So the Queen answered “R U OK” day with an emphatic no.
This is one of those difficult pieces to write because I can understand so many different points of view and I’m firmly in agreement with absolutely none of them… or all of them. I can’t make up my mind. Someone said that if you think people are being disrespectful here, you should hear what the Irish are saying, but if it’s about Charles the Third, that’s just the way they say “third”, so they may not be being disrespectful at all.
Anyway, as I said, I can understand the anger of various people who are saying that the British monarchs have been responsible for the rape and pillage of a large part of the world and the idea that we should be carrying on about the death of a privileged royal who had the good fortune to live into their nineties…
On the other hand, I can understand how the Queen’s death is a shock to some people because like your drunk uncle at Christmas, she seemed to go on forever. Perhaps, her death reminds people of their own mortality. Like when my grandmother died, it’s a shock to have someone who’s always been there, suddenly gone, even though you know that she’s old and it must happen some time in the next few years. It’s still unexpected when the day arrives.
Then there’s the group of people who lap up every column inch of the Royal Family and buy special commemorative, limited edition of two million cups and saucers celebrating some git who’s so far down the chain that one of Phil’s illegitimate children is more likely to claim the throne.
Whatever, I did wonder why there was no other news for a good few days and you’ll be pleased to know that I’m not going to spend any more time dwelling on the Queen. No, not even a satirical piece on the media coverage of every minor detail of her journey from Balmoral to Hollyrood to Buckingham Palace to Westminster Abbey to King’s Landing to Winterfell to… wherever.
No, I’m more interested in King Chuck because, for the first time in seventy years, there’s been a change in our head of state. While this may lead to some scam artists going round to people’s houses and telling them that they’re from the government and that coins with the Queen’s head are no longer legal tender and they must surrender them, and they’ll be issued with a replacement in due course, there could be other significant changes that lead to Auntie Doris smashing her Royal teacups in shock.
There was a question on one website asking if people thought that Charles should become King or whether he should hand it straight over to William. It seems that people have a lot of trouble with the notion that we’re not talking about a democratic institution here, so it really doesn’t matter what we think.
Which brings me to the idea that we’ll be saying goodbye to Charles the Environmentalist. Now, I’m not going to enter into the argument about whether he’s achieved a lot of good or whether he’s just done a lot of virtue-signalling for that large public relations firm of Royals R Us. I’m simply going to make the observation that he’s a whole new generation and it’s possible that he may not feel bound by all the past protocols.
True, he respected the Royal tradition of bonking a mistress behind his wife’s back for a number of years, but unlike others in his family, he actually married her, turning his back on centuries of tradition.
Mr Dutton has been suggesting that it’s inappropriate for King Charles to be against the destruction of the Earth because our monarch is meant to be politically neutral, but the first Charles lost his head and insisted that he didn’t need to listen to the British Parliament, although not in that order. So with a name like Charles, who knows what this Charles will do?
What will the monarchists do if Charles doesn’t become the silent figurehead who just cuts the odd ribbon and opens the odd fete and puts his name to the odd charity? (Although not so odd that it won’t have an office, a website or a plan before getting $18million from the government…) What if he feels that he has a role to play in loudly encouraging the move toward net zero? Which, after all, in Australia, is a bipartisan policy so it’s hardly controversial.
I mean, it’s not like they can demand we elect a new king.
Although it is possible that Scott Morrison had himself secretly sworn in as an alternative king in case something happened.
[textblock style=”7″]
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
[/textblock]
That tongue in your cheek hasn’t punched through yet? I know from whence you come and am in general agreement. I am just hoping that Charles III doesn’t either lose his head (I) or party too hard (II) while the planet sinks.
Ha funny Scotty waiting in the wings, Crown knocked up over the weekend with stuff from Bunnings.
Oh Rossleigh! So many…..
Ok , commentary on ABC, to wit, “what will Charles now do as Monarch?”
Like he hasn’t had 70 years to figure that out? Like he hasn’t made his concerns for the environment clear?
As for Dutton’s comment? The environment IS NOT POLITICS Peter! Understand that! Maybe just say it over and over until the potato begins to sprout? (Still I guess many a potato is grounded in……….)
As for the question, will Charles the 3rd interfere with politics?
Well I thought that was pretty clear from his ascension speech.
On a side note, John Barron pointed out that the other 2 King Charles’s had somewhat dubious careers in the role. One of them being beheaded. 😳
I would like to point out that the only 2 Queen Elizabeths, were both quite strong of character and willing to adapt.
I bear no criticism of QE2. Like her namesake she was prepared to change her moods to meet the current feelings of her subjects. She was born to the role and dedicated her life to the role as was the contemporaneous expectation. Having said that, both QE’s rose to that role by strange circumstance.
QE1 was the only child of Henry the 8th’s second wife Anne Boleyn, who was later beheaded whilst Elizabeth was pretty much on the backburner as no-one at the time knew what to do with an heir now regarded as illegitimate. Everyone else died so she rose to be Queen.
She set the mode for people like Steven Bradbury.
QE2 was the child of a woman who could not ever bear more than 2 children. If Margaret had been a boy there would be no QE2. Such were the constrictions of caesarian childbirth in the 1920”’s.
Elizabeth the 2nd went on to be Princess after her uncle abdicated passing the role of king to his somewhat unprepared younger brother by abdicating in “the name of love”. 🤷🏼♀️
Much of George the 6th’s reign was influenced by his bride Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, the Queen mother.
Her beliefs were quite restrictive, but that’s another story.
Then QE2’s chain smoking father died suddenly in his sleep having shown symptoms of lung cancer for many years. She took the throne at 25.
Her extraordinarily long reign is largely due to a set of occurrences she could not have ordained.
Her early ascension. Her genetic longevity. Her status as the only heir (no males). And, of course, her robust health
Yes! Oh yes!
There are waaaaay too many tributes, memories, histories and so forth about the now late queen.
Not a monarchist but respect the woman born to that role and genuinely seeing it as her duty to perform it to the best of her abilities. Elizabeth the 2nd was well prepared to adapt and change the monarchy as needed, having experienced the trappings of the “head of state and church” role. Charles was born of a different era.
Side note, my daughter believes he will be king for around 15 years in which time he will achieve very little.
As for the direct succession of William? Seriously folks? It ain’t gonna happen. Chuck has waited 70 years for his day in the sun and IMHO he will use it to his finish.
I really do not know how the media will ever likely release it’s tabloid grip on the “royals”.
For mine? I am waiting to see which journo/publication will be game enough to compare the crowds,
Floral tributes, condolence notes and general public dismay at the Queen’s passing with the extraordinary expressions of public grief when Diana was driven to her death and suffered that most mortal of human deaths, by road accident.
Will be interesting to watch.
Some reporting in the UK is alleging that Murdoch media are biding their time, allowing public mourning, before they start mauling Charles on his pro-environmental stances.
If not directly, he’ll be manipulated into making or agreeing with public statements blaming human population for environmental and other issues, deflecting from fossil fuels, energy crisis, US libertarian linked think tanks, Londongrad and the Tories.
I cannot comprehend what all the fuss is about. Betty and her inbred brood have been a background noise all my life but I still have no bloody idea what she or they actually did/do for a living.
The news media is saturated with “respect” and “sadness”, “grief and gratitude”, and enough bullshit to flood a continent. Monarchy and colonialism go hand in glove; both are monstrous anachronisms and should not exist in the 21st Century or civilized society.
King Scomo, he could only wish. Have ignored all media on royal stuff, but did read a short article about Pauline having a bitch about a few aussies wanting to move on.
For the benefit of Rossleigh and his wonderful take on current events:
”The Queen is dead. Long live the Australian Republic!!
Andrew, hug-a-tree Charle$ is well on board with Murdoch and the globalist program. I wouldn’t be surprised if he becomes #1 champion of Climate Change panic in the next few months. There’s lot$ and lot$ of money to be made in Carbon Trading Market$.
Nice Rossleigh. For those interested there are a few contrarian views around. I am disgusted that several nights of 7pm News bulletins were subsumed into the stuttering ABC coverage of some pretty boring television. Edited packages would have been much better. For what it’s worth I think Chas will do the job for about seven years then hand it on, not wanting to make William wait as long as he has.
I am a republican but the queen has worked extra ordinary hard all her life and deserves the accolades.
Charlie has been hanging around since ’52 and her has also worked hardm supporting his obligations to his mother.
He will be a good king for the pommes.
As a republican, I will NEVER vote for a republic till the politicians decide on the plan for a republic and we know what we are voting for.
So Max, NEC and Rossleigh are light on evidence.
When Elizabeth became queen, there were Standard, Austin, Morris, Vauxhall, Hillman, Rover, Rolls Royce, Bentley, Lagonda, M. G., Humber, Triumph, etc, so many British cars available; buit, the queen has been transported in a foreign hearse, to Edinburgh, by Mercedes-Benz. Had the plan been to fly the coffin back to London, in 1952 there were planes available by Avro, Bristol, De Havilland, Vickers, Handley Page, Shorts, many others. So, Ms. Truss (for support) is not useful in saying the late queen was the rock on which modern Britain was founded. In shipbuilding, aircraft, vehicles (Now 12th in the world in passenger vehicles) , trains, Manufactured goods, chemical industries, textiles, etc. The U K has gone down and back, will go further faster, and has a new leadership of no known merit. But greedy, scheming, financial, tax dodging Lords and gentry are doing well. Can we celebrate poverty, unfairness, class division, regional decline, ever deepening snobbery, raving propaganda, a cold, dark, hungry, winter?
Not only the current leadership of zero merit – a pack of dribbling nincompoops, truth be told – but also previous Tory regimes, as well as the Blairite era have all made their incremental contributions to the diminution of the UK, in essence, death by a thousand cuts. Falling and failing environmental standards, by some reckonings the country’s rivers, creeks, streams, ponds, origins… all under extreme stress as a function of pollution, off-farm runoff, animal dung, nitrification… all toxic to pristine freshwater systems.
Amphibian deaths follow, fish & crustaceans too, other aquatic fauna both micro & macro; all victim to the inexorable and unbearable stress placed on their homes & surrounds.
Step onto dry land and into the human realm; Brexit guaranteed to bring nothing positive and generational misery, suffering and hardship to millions of Brits… their resilience sure to be sorely tested in coming years; how was it allowed to happen that a bunch of drooling Tory spiffs spaffed such poisonous policy across the heartland of that once functional island community; more puzzling, how is that that there will be no personal consequences for the actions of that bunch of privileged bratty prat boys.. that they can essentially have an island bonfire, burn down the house, collect their pensions and live lives of squired exclusion free of the hardships they’ve inflicted across the realm?
It’s said that eventually the chickens come home to roost. Perhaps this is Britain’s fate, after its centuries-long adventurism across the planet, its warring militarism, its colonial legacies and brutalities, its commercial exploitation and willingness to pilfer & pinch and rob and steal wherever and whenever opportunity presented itself to these delusional to the manor born holier than thou barbarians. White man’s fate, and not a minute too soon, though spare a thought for the innocents caught up in this ghastly unwinding.
@ wam: No evidence was offered about the passing of Betty Windsor, this was considered common knowledge given the saturation coverage of media grovelling.
Your reticence to move into the politics of the 21st century is fair comment given the way Little Johnnie Howard screwed over the 1999 Referendum question. So far the proposed Albanese LABOR question is being discussed but not yet resolved.
”The Queen is dead. Long live the Australian Republic with an Australian borne Head of State!!”
When scottyfromplanningforthefuture was stil at the helm, HER majesty was still well and good, so i believ our ex pm had himself sworn in as a secret queen.
Oh, he’s a religious type. That couldn’t have happened then, could it.
@ Gangey1959: There could be something in your assertion. Remember Burnum Burnum went to England and claimed all that island for Australian Aborigines. So given Scummo’s dedication to the Aboriginal Cause of better representation, less incarceration for minor crime and there was obviously a cause that would require immediate take-over during the COVID pandemic. Perhaps the Eagle has Landed.
the media scrum is the evidence of what sells. It was certainly repetitive and boring but it showed a hard working dedicated woman. Her life dominated every paper, channel and radio. I accept that she was a woman of her times and therefore apolitical.
(except for GLASGOW, Nov 1 (Reuters) – Britain’s Queen Elizabeth told the United Nations climate change summit on Monday that “the time for words has now moved to the time for action”, as she urged world leaders to think of future generations when negotiating a deal to limit global warming.) and While the Royal Household believes in the longstanding convention that all conversations between Prime Ministers, Governor Generals and The Queen are private, the release of the letters by the National Archives of Australia confirms that neither Her Majesty nor the Royal Household had any part to play in Kerr’s decision to dismiss Whitlam.”.
She has shown herself to be somewhat sexist and racist but has often been used by pollies and rwnj for their own purposes. NEC I have been an atheist and a republican for most of my life. It may be inconsequential to you but I only sang god save the king/queen when the deputy stood next to me with a cane and never stood at the pictures. I have voted against nt statehood and the republic because there was not details as to what the was going to replace the GG. No state voted yes to howard’s republic of the politicians choosing the head of state. I consider the fact that we had no idea of duties, responsibilities and powers assigned to she, he or it. After reading your opinion of pollies, much less phil and blanche etc, it is amazing that you would vote for the ‘a republic’ and let the canberra pollies fill in the details untrammelled by the thought of us having any chance of voting no. Surely, with thoughtless idiots voting yes, that would put our republic as brexit mark two. ps anyone disputing: While the Royal Household believes in the longstanding convention that all conversations between Prime Ministers, Governor Generals and The Queen are private, the release of the letters by the National Archives of Australia confirms that neither Her Majesty nor the Royal Household had any part to play in Kerr’s decision to dismiss Whitlam.”
@ wam: Other Australians with first hand knowledge of the 1975 Dismissal do not share your monarchist view that Betty Windsor was kept ignorant of the John Curr actions against the Whitlam LABOR government.
@ wam: Another insightful comment on the involvement of Betty Windsor in the 1975 Dismissal of the democratically elected Whitlam LABOR government that offended the US CIA.
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australia-has-no-need-for-a-head-of-state-royal-or-not-20220912-p5bhhf.html
@ wam: Jenny Hocking is probably the leading authority on the Dismissal of the Whitlam LABOR government by the US CIA with the approval of the English Crown.
@ wam: More evidence that Curr conspired with Chuckles to sack Whitlam and the LABOR government in 1975.
Surely this is sufficient evidence to question the role of Europe’s most dysfunctional family in Australian politics.