Coalition of the Confused

Hosted by Jenifer (Zarknorph)

Confused malcontents swilling Chardonnay while awaiting the Zombie Apocalypse.

  • 793
    MEMBERS
  • 41328
    MESSAGES
  • 94
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

Harry and Meghan - who gives a crap?   The U.K and Europe

Started Jan-13 by Jenifer (Zarknorph); 5132 views.
BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

Jan-25

bml00 said:

The ex Lord Mayor of London can quote who he wants in this case quotes from a group who have both a religious and political bone to pick with the Jews of Israel will not make the quotes correct or acceptable

Holocaust survivors.

And victims of the Zionists, particularly Rudolf Kastner, who tricked 437,000 of their community onto the trains that delivered them straight to the Auschwitz gas-chambers.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

Jan-26

Actually the same tourists motivated by royalty would be equally motivated without royalty and having all the castles and palaces on view as tourist traps.

To get a broader view, I read two local papers every day. Here is one major difference in that the one leaning right puts UK and our royals in the news section, and the left puts them on the society pages.

I think you are right, I know I'd be more interested in the castles then the royalty.

That is quite interesting  how the papers handle them,  I'd agree, they belong on the society pages.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

Jan-26

When it comes to the society page, I don´t read it, just look at the pictures, then only read the captions if the photo is someone I know.

Our royals sometimes make both real news and society. For example the king´s brother in law, ex Duke of Palma, is in jail for (royal) influence peddling. Got a stiff sentence. His wife the former Duchess (King´s sister) got off well because she´s a woman, royal, and after all she was just following her husband´s lead (that is what her lawyer said, even though she was the brains in the theft). She has sold the palacet in Barcelona and moved to Switzerland because the kids at school were mean to her kids (because their parents are corrupt, and dad in jail).

So lets pretend I only stole 100,000€ insead of millions like that couple did and got time for it. What would my chances being of a 4 day leave from jail for a Christmas family reunion in another country. This did not go under "society" but news and editorial (negative).

But its the same with Trump in the U.S. half his news is family and should be in "society" instead of news.

bml00

From: bml00

Jan-26

Do the British wish to dispose of their Royalty , it appears they do not .

It appears those states which have Royalty are satisfied to keep them 

The notion that if there were no royalty you could wander at will where you like is little short of daft , try walking around Versailles where you want and of course you can’t , the same applies to any National Palace 

BM

BerrySteph

From: BerrySteph

Jan-28

RGoss99 said:

Actually the same tourists motivated by royalty would be equally motivated without royalty and having all the castles and palaces on view as tourist traps. 

I don't really think that's true. The castles and palaces would have nowhere near the fame and tourist-earning potential without the Royals.

RGoss99 said:

To get a broader view, I read two local papers every day. Here is one major difference in that the one leaning right puts UK and our royals in the news section, and the left puts them on the society pages.

40 years ago, the "Independent" was launched as a new newspaper - and promised to have no Royal news whatsoever. Didn't keep that up for long.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

Jan-28

We have no royals, nor does France, and both have a larger percentage of tourists, who go to see the same things as tourists go to see in the U.K. - we even have changing of the guard.

When it comes to exposure, how often does the average tourist actually see a royal? (almost zero). If royals were such a draw, percentage wise, there would have to be a significant

increase in foreign tourists on those few occasions, so once a year is hardly a blip, in the national economy, because the hotel industry sends most of their money outside the country.

When it comes to restaurants, the over booking moslly is offset by the locals who choose to stay away.

I don't take the paper anymore as it's too hard to read, the print is too small for me. But when I did, I never looked at the society page, just like I don't watch the award shows on TV either.

Good point, something like that is newsworthy.   I just don't see the need to know who wore what and where they went to.

I agree, they don't want to.  Besides "tradition", the Royals bring in lots of tourist dollars.

RGoss99

From: RGoss99

Jan-28

I have not reached that point yet, but am getting there. We are an outside culture here so I usually read the paper on the bar terrace on Sunday mornings with my brunch. However we are having very cold weather, but unless I can get a table by the window, I have to read the paper outside with the smokers, as bar and restaurant lights are insufficient for my failing eyesight. Most of what I know about royals is what others post on the net, mostly negative. Here is a great example. In the past, pre 1936, the royals sat on special chairs in front of the congregation in our cathedrel. Now only presidents from the conservative party do so, the others sit in the front pew as do the royals. Tarditionally our royals attend Easter mass in our cathedrel. What with mobile phones, and proximity, it is sometimes difficult to act "royal" and not like just another family all the time. Here is a clip of some family disharmony involving the queen, her mother in law, and a princess, while the king and exking look embarassed. (this did not appear in the socity page).

https://elpais.com/elpais/2018/04/04/inenglish/1522830022_840171.html

TOP