harry and megan

Anniebach

Harry is the only the member of the royal family to publicly criticise his blood family, the Duke of Windsor didn’t.

And here’s your comparison - it’s rather scraping the bottom of the barrel isn’t it to bring a Hitler loving self centred fool in as a comparator to show up the evils of PH ?

vegansrock

Members of the RF don’t have to pass an IQ test to become royals do they - so it’s not surprising many of them aren’t the sharpest tools in the box .

Which is why in a nutshell we shouldn’t have a RF

Ellianne

This is what royal family threads are made of. I am learning something new here, thanks.
Eventually as time moves on everything becomes history, just that.
I still think we can be angry with any one of them for the bad way they behaved, however great or small the upset they caused.

I think a bit more nuance might be order ???

....do some of you think Hitler only started being nasty to Jewish people in 1939.

Well I don’t know what others think, but I am most certainly very well aware of the fact that Hitler was ‘nasty’ to Jewish people from 1933, when he was made Chancellor, and indeed from well before that in his speeches. I realise that Hitler was able to pull Germany out of the terrible recession and unemployment that it was suffering, but he did this by dispossessing Jewish people of their incomes, property, rights, and citizenship, and by turning the economy in Germany into a war machine. He was preparing for war from 1933 and and in building tanks, arms, and roads, he was able to ensure full employment, so long as you weren’t Jewish. He encouraged Jewish emigration at first, but later clamped down on this, and later still, in 1941 at the Wannsee conference, after Jews had been suffering terrible persecution for some years, the Final Solution was conceived, which resulted in the deaths of some six million Jews. The killing of Jewish people had already started in various eastern countries that had been conquered, via bullets rather than gas chambers, and then the idea of mass killings in gas chambers was conceived and enacted in Poland, as Hitler didn’t want gas chambers operating in Germany, although he was happy for concentration camps to be in Germany, and indeed the first concentration camp was established near Munich, and named Dachau, in 1933.
So yes, I am aware that Hitler was plotting against the Jews for many years, and in particular, following him being made Chancellor in 1933. In fact, the burning of books by Jewish authors, or others considered subversive, started in 1933. I have visited the spot in Berlin where the books were burned.

Anniebach
Harry is the only the member of the royal family to publicly criticise his blood family, the Duke of Windsor didn’t.
And here’s your comparison - it’s rather scraping the bottom of the barrel isn’t it to bring a Hitler loving self centred fool in as a comparator to show up the evils of PH ?

No suzziewoozie no barrel scraping, just comparing two men who chose to leave their blood family and what they did to their blood family after they left.

Will you reply to my question ? Has any of your loved family
members spoken publicly about private family affairs, not
difficult, a yes or no, thank you

maddy I was (badly ) trying to make the point that when D of W went to cuddle up to Adolf, it was well known what was happening to Jewish people and D of W had no damn right to go on that visit - he was just an abdicated king. Yet some posters tried to whitewash him by saying he was trying to help. He was an utter disgrace and to try and put him in a positive light vis a vis PH because he never publicly spoke out against the RF is just ludicrous.

Will you reply to my question ? Has any of your loved family
members spoken publicly about private family affairs, not
difficult, a yes or no, thank you

No annie I damn well won’t - it’s NOYB and utterly irrelevant anyway to the points in question.

suzie thank you, I’m glad you’ve said that, because I began to think I must be wrong. I admitted I don’t know much about the DofW but I do know about Nazi Germany. I used the term ‘cosying up’ which was picked up on, and I started to think I had used the wrong term, but I probably didn’t. I do understand why some posters might think Hitler was a socialist and did good things for the German people in providing jobs, and getting that terrible inflation down, but at the very same time, the Jewish people were being persecuted, and deprived of their livelihoods, and citizenship. The euthanasia programme didn’t start until 1939 ( I had thought it started earlier, but not so) and finished in 1941, and so we can conclude that it was expressly the Jewish people who were so terribly persecuted from 1933. This was known about, but other countries, including Britain, declined to offer more immigration to the Jews who were trying to escape Germany and Austria.

At the risk of being branded a Harry Supporter in all future threads..

On one hand we have a weak man who gave up all his responsibilities and landed his brother (a blood relative) in a role he was unsuited for, probably hastening his death. A man who thought his female (blood) relatives were old hags and who thought Hitler was on the right track. A man who is famed for his concern for poorer people but doesn't seem to have done anything about it despite his wealth and power.

On the other, we have a serving soldier who was by all accounts good at it and had to give it up when his cover was blown. One who started the Invictus Games and appears for charities today. One who is trying to protect his wife and children in the face of the harshest criticism from people who have never met him, but who think he's upset our own dear Queen.

I'll choose Prince Harry please.

I've made a rod for my own back, haven't I?

maddyone I do understand why some posters might think Hitler was a socialist and did good things for the German people in providing jobs, and getting that terrible inflation down
I don't think any posters on Gransnet think Hitler was a good socialist, although undoubtedly some people did at the time.

suziewoozie

Callistemon

That confirms the view that some hold I think. That he was well-meaning but weak and married a strong, dominant woman. He was anxious that she should be accepted and received with the status he thought she deserved and which had not happened here.
The Nazi regime took advantage of that and welcomed them both, which he welcomed naively without realising the full implications of his actions.

??? Thick and entitled more like - thought he knew best. Really just wanted to go to give WS a sort of ‘state’ visit. Nice how his apologists forgive his utter self centredness and stupidity even though it meant him giving a seal of approval to what was already well known to be an evil regime. Or do some of you think Hitler only started bring nasty to Jewish people in 1939?

Exactly what I said but different phrases.
How strange that your post sounds as if you disagree with me:

He was anxious that she should be accepted and received with the status he thought she deserved and which had not happened here.
Really just wanted to go to give WS a sort of ‘state’ visit. Nice how his apologists forgive his utter self centredness and stupidity even

Yes, not that bright but weak too. Wallis was a far stronger personality than him.

The royal princes had a domineering father which set the pattern for a trait of submissiveness.
Interesting that marriages to strong women steered his and his brother's paths in life.

I think most people know quite a lot about the rise of Hitler and the dangers he presented.

Harry should probably have stayed in the army where he had a role and felt useful. He could have been a bit like the York girls maybe, working but doing the odd royal duty, or supporting some charities, particularly those to do with the forces. A young man in his twenties, now thirties, needs a role in life in my opinion. The Invictus Games is brilliant, but probably not enough. He was unlikely to ever be king, so probably needed his own role. Most people do. Harry’s not any different in that respect. I don’t think Netflix and so on will give him the role he needs. Although I don’t condone what he’s done, I’m feel a bit sorry for him in that he hasn’t got a clearly defined role. Maybe the DofW was the same once he had abdicated.

I cannot feel sorry for him-Harry- not having a clearly defined role as he has had plenty of time to figure things out and he has plenty of people to help him make plans or rather he did.

I noticed that the new book cover for Finding Freedom includes a subtitle of the "Making of a Modern Royal Family" I thought this was not allowed. They LEFT the Royal Family and were told not to cash in on being Royal weren't they?

From a historical point of view it appears that the Royal Family rebrands itself after each crisis and moves the firm in a different direction. I'm guessing their aim is to limit any damage done and to relaunch the firm under a new guise. Charles won't have many years in which to achieve this and anyway, The Queen has left him a pretty clean slate. William might have a more difficult task. His wife doesn't look like she will rock any boats, but I imagine her influence might be quietly strong. Sadly, Harry and Meghan could have had meaningful input, but more and more they will become excluded and of less importance. Only time will tell and not until there is a gap of a good 50 years are events are seen for what they are.

are events are seen for what they really are.

pinkquartz in my opinion, that title ‘Making of a Modern Royal Family’ is totally inappropriate, given the circumstances, and stated aims, of Harry and Meghan leaving the royal family. Of course, Harry can’t throw off his actual family, anymore than Meghan can hers, but having said they were leaving to be independent, I find it difficult to see how such a title is not trading on their royal connections. As the Queen told them, they have to be fully in, or fully out, there is no way to be both in and out.

But, and this is crucial, a royal can be in the armed forces and still do the odd royal duty. Why? Because the armed forces serve our country, and are not trading on royal connections in order to make money.

Harry can rebrand himself, or even reinvent himself, it is what celebrities do with the help of image makers (plenty of them in LA). Meghan is used to that kind of thing, it will be second nature for her. Harry's provenance will become less and less important. The only hope for them is that they are skilful enough to keep themselves relevant because let's face it 40+ is probably not the greatest age in life to be making a big name in the celebrity industry.

Harry should probably have stayed in the army where he had a role and felt useful.
Wasn't one of the problems that he didn't actually have a role and wasn't permitted to do any active service as he wanted?

I would imagine the title is necessary because if he returns for any ceremonial occasion it helps put him in the right place for his rank, without it they'd all be arguing where he should go.

maddyone

^BTW , I’ve read that resulting in bringing in Hitler into the conversation is a sign you know you’ve lost the credibility of your position.^

Haha Namsnanny that’s me done for then

?? maddyone dont take it to heart, they also say if we stay in conversation long enough we always refer to Jesus too!
I'm not sure if I was this or one of the other R threads, but the devil was referred to, so I suppose it wont be long.?

Alegrias1

At the risk of being branded a Harry Supporter in all future threads..

On one hand we have a weak man who gave up all his responsibilities and landed his brother (a blood relative) in a role he was unsuited for, probably hastening his death. A man who thought his female (blood) relatives were old hags and who thought Hitler was on the right track. A man who is famed for his concern for poorer people but doesn't seem to have done anything about it despite his wealth and power.

On the other, we have a serving soldier who was by all accounts good at it and had to give it up when his cover was blown. One who started the Invictus Games and appears for charities today. One who is trying to protect his wife and children in the face of the harshest criticism from people who have never met him, but who think he's upset our own dear Queen.

I'll choose Prince Harry please.

I've made a rod for my own back, haven't I?

No you havent made a rod for your own back, but you have cherry picked the points of your argument to polarise it!

Ellianne

Harry can rebrand himself, or even reinvent himself, it is what celebrities do with the help of image makers (plenty of them in LA). Meghan is used to that kind of thing, it will be second nature for her. Harry's provenance will become less and less important. The only hope for them is that they are skilful enough to keep themselves relevant because let's face it 40+ is probably not the greatest age in life to be making a big name in the celebrity industry.

But lets be fair here. He is doing so at the expense of his family.
It is a classic estrangement situation.

It was the Taliban leaders in Afghanistan who pretty much put paid to Harry's military career. They wanted his head. That's why once again he had to reinvent himself and re channel his energies. With some success.

But lets be fair here. He is doing so at the expense of his family.
Absolutely, as we were saying at the start of this thread. He is manipulating things to suit.

Isn't that what happened at the funeral, the argument over uniforms and medals and who stood where?
That is why they all wore morning dress.
They are Duke and Duchess of Sussex, the title the Queen bestowed and could have withdrawn but didn't.
They are not, and unlikely now to be, their Royal Highnesses.
They are not a'Modern Royal Family' but that is all they have to sell themselves.
Very vulgar.