Reply to Prince Harry’s book

Forum Index » The DCUM Book Club

Reply to "Prince Harry’s book"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]It's disappointing that so many people on this thread clearly haven't read the book yet feel confident in opining.  I'm appalled by the British class system and how it protects pedos like Prince Andrew.  I was interested in Spare because of the chance it offered to see behind the curtain - and it did not disappoint.  Harry's got a GREAT voice for audiobooks and listening to it was very easy and pleasant.  The dysfunction he describes resonates with me and my experiences with a dysfunctional 'family'.  I also suspect he has learning disabilities.  He, clearly, has anxiety/depression that was untreated for most of his life.  It seems he's on a path that's good for him.

As someone who also married into a family with strong ideas about the role of a wife and women, I can really sympathize with Megan.  I wouldn't want my DD marrying into that family nor the institution. [/quote]

I agree it’s appalling, and Harry should be speaking out vehemently about his uncle. But he doesn’t, because he supports it overall, and he’s friends with Eugenie. It would be easier to support him if he were anti-monarchy than wanting to have been more privileged within the monarchy[/quote]

I’m curious.  Do you think the other members of the British Royal Family should be speaking out against Andrew? His siblings for example?  King Charles?  Or just Harry? 
And how would people “support him” — beyond buying his book?

I think Harry carefully focused on himself as much as possible, in his memoirs.  I, personally, don’t think he “should” be speaking out about anything beyond that, although, of course, that’s up to him.  [/quote]

Yes, of course the Royal family should refuse to protect a pedophile.

The Royal family is publicly funded, which means they exist to serve the taxpayers. If Harry wants to remain a Royal, he depends on public support. It’s hard to support him given his focus on himself. And while he’s left the world of royalty in many ways, he hasn’t left entirely quite yet, nor does he seem to want to entirely.[/quote]

How, exactly, does Harry “depend on public support”?  You’ve used the word “support” twice here. What exactly do you mean? 
[/quote]

Public opinion. The people can end the monarchy whenever they want. Arguably, they should. They should not pay for people to live whatever lives they want.

The king can support his son privately as a father, as Elizabeth did Anne’s family, who are private citizens without titles or roles. He can also support his son as a king to an heir, as a role supporting another role. But he cannot use public funds to support the profiting of public roles for private gain, or to support private whims. The fact that both exist in the same set of people and relationships is confusing, which is why if Harry wanted to break off and go private, I’m sure he’d go with many well-wishes. But his argument to have his private desires publicly funded is problematic[/quote]

Thanks for clarifying, PP.  I agree with you that using public funds for private concerns can be problematic— but, as another person has said, Harry has asked for security and access to intelligence — because who he is, by birth, puts him at risk and puts his family at risk. I think that’s more than reasonable.  As to the rest, almost every adult in that family has had private business interests — from the Queen with her horses and her gin, to Anne and her horses, to Fergie and her books and other ventures, to Tara and Peter who have appeared in advertisements for official sponsors, and Tara’s husband who was on a reality show.  All of those people, even those who aren’t working royals, both benefit from public funds and profit from private ventures in part because of their royal roles and connections.  Where would you draw the line?  Ideally or practically?

Harry’s book — which I, personally applaud, was a response to the misinformation that others put out there for profit.  While I can understand arguments against this, I think Harry’s memoir pales in comparison to the very revealing book that his father worked with Dimbleby to write decades ago.  Again, where should one draw the line? [/quote]

I think if you want to draw a hard line, anti-monarchy is easy enough. A softer line is keep as much of the monarchy the public is willing to support, which is not a lot compared to decades past. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics