So what kind of King will Charles be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Charles is going to be terrible. It’s a shame because I think he is much more competent and intelligent than his sons. But his people skills are terrible and he has already gotten in trouble for being political with those letters mentioning Israel.

How so?

The sons seem way more emotionally intelligent, socially skilled and articulate to me in what ways do you think they they lack intelligence and competence?

Charles is better educated, more intelligent, hardworking and shrewd businessman than his sons. You are right that he has little self awareness, but he is basically the poster boy for complex childhood trauma and attachment issues. There is a picture of his parents returning from an extended tour shaking little Charles hand, as the queen then goes on to embraces her mother. Heartbreaking and humiliating for a young boy to experience.

I think he will be an eccentric king and will do things his way.

Ok thanks … so much of the lead royal job seems to be pageantry PR, social skills and appealing character - William definitely seems better suited to it EQ wise.

To your point though, capacity for intellectual intelligence is allegedly passed down through the mother (according to science I have read). I wonder whether Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was markedly more intelligent than Princess Diana? That would be a wonder given royal inbreeding….

Diana was intelligent?

I don't think either were intelligent. Elizabeth apparently also felt uneducated and a bit dull when young. I think she grew into her role brilliantly, but I don't think she was particularly intellectually blessed. None of them are. Diana was maybe slightly more self aware to know she was "thick" in the head. This is not a family that bred for intelligence or looks really.

“Not bred for intelligence or looks” makes them sound like racehorses bred to sit in the stables …

They can’t be that thick since they both managed to build savvy royal careers and great wealth …

Easy to make a home run when you’re born on third base.

Not really, most people born in third base squander the fortune made by prior generations. Chuck took the Cornwall Duchy and turned it into an extremely profitable business. He has also built the Prince’s Trust, formidable foundation raising more than $150M every year.

The pageantry is just one aspect of the job.

That's a lot of suitcases of cash!

[Anonymous]

Well he’ll always have a place in history as the last king of England.

[Anonymous]

Boy, he sure does seem grumpy about signing the wrong date and having a leaky pen. That’s going to be a meme.

[Anonymous]

Kenya is being particularly vocal. I love the human rights lawyer that said if there is Justice after death then Elizabeth and her ancestors are getting exactly what they deserve now.

As for Charles reign, we’ll see if he gives back the severed head from the tribal leader that they British took and kept all these years. He really doesn’t need a severed head and it would mean a lot for the tribe to get it back.

[Anonymous]

I’m confused. Does the UK benefit financially from all these Commonwealth nations (not talking about Wales, Scotland and N Ireland.) Is it a big deal if these countries “leave” the commonwealth. It just seems ceremonial anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused. Does the UK benefit financially from all these Commonwealth nations (not talking about Wales, Scotland and N Ireland.) Is it a big deal if these countries “leave” the commonwealth. It just seems ceremonial anyway.

It’s a big deal to the royal family. It decreases their prestige significantly if they all leave. It makes no difference to British citizens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused. Does the UK benefit financially from all these Commonwealth nations (not talking about Wales, Scotland and N Ireland.) Is it a big deal if these countries “leave” the commonwealth. It just seems ceremonial anyway.

It’s a big deal to the royal family. It decreases their prestige significantly if they all leave. It makes no difference to British citizens.

Maybe the Queen cared. It’s he’s to imagine William and Kate caring.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused. Does the UK benefit financially from all these Commonwealth nations (not talking about Wales, Scotland and N Ireland.) Is it a big deal if these countries “leave” the commonwealth. It just seems ceremonial anyway.

It’s a big deal to the royal family. It decreases their prestige significantly if they all leave. It makes no difference to British citizens.

Maybe the Queen cared. It’s he’s to imagine William and Kate caring.

They likely see the writing on the wall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused. Does the UK benefit financially from all these Commonwealth nations (not talking about Wales, Scotland and N Ireland.) Is it a big deal if these countries “leave” the commonwealth. It just seems ceremonial anyway.

It’s a big deal to the royal family. It decreases their prestige significantly if they all leave. It makes no difference to British citizens.

Maybe the Queen cared. It’s he’s to imagine William and Kate caring.

They likely see the writing on the wall.

And the tours are just more work for them anyway. Why try to force something that isn’t wanted.

[Anonymous]

U.K. is waking up hard damn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:U.K. is waking up hard damn.

It's an interesting interaction - security blocks someone voicing his opinion in a free society and Charles can't be bothered to do more than shake hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:U.K. is waking up hard damn.

It's an interesting interaction - security blocks someone voicing his opinion in a free society and Charles can't be bothered to do more than shake hands.

Security was also video'd arresting a man for calling Andrew out in the public parade.

In the U.S. that's called freedom of speech...

[Anonymous]

There is definitely an organized movement afoot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:U.K. is waking up hard damn.

Protest is a sign of a healthy country. You might want to look outside as G7 leaders meet for real protests

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:U.K. is waking up hard damn.

Protest is a sign of a healthy country. You might want to look outside as G7 leaders meet for real protests

You haven’t seen what a true protest looks like because your King and his family flee to private palaces in the country while the nation starves. Remind you of another moment in history?