Will the UK accept King Charles III

Just a curious Yank with an inquiring mind.

It will take some time for the queens death to settle. When it does how do you feel the people of the UK
will accept King Charles? I've already seen a lot of blowback, at least from across the pond. Am I just seeing the American version
of this, or is this the sentiment there too? Did the royal family "die" with the queen?


I've also seen a lot of countries around the world celebrating the queens death, and also wanting their stuff back, like
the Koh-i-Noor Diamond. I don't think they are going to be so cordial to the new king. I saw a clip with people yelling "Pedo, Pedo, Pedo" at the queens
funeral to Prince Andrew. Then of course there is all the gossip and scandal regarding Meghan and Harry.

a reply to: JAGStorm

My take is Charles has been raised since birth for this job.

Could anyone else, entering a job, be more experienced on what needs to be done?

As I've understood it over the years, sentiment is not his strong suit.

My question is: Can he find the delicate balance without too much upheaval?

I think he's already been accepted. The Brits recognize which side their bread is buttered on. They have a massive tourist industry.

a reply to: Annee

My question is: Can he find the delicate balance without too much upheaval?

From what i'm seeing not really.
Also because he was raised since birth for the job, maybe that makes him the worst. He won't have fresh ideas, or be in touch with what the people really need. I think the Queen was good at being what people needed at the time they needed. Can't say if it was geniune or not, but she was able to do it. He doesn't seem to have that "showmanship" empathy, or whatever you want to call it.

most like myself have been sceptical ogf him, thinking he'll be a king of extinction rebellion green king with globalist values..

quite pleasantly surprised we've seen a shift from faiths to faith..

While there are people who care a lot , for the majority of people it's much less of a big deal than people outwith the UK might think.

a reply to: JAGStorm

The royals are hugely popular across the UK still

I think that is overwhelmingly obvious, for good reason i do genuinely subscribe to both very left leaning tabloids and media, including very conservative right leaning media to ensure a healthy balance and purposely not entrap myself in echo chambers, and to me it appeasers extremely in favor nationwide, probably 90% positive in both these spheres

It doesn't really matter what the 3rd world says or cries about because they'll never be anything other than a 3rd world, or a handful of extreme right or left tankies because they're a tiny insignificant fringe minority and always will be

I think all their tantrums has done is made the vast majority of Brits even more sure that the Royals are still an important part of British culture, history and identity and those who hate it and hate us remind us of how important it is

I guess the royals for the UK would be like the USA equivalent of trying to repeal and remove the 2nd amendment? its not happening its part of your identity PERIOD

However, i don't believe Charles should be King, he should consider a very short reign hes not exactly popular even with royalists, i wouldn't describe myself as a royalist either TBH, just a traditionalist who thinks losing the royals would be a loss to British culture

Most people who support the royals really just see them as just that, they think its good for tourism and something rather fairy tale and romantic about it all, absolutely nobody feels they're oppressive and ruling in anyway. its just a soap almost

Unless you have a chip on your shoulders and there are some small extremist enclaves/groups in the UK but they're very very minuscule and backwards unhinged people, smalls groups like the racist hate group BLM, Scottish/Irish IRA terrorist sympathizers mostly in Glasgow, and a handful in Liverpool where Irish immigration was quite large and failed to integrate, generations of people who hate the UK but bothered to move here to live because its oppressive or something?

a reply to: VierEyes

i think it made the difference that he went out of his way to confirm his position on a number of sticking points.. from his position on faith through to his charitable bits ie the bits many thought he use to start interfering in politics..

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: Annee

My question is: Can he find the delicate balance without too much upheaval?

From what i'm seeing not really.
Also because he was raised since birth for the job, maybe that makes him the worst. He won't have fresh ideas, or be in touch with what the people really need. I think the Queen was good at being what people needed at the time they needed. Can't say if it was geniune or not, but she was able to do it. He doesn't seem to have that "showmanship" empathy, or whatever you want to call it.

I agree.

I liked Elizabeth because she did take her position seriously. But she is from a different era.

Charles has never been likable -- as far as I can tell.

But they don't really have that much legislative power anymore -- do they?

a reply to: Annee

People who i know, aren't really bothered by the royalty. They're just there and don't really impact our lives.

Personally..... i'm of the opinion people who are 'royalty haters' are just jealous. They'd be quite happy to inherit a fortune from their parents whether it be cash or a house etc, but object to that happening to others. The Crown is a 'hand-me-down' thing.

Charles can be quite out spoken at times which might cause him problems now he has the crown. He needs to be very careful if he wants to be as well thought of as his ma-mar.

Prince 'Andrew' - bit of a tosser, many have laughed that he wanted a royal job and has been given charge of Corgis.

Meghan and Harry..... Harry, I think he's 'pussy-whipped'. I don't think Meghan has grasped what it is to be a Royal. Plenty of families have their fair share of skeletons in the cupboard, the Windsors no different. I think she should shut the f#ck up, get along and do something constructive with her life.

a reply to: TritonTaranis

I guess the royals for the UK would be like the USA equivalent of trying to repeal and remove the 2nd amendment

to my American relatives I always frame them as being like the stars and stripes in terms of the embodiment of ideals and in terms of always being there..

a reply to: JAGStorm

The general public will accept Charles as King the rest of us have no choice , or much less care TBH.

I believe Charles will be a short term King , perhaps 10 years then he will move aside for Bill and his wife.

The thing is Charles doesn't want to be King , but don't tell anyone.

a reply to: JAGStorm

If he keeps his nose out of politics and doesn't continue preaching his eco warrior stuff he'll be at worst tolerated and at best respected.
He has big shoes to fill.....

He seems determined to keep Andrew out of things and I get the impression he won't be returning his former titles to him so that will be a good thing.

The jury is out, we'll give him time.

originally posted by: MCurns
a reply to: Annee

People who i know, aren't really bothered by the royalty. They're just there and don't really impact our lives.

How much does it cost to keep the Royalty?

Does the offset of tourism benefit enough to keep the Royals?

As far as Meghan goes -- how can any American adjust to Royal British protocols?

And as we learned from Diana and Sarah -- "they" don't offer much help in learning. There seems to be kind of an arrogance -- "if you don't know -- you don't belong here".

For Harry and Meghan -- I just hope they live a long life in a happy marriage.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Charles had already made it clear in the past he wants to reduce or get rid of none working royals when he becomes monarch, which I think will go a long way with the British public and also reduce the "cost" of keeping them.
I haven't seen the "blowback" and the Queens death has been covered a lot by the 4 main channels, a few have rightfully booed Andrew and a couple of Scots called out for independance but other than that I haven't seen any real displays of disrespect or hate.
I was also suprised by how respectful the Irish have been in all honesty.

I agree with what other posters are saying, they're just there and have been part of British culture and history for around a 1000 years on and off. They're good for tourism, and the British "Brand" around the world.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
Just a curious Yank with an inquiring mind.

It will take some time for the queens death to settle. When it does how do you feel the people of the UK
will accept King Charles? I've already seen a lot of blowback, at least from across the pond. Am I just seeing the American version
of this, or is this the sentiment there too? Did the royal family "die" with the queen?


I've also seen a lot of countries around the world celebrating the queens death, and also wanting their stuff back, like
the Koh-i-Noor Diamond. I don't think they are going to be so cordial to the new king. I saw a clip with people yelling "Pedo, Pedo, Pedo" at the queens
funeral to Prince Andrew. Then of course there is all the gossip and scandal regarding Meghan and Harry.

There's pretty much no actual blowback on the streets, it's a handful of people with over zealous media coverage.

The people accepted him 20 years ago, in fact there had been calls for QEII to abdicate so that he could be king.

always worth pointing out that Charles iii came as a surprise as he intimated he'll be a George.. the last one to try and be charlie3 was the jacobite Bonnie prince charlie..

originally posted by: MCurns
a reply to: Annee



Personally..... i'm of the opinion people who are 'royalty haters' are just jealous. They'd be quite happy to inherit a fortune from their parents whether it be cash or a house etc, but object to that happening to others. The Crown is a 'hand-me-down' thing.

If there wasn't such a divide between rich and poor, people would be less jealous and see their wealth and title as simply as hand me downs. I think it's the financial supports given to the royals, out of taxpayers money, that makes people angry when the average person is barely making ends meet.

The monarchy now is entirely symbolic and serves no purpose in protecting or promoting their countries so perhaps it is time that they refinance some of their vast land and material holdings and create their own income. They have the means to do this unlike most people. It would allow them to move forward with dignity and respect, protecting their lineage that they find so important. Maybe they could breed corgis?

a reply to: Annee

Its estimated that the cost of The Royal Family comes to about £1.30 per person a year.
Obviously tourism offsets a great deal of the cost.

Its not really the cost that is an issue to some but rather the principle.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: JAGStorm

If he keeps his nose out of politics and doesn't continue preaching his eco warrior stuff he'll be at worst tolerated and at best respected.
He has big shoes to fill.....

He seems determined to keep Andrew out of things and I get the impression he won't be returning his former titles to him so that will be a good thing.

The jury is out, we'll give him time.

Gosh you know what, i hadn't thought about this

If Charles starts getting involved in politics

Its almost certainly all over