Too much information. Was Hirohito guilty of Japanese atrocities then the military got the upper hand?
I think Charles’ reign wound last 5 years. He will end up dying young or quitting after finding out his 73 years as a playboy and good life are over.
Long, but good read. He makes a lot of excellent points here.
The luxury the British have is the monarch can be great, mediocre or worthless and things will go on regardless. Charles has a soapbox yo spread his idiocy about the environment but I suspect only the already-convinced will listen.
Perfectly said.
I think this is advice for America. I think out republic is gone. I think Rule of Law is gone. America is an oligarchy, ruled over by powerful individuals in a Uniparty which does what it wants. The guilty are above the law, and the innocent are persecuted relentlessly.
Given that situation, if a decent man where to make it into the White House (I have someone in mind) I would support some very drastic measures. Our customs and traditions set limits on what can be done? I say throw them in the trash and clean house here in America. There is nothing to lose, because we've already lost it.
This writer’s predictions makes Edgar Rice Burroughs look like a writer of non-fiction.
https://barsoom.substack.com/p/why-america-cant-win-world-war-iii
Constitutional monarch is a better sounding title than puppet monarch, in much the same way that sales associate is more pleasing to the ears than sales clerk. But a well-liked puppet was all the late EIIR could aspire to be, and this goes back to the aftermath of the Glorious Revolution, after which English monarchs ruled only in name. Britain is a de facto crowned republic. The monarch interferes only at the risk of turning crowned republic into de jure republic minus the crown. And there is no upside, no realistic prospect of the Crown regaining or wielding its ancient prerogative of absolute power, of rule by personal edict.
Three hundred years ago, the Crown had a firm grip on the puppet throne, which came with pecuniary benefits, because the powerholders in Parliament were either blue bloods themselves or aspired towards the peerage. Today, only the Tories are reliable supporters of the Crown as an institution. The day the Crown takes a strong stand on a controversial national issue is the day it begins to write itself out of the history books.
Queen Elizabeth used her influence to change Rhodesia into Zimbabwe, and again to foist majority rule on South Africa. Both countries are hellholes now. The rest of the time she sat benignly on the sidelines while the Church of England was largely subverted, and the Muslims have turned large sections of London into “no-go” areas for the descendants Alfred the Great and Edward the Third.
She had no real “power” but exerted great influence nonetheless.
She presided over the moral demise of her empire, which has made Queen Victoria roll over in her grave.
Spare me the sentiment: the House of Windsor is a total disaster.
“Elizabeth sat placidly by as, one by one, the ancient rights of Englishmen were stripped from them.”
Who else sat placidly by and let it happen? The British people themselves. Let it be a lesson to us Americans.
The political comparisons between other British monarchs and Elizabeth II, or between Elizabeth the I and Elizabeth the II are just stupid, either by openly ignoring facts or sheer ignorance.
Elizabeth the I and her predecessor British monarchs actually ruled England/Britain. Elizabeth II did not, nor will her heirs. By the time of Elizabeth II parliament, not the monarch in title only, ruled Britain.
The Brits love the fantasy. The Royal Family represents “Camelot”.
Strange that the leftists call her the “colonizer”. A much more accurate name would be the “un-colonizer”.
It was under her 70 year “reign”, that most of the British colonies became indipendent - to the detriment of the natives, I might add.
During her time what got, and continues to be colonized at breakneck speed, is Britain, Europe, the US and what we call the “west”.
At this rate if whites don’t regain a sense of common self preservation and backbone, we’ll become the new Neanderthals.
It’s hard to accomplish something when you don’t actually rule.
Say we had an unelected figurehead king or queen here, and he or she said everything "John Carter" wanted said. Would we really listen to him or her? Would we really keep a monarch around if he or she interfered with our elected officials?