Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
A101 wrote:Interested on people’s thought on whether King Charles should reign until his death or should he step down within say 5-10 to let the Prince William become king.
It seems he has got a much needed bounce but it’s more to do with the Queen than anything else in my opinion
https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-ne ... f085379e27
Kent350787 wrote:The Queen had barely reached her majority when she assumed the throne, and reigned for longer than most of us have been alive. Pretty much any of her known foibles have occured during her reign.
Charles is an elderly man with a "fairytale" wedding and nightmare divorce in his past, as well as marriage to his long-term mistress. Although not the playboy prince that Edward VII was, he assumes the throne in his dotage with a chequered past and even his envoronmental priorities split opinion.
I cannot see any way that he will receive the same suport as his mother.
scbriml wrote:Short answer - no, he will never be as popular as the Queen.
I don’t see any way he abdicates. He’s already hinted that he’ll follow his mother’s example of life-long service.
luckyone wrote:scbriml wrote:Short answer - no, he will never be as popular as the Queen.
I don’t see any way he abdicates. He’s already hinted that he’ll follow his mother’s example of life-long service.
Probably not the worst thing. The Wales aren’t ready.
QF7 wrote:luckyone wrote:scbriml wrote:Short answer - no, he will never be as popular as the Queen.
I don’t see any way he abdicates. He’s already hinted that he’ll follow his mother’s example of life-long service.
Probably not the worst thing. The Wales aren’t ready.
Ready for what? How much preparation is required to greet well-wishers, participate in scripted ceremonies, and read speeches someone else writes?
scbriml wrote:Short answer - no, he will never be as popular as the Queen.
I don’t see any way he abdicates. He’s already hinted that he’ll follow his mother’s example of life-long service.
johns624 wrote:scbriml wrote:Short answer - no, he will never be as popular as the Queen.
I don’t see any way he abdicates. He’s already hinted that he’ll follow his mother’s example of life-long service.
He's wanted the position for so long that he'll never give it up.
journeyperson wrote:In 1901, a line of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (itself a cadet branch of the House of Wettin) succeeded the House of Hanover to the British monarchy with the accession of King Edward VII, son of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. In 1917, the name of the British royal house was changed from the German Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to the English Windsor.
What Elizabeth did over seventy years was strengthen the rather shaky foundations of the Crown through total dedication to her symbolic role as Head of State and Head of the Church. The monarch has no real power and everyone knows that but as an ambassador she won respect and admiration as a person and as the country's figurehead. Backed by over a thousand years of history and the physical symbols of permanence, constancy and solidity in the forms of palaces, castles, lineage and pageantry, the monarch is immeasurably more valuable to the country than a president would be.
All King Charles has to do is follow the example she set and I think he will do that. He could slim down the Civil List a lot without doing any harm. There would probably be brownie points in doing that.