I'm from the U.S.A. and I don't know alot about you all history/government. I know y'all have a monarchy though. So want I want to ask is. Where the hell is your king? Why do you only have a queen thats like 80 years old. Did her husband die or something? And If Queen Elizabeth died, would Prince Harry become King?
To the Brtish people please forgive me for my ignorance but...
The royal family and the titles held by them is a pretty long and complicated thing to explain.
So I'll break it down as simply as I can for you. Queen Elizabeth is married to Prince Philip who is only a Prince by title, basically marrying her got him that title, otherwise as far as I am aware he isn't technically of royal lineage / blood / upbringing.
If Queen Elizabeth dies then her eldest son Prince Charles takes the throne, if he dies then Prince William takes it.
In Britian the monchary is there only as a figure head . She has no power and controlls no part of the government . Shes basicly there for the tourists and old people . When she dies Prince Charles will be king .
turbomonkey138 said: AhmadMetallic said: i heard that the queen farts 8 times a day Is that becuase she is human ... [more]
Hamz said: The royal family and the titles held by them is a pretty long and complicated thing to explain.So ... [more]
This is the order of succession..
- HRH The Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales (b. 1948)
- HRH Prince William of Wales, eldest son of The Prince Charles (b. 1982)
- HRH Prince Henry of Wales, (Prince Harry)younger son of The Prince Charles (b. 1984)
- HRH The Prince Andrew, The Duke of York, second son of HM Queen Elizabeth II (b. 1960)
- HRH Princess Beatrice of York, elder daughter of The Prince Andrew (b. 1988)
- HRH Princess Eugenie of York, younger daughter of The Prince Andrew (b. 1990)
- HRH The Prince Edward, The Earl of Wessex, youngest son of HM Queen Elizabeth II (b. 1964)
- Viscount Severn, James Alexander Philip Theo Mountbatten-Windsor, son of HRH The Prince Edward, The Earl of Wessex (b.2007)
- Lady Louise Alice Elizabeth Mary Mountbatten-Windsor, daughter of HRH The Prince Edward, The Earl of Wessex (b. 2003)
- HRH The Princess Anne, The Princess Royal, only daughter of HM Queen Elizabeth II (1950)
- Mr Peter Phillips, son of The Princess Anne (b. 1977)
- Miss Zara Phillips, daughter of The Princess Anne (b. 1981)
- David Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley, son of The Princess Margaret (b. 1961)
- The Honorable Charles Armstrong Jones (b. 1999), son of David, Viscount Linley
- Margarita Armstrong-Jones (b. 2002), daughter of David, Viscount Linley
- The Lady Sarah Chatto, daughter of The Princess Margaret (b. 1964)
Austin said: Hamz said: The royal family and the titles held by them is a pretty long and complicated thing ... [more]
AhmadMetallic said: i heard that the queen farts 8 times a day ... why would you say that? [more]
AhmadMetallic said: i heard that the queen farts 8 times a day Is that becuase she is human ? [more]
Gunner612 said: turbomonkey138 said: AhmadMetallic said: i heard that the queen farts 8 times a day Is that becuase she ... [more]
Our Royal family don't have as much people as they used to, they're good for tourism though most power lies with our government.
Our current government is Labour although they've not done very well so I'd imagine at the next election someone else will take over possibly the conservative.
There's been a recent thing coming out over the past couple of weeks where Labour members have been using tax to buy things for their home and pay for mortgages and what not, so basically stealing, lots have walked, and others said they'd go at the next election because if they leave at the next a election if they don't win, they get a set amount of money based on how long they've been in power, I was reading someone's getting £30K to quit.
I'm from the U.S.A. and I don't know alot about you all history/government. I know y'all have a monarchy though. ... [more]
I'm from the U.S.A. and I don't know alot about you all history/government. I know y'all have a monarchy though. ... [more]
Our Royal family don't have as much people as they used to, they're good for tourism though most power lies ... [more]
The Royal Family doesn't particularly have much power nowadays compared to the days of old, but they still play an important part in not just the United Kingdom. She is a key figure for many countries such as New Zealand, Canada and so many other countries. Most members of the commonwealth (when we actually had a massive Empire and all) also see her as a key figure. There not always liked, but I think the majority of the public like what they do and what they representent. Not to mention how much revenue they earn in tourism.
Queen Elizabeth II is the queen much like Queen Elizabeth I was, her husband isn't of the bloodline I believe and is generally seen as somewhat of a racist, whenever he opens his mouth he usually says something rather stupid. When Queen Elizabeth II does die, Prince Charles will be named King and when he dies his oldest son Prince William will become King. It can get rather complicated, but I have to admit I like the Royal family despite how folk see them most of the time. Reminds this country that we were once a proud nation rather then the apologising screw-ups that our Government as put us into today.
I'll still find it odd to sing 'God Save the King' at England football matches :D
Ehh, not even us brits know whats going on nowadays, and anyone who claims they do got the info from wiki I guarantee it.
But seriously. it's not like it even matters, all they do is ride around waving and wasting british taxpayers money.
Did you know, if we didn't have the fecking Royal Family we could each buy ourselves a Mars bar from the money we'd save. Due to inflation I reckon we might be able to stretch to a Snickers Duo given I heard that figure a while ago.
I want my Snickers Duo.
Yeah, I know that it isn't a lot of money, and that people think it's insignificant. But i'm sure that the NHS would be gratefull for it, or some other taxpayer funded government body. Personally, i'd like to see it go into replaceing the space program cutbacks they made supposedly for the NHS' benefit.
You have to remeber though, that money is offset by creating a "tourist attraction" and the royals genuinely do some good. They do a lot of charity work and community based things. I think people understate the fact that the royal's genuinely do a lot for bringing attention to important subjects.
They're not important per se, but they are almost like a PR figure-head these days, and while I don't neccessarily agree that they're worthwhile; they do more than just sitting around.
Well they'd have to, or we'd have revolted already :P
I still honestly feel we'd be better off without them.
But at least they're not stealing the tax-payers money to pay-off their second mortgage/put a moat around their house.
Here's something you Americans might not know about: our MP's (basically Members of Parliament - i.e. the government) are able to claim expenses from the tax payer. For example they might be able to pay for a train journey or whatever, if it's work related.
Those guys have been claiming money to have their tennis courts repaired, pay off a second mortgage, have a moat built around their house... It goes on.
So the country is basically billions in debt, there are no jobs, and the people running the country are bleeding the tax payer dry.
The best was the £80,000 used to get a forest inspected. Think he also said that he was in the right and that everyone was just jealous because his house was huge.
While I agree, I don't see how that exhonorates the royal families current existence. They are effectively doing the same thing, living lavishly at the expense of the taxpayer. As for tourism, we have enough legitimate attractions we don't need some phony ass royal family.
In Britain, they often do things different. The great historian JR Tolken, has proof of their history.
You see, in America, everyone is equal as long as you're born a white man in a rich family.
In Britan, they often have to deal with Dr. Who screwing things up.
I hope this answers your question.
To answer your original point: Her husband isn't 'King', because he only married into it. If the Queen had any brothers (older or younger) then they would be King in her place - and she could never become Queen unless her brother/s died childless.
However, if we did have a King then (ordinarly) his wife would be known as Queen Whatever, but that still wouldn't put her anywhere in the line of succession.
It is said to be largely a ceremonial position, yet every member of the British armed forces still swears allegiance to the monarch upon joining. In the (extremely unlikely) event of the Monarch acting against Parliament, who's to say how that would go down? I suspect if it came to it, a substantial part of the military would not refuse an order from their Queen.
By the way, the monarch still is the most powerful person in England. She can over rule every government decision (if it was wasn't for a last minute decision, she would have stopped us participating in the Iraq war), she just chooses not to use that.
Somthing that depresses me is that in schools and college etc it seems like each country just learns about all the other country's worst moments and things. This conversation just made me realise i dont really know any of the USA's great moments. Like here in the UK i've studied history up until A levels....(which is the qualification before university if people need a reference point.) And i've spent at least half the time learning about the Holocaust, rise of stalin, the cold war, the KKK. Racism in the US, The Korean War. pretty much anything that puts another country in a bad light. I spoke to a french guy who said he learnt about the British Miner's Strikes, our racism, etc.
I can only speak for my experiences of education, and I might be completly wrong, but it seems a shame that most countrys just teach students the failures of other countrys and not the successes. What do you guys think?
It's not really a choice. She is obliged to follow whatever Parliament tells her, if she went off the reservation and started trying to overrule Parliament they would remove the entire Royal Family by the end of the week. That's the theory at least; that's what you get for losing the civil war.
In reality I think HM is (generally) well loved by the population and - more importantly - extremely well loved by the military. I don't think removing her would be easy - and she knows the fight would be worse for the country than whatever she was trying to overrule anyway. It would take an extremely serious situation for her to interfere with the running of the country.
I'd bet my top hat that some of these MPs just "go with the flow", don't do a fat lot, and claim expenses for their efforts.
The people I feel worst for are the genuine MPs who are sadly going to get tarnished by all the thieves.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment