[Joseph K]

OK JK what’s your solution. Do you want a Trump? a Macron? a Putin? a Johnson?

Correct me if I'm wrong but we do actually already have one of them, don't we?

[cloughie]

Correct me if I'm wrong but we do actually already have one of them, don't we?

As PM not head of state, and there is a difference!

[vinteuil]

How so - do we still live in a feudal society?
.

... no. And 'feudal' here is an empty insult, in the same way that the term 'fascist' is so often used.

I'm not a particular fan of the monarchical system, but as others have demonstrated, 'nice' Scandiwegian democracies function adequately as constitutional monarchies. And I think better this than a 'monarchical' republic such as the napoleonic system that currently obtains in France.

I think our current system inflicts a 'cruel and unusual punishment' on those obliged to be working royals, and that's one of the reasons I dislike it

.

[french frank]

How so - do we still live in a feudal society?

Speaking as a medievalist, I'd say, No, of course we don't.

I'd say whether they're likeable or not is totally irrelevant.

Well, I agree that you would say that. But if that means that you are only able to view people as what they are and discount who they are, I would say that was a shortcoming, a lack of humanity.

Just seen vinteuil's:

.I think our current system inflicts a 'cruel and unusual punishment' on those obliged to be working royals, and that's one of the reasons I dislike it.

They are where they are by an accident of birth and have less freedom than many of us poorer people.

[Joseph K]

As PM not head of state, and there is a difference!

An elected head of state would be a start but by no means a solution.

[cloughie]

An elected head of state would be a start but by no means a solution.

That would deliver what I said previously, so not a good solution. As with many things in life ‘be careful what you wish for’.

[Joseph K]

That would deliver what I said previously, so not a good solution. As with many things in life ‘be careful what you wish for’.

And as I have already pointed out, we already have a Johnson - no wishes involved!

[french frank]

And as I have already pointed out, we already have a Johnson

An elected Johnson, according to our version of 'democracy'.

[cloughie]

And as I have already pointed out, we already have a Johnson - no wishes involved!

Well you gave me the impression you were not happy with a monarchy so you must wish for something different in its place!