• Sibbo
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -39 months ago

    Is this good or bad news? I don’t know much about the UK, but I thought he was kinda unpopular.

    • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝
      link
      fedilink
      English
      199 months ago

      I want to see the monarchy abolished but don’t wish him personally any great ill will. He’s more of a meddler in affairs of state than his mother and has been nonce-adjacent too many times for me to trust his judgement but this brings me no joy - too many friends getting cancer at the moment.

    • Hyperreality
      link
      fedilink
      169 months ago

      He’s not hated, certainly not hated enough for people to wish he dies of cancer.

      He’s less popular than his mother, but that’s mainly because people are simply ambivalent about him.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        59 months ago

        I can’t think of anyone I’d wish to die of cancer. I watched my father become a shell of a man while cancer took him, I wouldn’t wish that on anyone.

        Really, I wouldn’t wish anyone dead, but definitely not of cancer. What a horrible way to go.

        Fuck cancer.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      149 months ago

      Generally it’s considered bad when people have cancer.

      The monarchy has no real power, and they’re no worse at wealth hoarding than any other billionaire, so it’s vaguely uncouth to be happy he has cancer.

      • @IchNichtenLichten
        link
        English
        189 months ago

        The monarchy has no real power

        "The Queen successfully lobbied the government to change a draft law in order to conceal her “embarrassing” private wealth from the public, according to documents discovered by the Guardian.

        A series of government memos unearthed in the National Archives reveal that Elizabeth Windsor’s private lawyer put pressure on ministers to alter proposed legislation to prevent her shareholdings from being disclosed to the public.

        Following the Queen’s intervention, the government inserted a clause into the law granting itself the power to exempt companies used by “heads of state” from new transparency measures.

        The arrangement, which was concocted in the 1970s, was used in effect to create a state-backed shell corporation which is understood to have placed a veil of secrecy over the Queen’s private shareholdings and investments until at least 2011."

        https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/07/revealed-queen-lobbied-for-change-in-law-to-hide-her-private-wealth

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          79 months ago

          Aight. I meant more like “the monarchy can’t order the military to detain people, or unilaterally pass decrees against the will of the people”.

          Asking parliament to pass an abusive law isn’t the same type of abuse of power that would justify wanting a monarch to die in the short term in my view.

          Charles is not Putin. I’m pretty firmly in the “overthrow the monarchy camp”, but that’s different from wanting an essentially harmless figurehead of an old man to have cancer.

          • @IchNichtenLichten
            link
            English
            -19 months ago

            Charles is not Putin. I’m pretty firmly in the “overthrow the monarchy camp”, but that’s different from wanting an essentially harmless figurehead of an old man to have cancer.

            Who wants him to have cancer? You said they have no real power, I showed that they do. Obviously they can’t have people thrown out of windows but that wasn’t the point I was making.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              39 months ago

              I was more saying we seem to have different definitions of “real power”. You’re not wrong that they have influence, but the influence they have doesn’t seem like “dictator level” power. Simple disagreement of terms.

              Given the context of someone asking “is it good the man has cancer”, people disagreeing with “there’s no real reason to want him to have cancer, so no” are easily mistaken as suggesting that maybe it is good he has cancer.

              • @IchNichtenLichten
                link
                English
                -19 months ago

                “real power” to me, is being able to make the government craft legislation that suits you. I can’t do that, can you?

                • HeartyBeast
                  link
                  fedilink
                  19 months ago

                  Yeh, I can actually - I can write to my MP, go and see them in the local surgery and persuade them to table questions and even draft legislation It’s quite cool.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  09 months ago

                  Yes, we’ve already determined that we have different definitions.

                  To me, real power would be if they could just choose not to disclose the information.

        • Hyperreality
          link
          fedilink
          19 months ago

          Those with true power and wealth are rich and powerful enough to convince the world that they aren’t that rich or powerful.

        • HeartyBeast
          link
          fedilink
          -19 months ago

          So, 1 item, specifically connected to the monarchy in 70+ years.

          • @IchNichtenLichten
            link
            English
            19 months ago

            That was the first result that popped up. There are more.

            • HeartyBeast
              link
              fedilink
              0
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              There are very very few. And all directly linked to the issue of monarchy itself

              • Devi
                link
                fedilink
                19 months ago

                There was a ruling put in place when Harry and William were young to prevent the press from being able to report their normal day to day lives, like going to playdates, or playing at the beach.

                I assume this guy is livid at that!

                • HeartyBeast
                  link
                  fedilink
                  09 months ago

                  In her lifetime the Queen gave royal assent to around 2,500 bills. If she directly influenced the contents of more than 3, I would be surprised

      • Sibbo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        29 months ago

        Sure, death in itself is never a good thing. But since there is only one way for him to end his reign, you can’t really wish him away without wishing him harm.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          29 months ago

          Well, if the Brits voted to not have a monarchy, they could just kick him out.
          I don’t think the British monarchs in the current day need to be removed from office the way the French did it.

    • @MrNesser
      link
      English
      119 months ago

      No one wanted him to get cancer

      • iAmTheTot
        link
        fedilink
        -19 months ago

        Well, I wouldn’t say “no one”. There’s always one.

    • Flax
      link
      fedilink
      English
      99 months ago

      He is only unpopular with the terminally online. At most, people are apathetic/don’t really have an opinion of him

    • Skua
      link
      fedilink
      8
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      He’s primarily unpopular with those of us that are against the monarchy as an institution rather than because of the man himself. If he dies that doesn’t get rid of the institution, it just changes which rich prick currently has the job

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      59 months ago

      You can hate someone and what they stand for without wanting them to get cancer. Call me an old bleeding heart, but I don’t think it’s very healthy to wish death on anyone.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        49 months ago

        When the system of government is literally based on succession through death, you kind of open yourself up to such questions.

        • Sibbo
          link
          fedilink
          English
          29 months ago

          Yeah, that’s the problem here, right? If you wish him away, there is only one way.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            39 months ago

            It’s not the only way, he could abdicate for one thing. There’s the possibility of democratic abolition of the monarchy (but if you go by opinion polls it doesn’t have enough public support at the moment).

        • HeartyBeast
          link
          fedilink
          19 months ago

          changing the system of government doesn’t require anyone’s death.

    • GreatAlbatrossM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      People on the whole don’t like the idea of that much wealth in one location, or the way that there are lots of loopholes and exemptions for them that commoners don’t receive.

      However, opinions of the bottom in the seat vary.
      The late queen was generally well regarded as a reasonably nice person.
      And the current king is getting nods of approval for championing environmental issues, and the way that he’s been very open about his recent medical issues (which hopefully will drive more prostate-holders to get checked).

      • Sibbo
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -29 months ago

        Imagine not being able to ask if it’s good or bad news that a politician resigns. The fact that there is only one way for him to quit doesn’t mean you can’t be happy about him quitting.

        • HeartyBeast
          link
          fedilink
          39 months ago

          He can always abdicate. It’s been done before. But that wi have no effect on the constitution or shake of government