Prince Philip 1921-2021

[kernelbogey]

I am quite shocked by the out-pouring of grief for the passing of the Duke of Edinburgh....

I'm not convinced that this is an outpouring of grief. It seems more like a mixture of respect and expected behaviour; possibly also genuine sympathy for the Queen, who is still held in high regard.

[DracoM]

[Bryn]

Bryn, you're cavilling. A racist so-and-so is a racist so-and-so, regardless whether they were racist to one particular person.

I never had the opportunity to observe the DoE interacting with those of different ethnicities at close quarters but my father did, through his work on the DoE Award scheme, and found not a trace of the racism so often ascribed to him by his detractors.

[Ian Thumwood]

8Obs

I can see a time in the near future when having any form of title will be a distinct disadvantage as it will convey all sorts of rights and benefits and even criticism which may not be justified. I totally agree that the relatively obscure people with a title are a problem. For me, I think that many people see that they are irrelevance and convey power and privilege where it is not necessarily deserved.

The whole idea of "Dukes" is more than faintly ridiculous when you consider that the origins of the title stem from late antiquity when Rome was trying to impose a degree of order on it's increasingly fragmented and troubled empire. These military commanders were known as "Dux." On a broader scale, we are supposed to be ruled by a parliamentary democracy yet the second house of Parliament consists largely of clergy and aristocracy that has scarcely presented this country since at least the 1700s and the evolution of a modern economy and the Enlightenment. I feel that the disadvantage of someone having a title like "Duke" is that there is little the general populace can do about them if they are considered unfavourably. With politicians, we can vote them out. We have no way of saying whether or not we would like any members of the aristocracy to act on our behalf nor is there any means of removing them.

As I said in my earlier post, the aristocracy and the Royals do not reflect society from either a social, religious , political, racial or economic perspective. A lot has been posted regarding the esteem with which the DoE was held and I do not doubt that, someone in his 99 years, he did some good. In a lot of respects, his opinions often sat uncomfortably with those of a liberal and enlightened society. I concede he was a colourful character but having a kind of upper crust Jim Davidson was the consort of our head of state has reflected poorly on this country for the best part of 50 years. Time for people to recognise him for what he really was. Not a life we should be celebrating.

[LHC]

I never had the opportunity to observe the DoE interacting with those of different ethnicities at close quarters but my father did, through his work on the DoE Award scheme, and found not a trace of the racism so often ascribed to him by his detractors.

Although Meghan and Harry did not name the person who they claim made racist comments about their son, they were quite clear in stating that it wasn’t The Queen or the DoE.

[LMcD]

Bad luck LMcD.... I gave you false hope

If I can survive Ipswich Town's relegation to the third tier of English football (gulp), I guess I can do without 'tonyb' for once!

[eighthobstruction]

They're all irrelevant, an embarrassing feudal throwback.

....i agree....both Reevers and Reivers....but how can they be irrelevant in the true sense of the word ....when they are an huge obstacle to change....(embarassing, well that doesn't matter does it)

[eighthobstruction]

8Obs

I can see a time in the near future when having any form of title will be a distinct disadvantage as it will convey all sorts of rights and benefits and even criticism which may not be justified. I totally agree that the relatively obscure people with a title are a problem. For me, I think that many people see that they are irrelevance and convey power and privilege where it is not necessarily deserved.

The whole idea of "Dukes" is more than faintly ridiculous when you consider that the origins of the title stem from late antiquity when Rome was trying to impose a degree of order on it's increasingly fragmented and troubled empire. These military commanders were known as "Dux." On a broader scale, we are supposed to be ruled by a parliamentary democracy yet the second house of Parliament consists largely of clergy and aristocracy that has scarcely presented this country since at least the 1700s and the evolution of a modern economy and the Enlightenment. I feel that the disadvantage of someone having a title like "Duke" is that there is little the general populace can do about them if they are considered unfavourably. With politicians, we can vote them out. We have no way of saying whether or not we would like any members of the aristocracy to act on our behalf nor is there any means of removing them.

As I said in my earlier post, the aristocracy and the Royals do not reflect society from either a social, religious , political, racial or economic perspective. A lot has been posted regarding the esteem with which the DoE was held and I do not doubt that, someone in his 99 years, he did some good. In a lot of respects, his opinions often sat uncomfortably with those of a liberal and enlightened society. I concede he was a colourful character but having a kind of upper crust Jim Davidson was the consort of our head of state has reflected poorly on this country for the best part of 50 years. Time for people to recognise him for what he really was. Not a life we should be celebrating.

....

[french frank]

As far as 'outpourings of grief' are concerned, I know who I think are getting this out of proportion!

[Bryn]

I wonder how much the Beeb is saving through all this simulcasting?

[vinteuil]

I wonder how much the Beeb is saving through all this simulcasting?

... they perhaps think they are saving their reputation as staunchly loyal, with an otherwise suspicious tory administration

.

[LMcD]

Radio 3 is now broadcasting a special sequence of words and music hosted by Petroc Trelawney. Katie Derham will host a further sequence between 6.00 and 8.00 pm. Currently playing: Cantus Arcticus.

[Nick Armstrong]

I wonder how much the Beeb is saving through all this simulcasting?

I also wonder who’s spending it having got the gig to go and do the statutory ‘stand with microphone’ job on Tanna, Vanuatu, to report on the reaction of the late God-Prince’s worshippers...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Philip_Movement

[muzzer]

It’s an interesting chance to take the temperature of the nation, isn’t it? Which is ironic, given that the DoE was, at least as characterised, utterly devoid of self-pity or sentimentality. Obviously the BBC is erring on the side of caution, and that shows you just how scared of the government its management is now.

[LMcD]

Petroc again at 8 p.m. Penny Gore from 1 a.m. to 7 a.m.