- Joined
- Oct 28, 2007
- Messages
- 26,621
- Reaction score
- 23,818
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Prince Harry and Meghan will no longer use their HRH titles and will not receive public funds for royal duties, Buckingham Palace has said. Link.
Hopefully they find peace from all the sniping and racial undertones behind the criticism. The one person to come through in shining light has been the Queen who clearly references her grandson remaining part of her family.
So far, we know:
- give up HRH titles
- repay £2.4 million that was spent on a building that needed rebuilding anyway.
So... what will the red-tops and the Telegraph do now for whipping boys?
Personally, I wish them happiness.
Good, hope it starts something evolutionary... the whole idea of birthright into royalty and aristocracy should have died with the end of the Dark Ages.
The Queen will no longer support them financially. They cannot represent the Queen abroad.
I guess this is what is called a "hard Megxit". /s
All these British nobility titles and stuff is confusing. So he cant be called a prince anymore or what?
He was born a Prince and remains a Prince - it's the "His Royal Highness" title that is being given up.
~ How many titles does Ginger Harry have?
lolwhut? Those are two separate titles? ~
All these British nobility titles and stuff is confusing. So he cant be called a prince anymore or what?
The entire concept of birthright into the aristocracy comes from the accumulation of property and titles, which are passed on to successors. This is why the queen is the single largest property holder in the UK. But one does not have to be royal to profit from the accumulation of wealth. Such dynasties exist in places like the US as well.
Which is why inheritance taxes were introduced.
I'm glad Jesus Christ isn't alive today.
Why?
What's his connection with the Royal Family of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?
The entire concept of birthright into the aristocracy comes from the accumulation of property and titles, which are passed on to successors. This is why the queen is the single largest property holder in the UK. But one does not have to be royal to profit from the accumulation of wealth. Such dynasties exist in places like the US as well.
That is entirely false.
The entire concept of birthright into aristocracy comes from the accumulation of and passing down to heirs the most extreme versions of governmental power and aristocracy, the entire concept of birthright into wealth comes from the accumulation of and the passing down to heirs wealth and property.
The difference is vast.
Someone in the 2nd income quintile passing to their kids a house and nice nest egg is wildly different than what happens in the UK with royalty passing down vast wealth and property even though there is little power left being handed down with.
A dynasty existing does not mean targeting everyone who has something to pass to their kids.
They are not particularly different. The only reason aristocracy is able to pass down governmental power is because of their claim to and control of territory, from which they are able to extract wealth just like modern dynasties extract wealth from their own property.
The history books would very much disagree with you.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?