The King's Speech

Rosie51

Volver Here's an impoverished President. You said you'd never seen one? Well here he is:
simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Mujica

Except he's not impoverished from lack of pay, he voluntarily donates 80% of his pay. No country pays its president an impoverished wage.

I'm not sure that's the clinching argument you think it is Rosie51.

volver

The President might be able to actually do something about it, and we wouldn't have to spend millions that could be spent on supporting the population of this country, on watching some religious fella putting his jewelled hat on in a televised ceremony.

Here's an impoverished President. You said you'd never seen one? Well here he is:
simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Mujica

Also, I'd like to point out that the OP asked what we thought of the speech. It's not the Republicans who have decided to make this about systems of government.

Umm, he donated 90% of his Presidential salary, its true. good for him. But don’t pretend he didn’t come from a socially privileged family of European origin and had more than adequate financial resources of his own.

Republicans always seem to focus on the wealth of monarchy whilst ignoring the wealth of a privileged few in Republics.

The dream of equality is only a dream.

I'm not one who regularly watched the Queens Speech watched Charles. I thought on the whole it was a good speech especially coming from St George's Chapel.

volver

Oreo

Hmmm, well I think it comes down to you usually being in the minority with the way you think on every subject and thread Volver but if you don’t care about that, it’s all good.

Nope, don't care.

Don't care that people try to make out I'm an argumentative old so-and-so only doing it for attention either.

😂😂😂

MarilynneT33

I'm not one who regularly watched the Queens Speech watched Charles. I thought on the whole it was a good speech especially coming from St George's Chapel.

Much better wasn’t it, than behind a desk in the Palace?
Maybe he’ll find a different venue for each Christmas speech.

This here Republican doesn't care how much money any head of state was. I think you're projecting there, Lathyrus.

Incidentally, I don't think having a bankrupt farmer for a father and an impoverished Italian emigrant mother counts as being from a socially privileged family, but I could be wrong...

All those of European origin hold socially privileged positions in the society of that country. Bankruptcy is a frequently used ploy to retain wealth.

I think it was the pro-republicans that brought wealth into this debate.

Oh good grief.

Righty ho. I'm sure you're right..

I thought he gave a safe, considered speech...whilst being aware of how fabulously wealthy he is and wondering whether he actually has any real influence to change things.. I seriously doubt thatit will make any difference to the thinking of this government

I thought his speech was very good both in its content and delivery.

My daughter and I didn’t bother watching it. We were happy listening to Christmas songs in her kitchen making the gravy for dinner. Himself, my stepfather and son-in-law all watched it at 3pm. Mostly I think because it was a ‘memorable first’.

I think I’m on the fence really about having a royal family. I don’t give them much thought really. Probably they feel the same about me and mine.

So he said "thank you" to the armed forces, NHS workers and public sector workers. I'm sure that will mean a huge amount to those who are still trying to make ends meet, using food banks and standing on the picket line after being forced to strike. Just like the Tory's clapping did.
And thank you to the religious organisations and the volunteers who feed those in need. Effectively agreeing that it's OK for a society to rely on charities to take proper care of its citizens.
As I said it meant nothing.

Would you have preferred it if he'd not mentioned them at all Glorianny?

Majority of country didn’t see it and won’t. A lot will watch and pay little attention. The patronising idea that we need glib sentiments from a man ripping off the taxpayer and failing to live up to basic standards of public life is nonsense. #NotMyKing

Oh so it looks like #NotMyKing is trending today on Christmas. QE2 was beloved, but apparently KC3 is not. Fascinating to watch from the other side of the pond. The concept of monarchy is thing of fairy tales to me.
👀🍷🍿

Charles is sitting on a huge fortune, most of which is either the result of slavery, unique and unjust tax breaks or the state allowing him and his family multi-million pound income from state assets. He has no business patronising the country like this.

Never really listened to the late Queen's speech so can't make. a comparison but watched this as thought it was an historical moment. I was impressed, I liked the way he showed appreciation to all the emergency workers and volunteers and also the way he included all faiths. Not a royalist by any means but I thought he did a really good job and seemed very sincere.

People can adopt as much of #NotMyKing and similar pat sayings as they like but if they are UK citizens he simply is their king whether they like it or not until the UK monarchy is disestablished.

Ignore him by all means if that floats your boat but he is your king.

I think that's what people don't like about it Baggs.

Like it or not, he is our King. And always will be, whether we like it or not. And his son will be too, and then his son after him...like it or not.

Not a grown up way to run a country is it?

I think KC is going to have a much harder time of it than his mother ever did. She had a legacy of unquestioning support and approval from a couple of generations ,where even questioning the validity of a monarch, was seen as traitorous and unacceptable. She came to the throne at such a young age, that she had no time to " blot her copybook" so to speak. She started with a clean slate in a country eager to build a new future after the hardships of a world war.
It couldn't be more different for Charles. He has the monumental task of establishing his relevance in a society that is openly questioning the concept of monarchy itself. He also has a past that many people see as irredeemable and has the added headache of a country that is facing the worst cost of living and energy crisis's for decades coupled with a government in tatters. He has to overcome all this without being seen as " political" in any way. I think his speech was an attempt at this but it was a failed attempt.

If you want an insight into how Charles really feels about the rest of us, and his own importance, see what he has to say in response to one of his staff seeking promotion.

So… shouldn’t be given positions of authority without working up to it and putting in the effort….

….says hereditary king who only needed to be born to the right mother 😂

What a hypocritical old fart. Get rid of them.

Abolish the monarchy

Grany🤣🤣🤣
You could well be a one of the
hypocritical old farts who also criticise others whilst enjoying the money they have which allows them to come on GN and criticise the RF.
Who knows?

I’m with you Volver! 👍

volver

I think that's what people don't like about it Baggs.

Like it or not, he is our King. And always will be, whether we like it or not. And his son will be too, and then his son after him...like it or not.

Not a grown up way to run a country is it?

I agree with your first two sentences, V, but KC isn't running the country.

The government isn't doing that very well either, more's the shame, but it is able to do far more harm than an unwanted king.

Well I agree with him Grany and Charles has been trained for and working toward this role for the majority of his life.

Baggs

volver

I think that's what people don't like about it Baggs.

Like it or not, he is our King. And always will be, whether we like it or not. And his son will be too, and then his son after him...like it or not.

Not a grown up way to run a country is it?

I agree with your first two sentences, V, but KC isn't running the country.

The government isn't doing that very well either, more's the shame, but it is able to do far more harm than an unwanted king.

The way we run the country defines how we choose our Head of State. What we expect of them, and how much we decide not to have by having a Head of State with no political power. It appears we would rather have a person who holds the office because his mother, grandfather, great grandfather, great-great ...etc, etc did, rather than someone who is able to represent the people of the country and hold the elected government to its promises. And do something about it if that government tries to overstep the mark. Oh, and not be profligate with the country's money because they think we need to see a coronation.

Beautifully crafted with several excellent messages to those who need a bit of recognition for the good they do in this time so full of hate.

The far-right government may not like some of it.

Those who love to hate the Royal Family as heads of state will not like it but were never going to. Theirs is not an argument but an ideology.

Most will be quite happy because the majority have better things to do than come up with new things to hate and no one has offered anything better.