Or the members of the crowd who physically attacked the bloke who called Andrew a "sick old man" while chanting "God save the King". I'm guessing they would not normally be defending a paedophile so vociferously. Weird what tribalism does to people.
The concept of a paedo-royal must make their heads explode in a cognitive superposition of hate/worship that breaks the space time continuum.
Conservatives are convinced they are the good guys, so when one of their "team" is found out to be doing something bad, they just assume it's all lies. A good example from today is Lord Agnew claiming the civil service is full of "Elites" who operate a secret deep state attempting to stop this country becomes great again, by blocking poorly thought out and previously failed economic approaches. We've literally taken on board the American approach without thinking of the consequences. Kwarteng ‘tells Treasury to focus entirely on growth’ as Tory peer defends sacking of senior civil servant – UK politics live Theodore Agnew, Baron Agnew of Oulton - Wikipedia
Let's all remember that Charles first met the 16 year old Diana, when he was 29. Which doesn't even pass the half your age plus seven rule of thumb.
British laws on free speech are very strange, a lot of people don't understand how they work and assume it's the same as the state, only to find out later that they are wrong. That said, it's not uncommon for inflamatory content to slip through in our media and publications. That said, my stance remains that being jerks to them and jeering during the funeral walk is indecent and distasteful, but then perhaps I expect a level of decency that is too much from some people?
Whether it is indecent or not is besides the point to me. Just as I support the right of neo-nazis to march in the street, even though I find their views disgusting. And yes, expecting decency is not a realistic expectation. It is also subjective. I find it indecent that thousands of mourners have left marmalade sandwiches for rats to feast on in the street, but I don't expect many to share that view.
... not to mention how distasteful it is to spend millions of pounds of taxpayers' money on the funeral of one old woman, when there will be old women dying because they can't afford to heat their homes this winter.
Jeering a man who spent 12 million pounds to avoid a sex crime court case is indecent? That's certainly an Interesting viewpoint.
Mod Note: Please remember this no profanity is allowed on MAP. Please make selections that don't get masked out. If that happens, it isn't allowed folks! Thanks.
You're assuming any other family or loved ones at a funeral for someone they're mourning need to witness that at such a somber time as well? Interesting take yourself. At the end of the day, would you think to go looking for someone you had a grievance with and do something like this at a moment like that to be heckle them? If your answer is no, then you see my point. Regardless of the actions of one man that are absolutely gross, the family as a whole do not need that injected into such an event in their lives. Imagine thinking because a relative of yours did something questionable at best, someone who doesnt like them for it could drop in at any event they were at, say, your wedding, and do something like this....
True, but that's not the issue I have with the heckling. I'm not fond of monarchy and think there are better systems than inhereting rulership of a nation, but at the end of the day, leave the family to grieve in peace, theyre on an unpleasant enough day as is. Perhaps I try to look compassionately at the human element there. Pack up that moment, then we deal with them. Seem fair?
" Imagine thinking because a relative of yours did something questionable at best, someone who doesnt like them for it could drop in at any event they were at, say, your wedding, and do something like this.... " Avoiding the FBI and getting your mum to pay out 12 million to avoid a court case isnt just questionable, it's also the reason he had to withdraw from public life, and perhaps why he should of stayed withdrawn. A) if a private individual did that then they wouldn't be invited to a private event by myself. B) if that did happen I would quite happily heckle/verbally abuse them myself, C) this isn't a private person, it's a public figure who is still bankrolled by the nation. D) this isn't a private event, it's a public event. E) this isn't a funeral, this is a PR event for the monarchy leading up to the state funeral, which the public is paying for.
Avoiding the talk of a certain prince, what's getting to me is that this "outpouring of grief" just reminds me of the film "The Death of Stalin" far too much. "Stalin's dead." "No! Our Stalin? The Stalin?!" And the other favourite: "Long live Stalin!" "Stalin's dead, Malenkov's in charge now." "Long live Malenkov!" * Get's shot in the head anyway *
Great film, the use of the actors natural accents was a great move. I can literally hear this picture.
I wouldn't want thousands of strangers turning up to a family funeral to grieve for someone they'd never met either. As dead_pool said; it is a public event, being paid for by the public (the country could lose 2 or 3 billion pounds if you include lost business from the bank holiday How much will the Queen's funeral cost? - The Big Issue ). We are their subjects. I agree that it is distasteful, but I still defend their right to protest. Plus, how many opportunities do people get to show their displeasure in person to a member of the royal family?
A woman born to a life of hereditary rule over an Empire, who lived a life of privilege in exchange for unending, public, service to her country, has passed the same burden on to her children, who are already raising their children in turn to the same expectation. If you read that sentence again you will hopefully see that none of it is good or fit for the 21st century. She got a huge amount of respect because the Royal Family stayed in London during WW2, so she came to the throne with a lot of good will. Because she was seen to be part of "the war effort," she became part of the national myth of GB alone against the Nazis. That respect continued because she didn't comment publicly so we never knew what she actually thought. I think a hereditary monarchy is an anachronism in any modern nation, and "God and My Right," is the antithesis of any last vestiges of a social contract. But here's the thing. When confronted with division and venal politicians, many countries need a figurehead beyond politics that can inspire some sort of unity. Presidents don't do that. I'm not sure a monarch can do that anymore (though our media are changing their narrative overnight to praise King Charles after years of abuse), but I'm also not sure what other figurehead can.
Those are very good points, Non political figureheads are thought of as a good idea, because the public can project they're own beliefs onto that empty podium and feel good their imaginary figurehead matches their own feelings. But surely it's Far better the face the truth that is the real leaders of the country, They are the reheated leftover, Incompetant dregs of a political system that rewards mediocrity and a connected background, over actual leadership ability and economic competence. A non political figurehead just gives them a shield to hide behind. It's interesting how the commentariat / daily mail reading public have treated Harry and his wife, since he stepped away from his former role. If you believe in royality and their God given bloodlines etc, surely he can do what he likes, he's a prince. And if you don't, then the entire thing is just madness anyway.