Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

caraher

(6,356 posts)
7. The best explanation I've heard so far...
Mon Mar 8, 2021, 01:29 AM
Mar 2021

Last edited Mon Mar 8, 2021, 02:29 AM - Edit history (1)

An English friend who is not at all a fan of the royal family still considers the fact that they are (as you say) "a completely unremarkable lot" is a virtue in the figurehead business, because in his view the alternative we have results in an unhealthy mix of politics with ceremonial roles. So if you have a king or queen who is nobody special but knows how to smile and wave and can cut ribbons at the opening, you can have events where folks by and large just share in whatever national pride their symbolic presence offers, while with a first lady/gentleman (someday soon, right?) emotions will be more tied up with the political agenda of the spouse, detracting from the unifying symbolic value.

(It's a funny thing to hear because he rips the royals constantly; he just thinks having politicians and their spouses play ceremonial roles is functionally worse.)

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

And misogyny Walleye Mar 2021 #1
Good point. Popcorn 51 Mar 2021 #2
It's so obviously racism. The firm has screwed this up so badly... brush Mar 2021 #3
I would agree except that Kate Middleton hasn't been savaged by the press. RandySF Mar 2021 #6
A lot of racism in enhanced by some misogyny. Also that she's not British Walleye Mar 2021 #13
Another lesson, that royalism is an anachronism and a racket? UTUSN Mar 2021 #4
I find British royalty to be a total enigma. Sogo Mar 2021 #5
The best explanation I've heard so far... caraher Mar 2021 #7
That's good insight. Mr.Bill Mar 2021 #8
Fortunately, England has never had that kind of problem with a king. Beartracks Mar 2021 #9
Not recently, anyway. Mr.Bill Mar 2021 #10
The queen has no powers to govern, so he would have had less power than he had here. Pongo Mar 2021 #14
No, but he would still have had the power Mr.Bill Mar 2021 #20
Once Charles is in charge they'll be even more unremarkable. dem4decades Mar 2021 #12
I think the same. Not a particularly talented bunch. Buckeyeblue Mar 2021 #15
Just cannot fathom why they want Deminpenn Mar 2021 #11
Attention. tavernier Mar 2021 #17
I have to wonder along with you. They put the one book out to tell their side supposedly, so I Pongo Mar 2021 #18
Think your assessment is probably correct Deminpenn Mar 2021 #19
The world has been speaking for and speculating about them since day 1 Lucinda Mar 2021 #23
There was a book telling their side, correct? Deminpenn Mar 2021 #24
This message was self-deleted by its author maryellen99 Mar 2021 #16
Well, kind of it does. They had the $$$ to pick up and buy a $14M mansion in the US aikoaiko Mar 2021 #21
Appears to be true treestar Mar 2021 #22
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The valuable lesson of th...»Reply #7