British Monarchy

[bloombergforpresident]

After the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, where does it go? Any chance Prince Charles chooses not be crowned (with the trouble over Camilla's role) and proceed directly to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge?)

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

After the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, where does it go? Any chance Prince Charles chooses not be crowned (with the trouble over Camilla's role) and proceed directly to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge?)

I assume you've meant Charles declining to assume the throne, right?

Coronation is not the same as assuming the throne. It's being held some time after the accession. For example, Edward VIII reigned for little under a year, abdicating before he was to be crowned. Edward VII's coronation was delayed due to an emergency operation, but he was already the King. Elizabeth II herself was not crowned until a year and four months after succeeding her father.

As of your question, I don't know how such refusal to assume the throne would work after Elizabeth's reign is over.

[ingemann]

After the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, where does it go? Any chance Prince Charles chooses not be crowned (with the trouble over Camilla's role) and proceed directly to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge?)

I don't think he would abdicate, but the question is whether he survive long enough to be crowned.

[Vega]

This is so stupid. The succession to the British crown isn't based on popularity. Charles won't abdicate and will reign some day.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

incidentally a lot of polls suggest the British people would quite like the crown to skip a head, suggesting a lot of Brits don't really understand their own monarchy...

I think he would have to be shoved, rather than voluntarily give up the throne - he does indeed want to be king. The only potential threat is being ensnared in some manner of scandal.

(abdication is far less accepted in the British monarchy than it is on the continent.

[politicus]

incidentally a lot of polls suggest the British people would quite like the crown to skip a head, suggesting a lot of Brits don't really understand their own monarchy...

I think he would have to be shoved, rather than voluntarily give up the throne - he does indeed want to be king. The only potential threat is being ensnared in some manner of scandal.

(abdication is far less accepted in the British monarchy than it is on the continent.

Well, it is frowned upon in a lot of continental monarchies as well. It is more a matter of national tradition than Britain vs. the Continent. At least you have had an abdication in the modern era, we have only had one all together and that was back in 1146, after that they stayed on to the end - even with an insane king.

I have always thought of abdicating monarchs as "that weird Dutch thing", but you can find 1-2 in most monarchies if you go back far enough.

[Simfan34]

After the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, where does it go? Any chance Prince Charles chooses not be crowned (with the trouble over Camilla's role) and proceed directly to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge?)

That would require Parliament to get involved and would be very messy.

[Vega]

After the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, where does it go? Any chance Prince Charles chooses not be crowned (with the trouble over Camilla's role) and proceed directly to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge?)

That would require Parliament to get involved and would be very messy.

Parliament couldn't do anything either. Unless somehow they amended the succession rules to bar Prince Charles alone.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

After the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, where does it go? Any chance Prince Charles chooses not be crowned (with the trouble over Camilla's role) and proceed directly to the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge?)

That would require Parliament to get involved and would be very messy.

Parliament couldn't do anything either. Unless somehow they amended the succession rules to bar Prince Charles alone.

Parliament still has to consent to the accession.

But long story short, barring some health issue (but considering Charles seems very fit and healthy for a man of 66 and his father is still happily chogging along at 93... unless the Queen lives to 110 - actually, even then, Charles will be 88 and probably still with us.

As for the Camilla thing, as time wears on, the (faux-) pearl clutchers who continue to freak out about Diana... will become a bigger minority than they are now. The plan is that Camilla will assume the title Princess Consort (ie Queen in all but name) when Charles ascends, but I think (rightly so), that there will be more noise for her to assume the title of Queen, as is her right by marriage and Constitutional convention.

[Simfan34]

The only way Prince Charles could effectively "renounce the throne" was if he converted to Catholicism, which would result in his immediate ejection from the line of succession. But that won't happen. Polls show that people have (finally) dropped the idea of skipping over the PoW and going straight to Prince William.

As Polnut noted, the sentimentalist Diana fanatics will eventually become  non-entities and I think Camilla will be Queen without much griping- by the next decade you'll have two generations of people, some pushing 40, who will have no real memory of who Diana was or while the Duchess of Cornwall is reviled by some.

But I can see Prince Charles abdicating if he's still around as William is in his 50s, as to ensure he has a good 30-40 year reign. I imagine royals, generally speaking, will start having children later, after 35 or so, to ensure longer reigns.

[Famous Mortimer]

I understood wanting to skip to William when he was cute and 12 and his mom had just died and he had a lot of sympathy.

Now that he's a like 30 and already turning into a balding troll, there's not much point though.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Why does everyone hate Charles anyway? Not that I give a sh*t about this monarchial fluff, obviously.

[ingemann]

Why does everyone hate Charles anyway? Not that I give a sh*t about this monarchial fluff, obviously.

Because Diana was better at the whole PR thingie in the start, and then she died and became the Holy Blessed Virgin Saint, making any counter PR campaign against her impossible.

It's really interesting, mostly because you can see how the royal houses in the rest of Europe have learned a lot from it. As example Prince Joachim of Denmark's ex-wife countess Alexandra (whose youngest son with Joachim look a lot like her new husband) get de facto a large annual bribe so that she's doesn't say anything paid by the Danish tax payers of course (no I'm not bitter).

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

But I can see Prince Charles abdicating if he's still around as William is in his 50s, as to ensure he has a good 30-40 year reign. I imagine royals, generally speaking, will start having children later, after 35 or so, to ensure longer reigns.

That would be quite sensible.

Two of the long-ruling monarchs, Victoria and Elizabeth II, gave birth to their heirs at 22, which. Yet, Edward VII had to wait for 59 years before succeeding his mother (and subsequently ruled for less than decade), while Charles is still waiting his turn for over sixty years.

Of course, to marry and have children young was a "standard" at those times, but nowdays it seems to change.

[Oakvale]

Hopefully

[Simfan34]

Why does everyone hate Charles anyway? Not that I give a sh*t about this monarchial fluff, obviously.

Because Diana was better at the whole PR thingie in the start, and then she died and became the Holy Blessed Virgin Saint, making any counter PR campaign against her impossible.

It's really interesting, mostly because you can see how the royal houses in the rest of Europe have learned a lot from it. As example Prince Joachim of Denmark's ex-wife countess Alexandra (whose youngest son with Joachim look a lot like her new husband) get de facto a large annual bribe so that she's doesn't say anything paid by the Danish tax payers of course (no I'm not bitter).

I'm curious: she is Chinese, how was that received in Denmark?

[politicus]

Why does everyone hate Charles anyway? Not that I give a sh*t about this monarchial fluff, obviously.

Because Diana was better at the whole PR thingie in the start, and then she died and became the Holy Blessed Virgin Saint, making any counter PR campaign against her impossible.

It's really interesting, mostly because you can see how the royal houses in the rest of Europe have learned a lot from it. As example Prince Joachim of Denmark's ex-wife countess Alexandra (whose youngest son with Joachim look a lot like her new husband) get de facto a large annual bribe so that she's doesn't say anything paid by the Danish tax payers of course (no I'm not bitter).

I'm curious: she is Chinese, how was that received in Denmark?

It is perfectly uncontroversial to be Chinese in Denmark. They are considered a model minority. The Danish uneasiness towards foreigners is not based on skin colour, but on people having alien norms such as "excessive" commitment to religion, dominant macho-style masculinity and a strong concept of honour - especially if based on sexual chastity/modesty.

Alexandra was widely admired as a sophisticated international businesswoman and was a bit of a style icon + she managed to learn Danish in record time. Her public profile and popularity is of course much lower now.

Also she may look Chinese, but has an Austrian mother and British paternal grandmother, so she is 3/4 European. As you can see her two sisters look more Caucasian.

[Simfan34]

I see. They must not like us Americans, I imagine.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Hopefully

I was awaiting its arrival in the thread.

[politicus]

I see. They must not like us Americans, I imagine.

Most Americans would be well within what is considered acceptable in Denmark. We think US mainstream norms about sex and nudity are very prudish and ridiculous, but that is mostly something we find funny. Evangelical Southerners would become unpopular if they for some strange reason decided to emigrate en masse to Denmark and some US men would have to tone down their masculinity to fit in, but in general Danes have a positive attitude towards Americans.

[Simfan34]

I don't mean to derail the thread- we can take this elsewhere if need be- but I'm intrested as to what exactly you mean by "masculinity" and Danish conceptions of how much of it is appropriate. I'm sure you don't expect men to wear dresses or anything but I am curious as to how they differ from ours.

[Murica!]

Hopefully

Mostly this, but only the "old" ones the rest just should get dismissed.

[politicus]

Hopefully

Mostly this, but only the "old" ones the rest just should get dismissed.

Ageist!

[Famous Mortimer]

Why does everyone hate Charles anyway? Not that I give a sh*t about this monarchial fluff, obviously.

Because Diana was better at the whole PR thingie in the start, and then she died and became the Holy Blessed Virgin Saint, making any counter PR campaign against her impossible.

It's really interesting, mostly because you can see how the royal houses in the rest of Europe have learned a lot from it. As example Prince Joachim of Denmark's ex-wife countess Alexandra (whose youngest son with Joachim look a lot like her new husband) get de facto a large annual bribe so that she's doesn't say anything paid by the Danish tax payers of course (no I'm not bitter).

I'm curious: she is Chinese, how was that received in Denmark?

It is perfectly uncontroversial to be Chinese in Denmark. They are considered a model minority. The Danish uneasiness towards foreigners is not based on skin colour, but on people having alien norms such as "excessive" commitment to religion, dominant macho-style masculinity and a strong concept of honour - especially if based on sexual chastity/modesty.

Alexandra was widely admired as a sophisticated international businesswoman and was a bit of a style icon + she managed to learn Danish in record time. Her public profile and popularity is of course much lower now.

Also she may look Chinese, but has an Austrian mother and British paternal grandmother, so she is 3/4 European. As you can see her two sisters look more Caucasian.

Those sound like the reasons a liberal might not like Muslim immigrants. Do your really think those are the concerns of the people who vote for the Danish People's Party? Legit question.

[ingemann]

Those sound like the reasons a liberal might not like Muslim immigrants. Do your really think those are the concerns of the people who vote for the Danish People's Party? Legit question.

Yes to large extent, yes there's people who vote DPP because of "Vienna 1683" and "the eastern hordes" kind of stuff. But most really vote DPP because of immigration issues (thhere are some who for other reasons) specific vote for the party, because the Muslim immigrants behaviour rub them the wrong way.

... and it's really in many ways we see these cultural crashes, from personal space (Danes have a large intimate and personal space, Middle Easterners ... doesn't), child raising*, honour**, even how social mores like looking each others in eyes differ*** and the differing social, political and religious views doesn't make anything better.

These things are not the fault of anybody, but it means that when a Dane meet a Middle Eastern immigrant, they usual get a impression of that person as rude and dishonest, while the Middle Easterner get a view of the Dane as cold and arrogant.

Of course many of the Danish behavioral cues have been adopted by the children of immigrants, at least the ones who do well.

*Here's the problem that Danes believe to set up borders for children, which slowly become removed as they grow up, while the most common immigrants groups, believe in letting children have a lot of freedom when they're young, only to set growing limits of duties to the family up as they grow up.

**Danes as individual tend not to care what strangers think of them (mostly because strangers don't mean a lot to Danes), while Middle Eastern types (especially Arabs) tend to fear ridicule (which is why we see the reaction we do on the whole Muhammed cartoons).

***Keeping one eyes away from the others or his face, is a sign of respect to a social superior in much of the Middle East, while it's sign of dishonesty for a Dane.