Harry and Megan's break-up with Her Majesty..... - Page 8 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#15069743
ness31 wrote:I don’t intend researching something that should be common sense. If you are royal by birth, you are royal by birth. It’s a hereditary issue. That’s the whole point of nobility.

Have a good day with your shitty weather. Maybe get some sun, sounds like you could use some :)


Royalty is not magic, it is an inheritance like any other. And like any other inheritance you can be disinherited of it if the current holder does not want you to have it.

---

Modern minds have rather mangled the concept of "nobility" too. Essentially the idea is that we are all of us obligated to be good but the more powerful you are the more obligated you are to be good. To be born into the nobility is be handed some strong privileges attached with deep obligations. Nobility is an ideal to strive for though. The base born can attain it and the noble born can lose it...
#15069755
Royalty isn't a characteristic and has nothing to do with it. That should be common sense.

The title HRH is honororary and can be removed.


A characteristic? Like a personality trait? It rather is actually. Those fuckers are bred royal. Again, the whole point of “breeding” and bloodlines.

And while the title HRH was removed, the couple were quite right in pressing the point of the of the word ‘royal’. In context, it’s usage was a statement of fact.

Everyone will still refer to Harry as Prince Harry, because that is what he is. A member of a royal family.

Personally, I disliked the Sussex Royal brand, but it was a fairly apt and meager description of whom and what they are.

Just feels like this is all being done to spite the American and to punish Harry.

Some of us have to work. It's a beautiful day today, but that doesn't mean I'm any more inclined to do your research for you.


I reckon you sent me your rain. I walked home in a thunderstorm today. Lightening and all! :lol:

In all honesty, neither myself or yourself should have to do the research. Of all the articles I’ve read not one source has quoted anything specific or explained how the legislation applies to a royal.

Royalty is not magic, it is an inheritance like any other. And like any other inheritance you can be disinherited of it if the current holder does not want you to have it.

---

Modern minds have rather mangled the concept of "nobility" too. Essentially the idea is that we are all of us obligated to be good but the more powerful you are the more obligated you are to be good. To be born into the nobility is be handed some strong privileges attached with deep obligations. Nobility is an ideal to strive for though. The base born can attain it and the noble born can lose it...


Even when that nazi geezer abdicated the throne, he was still a royal. You can cut them off financially and have them wander the streets like a homeless person, they would still be royal.

Poor Harry. Trying to make the best of the cards he’d been dealt and this is how it goes for him. They aren’t my favourite royals, but I never doubted their noble intentions.
#15069935
I care about logic. And telling a royal that they cannot refer to themselves as such is illogical.

That’s all. Just standing up for common sense. :)
#15071051
ness31 wrote:I care about logic. And telling a royal that they cannot refer to themselves as such is illogical.

That’s all. Just standing up for common sense. :)

It might help you to think of the Royal Family as a family business whose business is governance. In a family business it can be hard to see which is a property of the family and what is a property of the business. Most of the time it does not matter, but when a family participant in the business gets ejected from the business, he remains a family member but not a member of the business. See? You could think of the titles that Harry wants to keep as company titles or trademarks. These are things which belong to the business more than they do the family members.

If Coco-cola had a son that ran away from the business to start up his own thing, then okay he can do that but he would not be entitled to call his new business New Coca-Cola, or Coca-Cola the Second. It infringes on the rightful trademark holder.
#15071056
Well then, the British Royal Family are a perversion of what it means to be royal. Scrap the royal stuff and just refer to yourselves as The Firm.
#15071058
ness31 wrote:Well then, the British Royal Family are a perversion of what it means to be royal. Scrap the royal stuff and just refer to yourselves as The Firm.

That was what it always meant. It always was a family business doing governance going all the way back. You know civilian business are either private personal / family businesses or public corporate businesses? It is basically the same for military businesses. Monarchies are personal / family military enterprises and republics are public corporate military enterprises.

I think that is the best way of thinking about it.
#15071063
ness31 wrote:Then you will have to give me an example of a royal family member throughout history that was barred from referring to themselves as royal.

Do I? There has to be first time for everything. The most comparable case in recent history was King Edward VIII but he behaved relatively well, voluntarily abdicated and then kept a low profile. His successor made a nominal title for him Duke of Windsor. I do not know if he still went about calling himself Royal? He kept a pretty low profile though so even if he did no one would notice. I bet he did not though as it would feel like a lie.

That might be the real issue see? QE2 may have been okay with him bunking off his duties if he did so quietly and discreetly. But as it is he is married to a famous actress (or singer? I do not remember) and is still flouncing around courting attention. It is potentially embarrassing to the "brand" to have him flouncing around doing his own thing for the paparazzi using the firm's precious trademarks.

I think he needs to let it go and get on with his life. You are either in or you are out, there is no having your cake and eating it even for a former royal. He is still luckier than 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of the planet, so there is that.
#15071067
It’s all well and good for the ‘Firm’ wanting to protect its ‘brand’ but who protects a child born into that stupid, onerous institution where you are robbed of your life?

Harry is royal. 6th in line to the throne at that. He has served his country and Queen more than we will probably ever publicly know and will, for a fact, continue to. That is what it means to be royal. It doesn’t just go away. It’s a bit like a curse :hmm:
#15071070
ness31 wrote:It’s all well and good for the ‘Firm’ wanting to protect its ‘brand’ but who protects a child born into that stupid, onerous institution where you are robbed of your life?

Harry is royal. 6th in line to the throne at that. He has served his country and Queen more than we will probably ever publicly know and will, for a fact, continue to. That is what it means to be royal. It doesn’t just go away. It’s a bit like a curse :hmm:


Relax I am pretty sure they won't kill him. He will be fine.
#15071078
SolarCross wrote:Relax I am pretty sure they won't kill him. He will be fine.


I’m very relaxed 8) I’m just not very ‘woke’ and I dislike it when the meanings of words, which have been around for millennia, change overnight.
#15071080
SolarCross wrote:I think he needs to let it go and get on with his life.

Or do you mean you need him to let it go? For decades now it has been the law that ordinary White working class people are not allowed to pass on the jobs to their children, if that would in the slightest way disadvantage Blacks. In the old days the children of dockers tended to become dock workers. The children of car plant workers tended to work at the car plant. Marxists and Cultural Marxists were predictably horrified that White working class people should have any kind of inheritance. So strict rules on hire practice were introduced. Libertarians also loved these rules, because they helped destroy the social solidarity which underlay Britain's strong labour movement.

Its not just the manual working class. In the entrance to universities and at all stages in a career path White people are rejected so as a Black person with lower qualifications can get the place / position, all in order to make society "fairer". I like to follow fivethirtyeight for their strongly maths based analysis, but is quite obvious that underneath their quietly seething that the Democratic Party is going to nominate a White person, they then shifted to the consolation prize that at least the nominee should be decided by Black people. Hence why they're in the tank for Biden.

In this Woke world of 2020, why do you think that the Royal Family should be exempt from anti White race quotas, or diversity as they like to call it? Particularly as the heir to the throne has been ramming Green moralism down our throats for decades. These days the House of Windsor markets itself as a Woke-Monarchy. Of course the Queen of Compton and her bitch, the Queen of Compton and her White consort are going to exploit the absurdity of the House of Windsors position.

I'm as Republican as they come, but the fact that my mother is still alive, as opposed to losing her at the age of twelve, makes me feel way, way luckier than Price Harry. For him loyalty to Meghan is symbolic loyalty to his mother.
#15071089
ness31 wrote:I’m very relaxed 8) I’m just not very ‘woke’ and I dislike it when the meanings of words, which have been around for millennia, change overnight.

Did the meaning change or did you just get the wrong meaning of the word? Hollywierd is fun but it is bad source for history.
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8

Yeah, I'm in Maine. I have met Jimjam, but haven'[…]

No, you can't make that call without seeing the ev[…]

The people in the Synagogue, at Charlottesville, […]

@Deutschmania Not if the 70% are American and[…]