You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
No one posted this yet?
I think the French had the right idea....
I dont work on Mondays so technically don't even get a BH and the normally quiet trails will be full of people avoiding the ceremony.
Off the top of my head – smoking in bars. Not that smoke myself. But now look what’s happened. A general atmosphere of sickly perfume and farts. Noisy little kids running around and insufferable people taking ages at the bar ordering food.
This is brilliant. Of all the things banned or generally awful about this country you picked smoking in bars. love it. well played.
I'm more interested in ideas of how to express disagreement and disrespect towards the coronation. Other than simply doing nothing, cause that's no fun.
Does anyone sell doormats to mark the occasion? But ideally something low effort and zero cost.
Hmmm. You appear to think that your word is worthless unless enforceable in some way. Really?
...
But would you regard a solemn promise, made by you in whatever form you think appropriate, as having any value?
You miss our point I think.
I know what my word is worth, and I'm sure that TJ does likewise with his promises. But a complete stranger does not, so the point of swearing an oath is to demonstrate your trustworthiness.
If you believe in a supreme being then swearing 'in the presence of god' or what have you carries weight; even if the rest of the planet thinks it's nonsense, what matters is what the oath-maker believes. (Which of course is one of the reasons we have organised religion in the first place, to keep the proles in toe.) Without that you're left with someone you don't know going "promise!" and hoping they don't have their fingers crossed behind their back.
It's all very silly.
Does anyone sell doormats to mark the occasion?
I had one but I got rid of it. It was always getting under my feet.
But a complete stranger does not, so the point of swearing an oath is to demonstrate your trustworthiness.
It makes no odds at all. If I will break a simple promise I will break a solemn oath. its totally meaningless
cougar - in most contexts where you swear an oath/affirm, eg court, signing certain documents, appointments to parliament/police/military etc you are accepting that if you break the terms of the oath, you will be subject to some form of legal punishment. There is no sanction for someone who pledges allegiance in this way then breaks it so you are right that it’s somewhat meaningless - but it’s also entirely optional and with zero benefit to you personally (in other cases you either have no choice or get something - like a job in return). So yes it is symbolic, but only those who believe it are likely to do it.
I think it runs the “risk” of backfiring and seems like the sort of policy dreamed up by the sort of person who would be very excited about a royal visit to the local hospital and think it was right that budget went on paint rather than patient care!
presumably the people who will do it are staunch royalists who are already fully on board with KC3 and the pomp and ceremony of the process (let’s call them the 9/10 and 10/10 royalists). Then there’s the vocal republicans who will defiantly avoid the whole nonsense and are obviously not going to take any pledge (let’s call them the 0/10-2/10 royalists). But a huge part of the U.K. are in the middle ground, with in in grained sense of deference to the royal family, a belief that on balance they might be better than alternatives, but never really thinking in any great depth about them (so the 4/10-7/10 group) - I’m guessing a fair number of them will watch the tele during the coronation because it’s “what people do” or because someone in their friend/family group turns it into a piss up. Suddenly they’ll be invited to make their own oath - and I’m expecting a lot of them are going to laugh at it, but some will surely read the words and think “what the f***” and take at least a few points off their “royalist level”. I wouldn’t be surprised if a few fights are started this way - there’s always one staunch royalist in these situations who is offended when someone else laughs at the stupidity of the whole system.
so the faithful get to remind themselves the are faithful. The opponents gain some more ammunition and the apathetic middle ground are forced to at least momentarily thing about whether they care or not. If I was on the royal PR team this would be my worst nightmare - I assume some sort of survey group will be making up statistics on how many people pledged allegiance and it’s going to be grim reading for the “firm”.
tjagain
Full Member
Can we elect a new king? Who is your nomination? I go for Chris Packham
He'd get my vote 👍
Erm, they will be 2 days late
Royalist!
Of course they did. All military training has an element of mental conditioning/brain washing, particularly what would be considered frontline infantry. It’s the only way to ensure they will do as they are told.
Another quality STW hot take. You utter belter.
Can we elect a new king? Who is your nomination? I go for Chris Packham
Greg Davis. Can imagine the utter rinsing he'd give people.
I really couldn't care a hoot if we have a monarchy or not.
If we weren't paying a bit each year to them, the government would just scab the money off us for other pointless dross.
Let the flag shafters have their day, but don't get upset when I don't join in.
I do, however, feel that they should pay taxes in exactly the same way that everyone has to - including inheritance, company, personal etc, they are exempted from a lot of requirements by all accounts.
And, can we please ditch the National Anthem? Heaping praise on the King - not the Nation, it's people, our achievements, the land etc. Maybe go the style of Spain and just have a tune, no lyrics.
cougar – in most contexts where you swear an oath/affirm, eg court, signing certain documents, appointments to parliament/police/military etc you are accepting that if you break the terms of the oath, you will be subject to some form of legal punishment.
So, why isn't that implicit? You're in court, you're expected to tell the truth, what difference does standing there going "I'll tell the truth, honest!" make? Like telling the truth is optional?
Signing documents is different, you can always disagree.
So yes it is symbolic, but only those who believe it are likely to do it.
Precisely.
Interesting, there is no time limit on this pledge, so you pledge support to those yet unborn, whatever their character or behaviour. A pledge made by people to their Gods. Pretty serious stuff to those who have a God/Goddess.
By the wording this pledge encompasses the line of succession for eternity, unless eventually enough of this royal family line fail to breed and they die out.
The succession line of course includes Prince Andrew, and perhaps more interestingly as a son of Charles, Prince Harry. I wonder how many want to swear an allegiance which includes Harry?
“I swear that I will pay true allegiance to your majesty, and to your heirs and successors according to law. So help me God.”
- There is speculation that over time Harry will be moved back into British and Commonwealth public life if he looses his wife or he & she go bankrupt.
- My housemate, a faithful Royalist of decades standing is horrified at the PR blunder of this new oath.
Even housemate thinks it out of touch, embarrassing and distasteful.
- Should not Charles be pledging allegiance to his people as their representative?
___________________
Aside from the above, how is the Church of England crowning Camilla as Queen when technically in the eyes of the Church of England she is perhaps not married to Charles, as it is 'only' a civil marriage?
Charles and Camilla had to marry via civil service at a Registry Office, as Camillas previous spouse is/was alive so their marriage was not acceptable/permissible to the Church and could not happen on Church premises.
Princess Ann remarried in Scotland (Church of Scotland), to enable her 2nd marriage to be accepted by/ take place in a Church. I have known people whose re-marriages were point blank refused by C of E Churches due to prior marriages ending in divorce, as they were considered to still be married to the first partner despite having legally divorced.
I am curious about the technicalities and the convenient 'flexibility' of the rules of the Church of England.
Can all divorcees with living Exes now remarry freely in the Church of England, have the rules of acceptance changed?
Don't lead us down that path - he'll start his own religion free of the encumbrances and just remarry anyway. And all those pulled out entrails and heads on spikes around the towns will make the place smell horrible.
I may as well stick me leg in, I keep writing and then stopping.
I've been invited to the coronation and will be attending - I'm one of the 450 members of the public who were awarded BEM's who have been invited.
But, I'm <span style="font-size: 0.8rem;"> with Poly on this subject - I think the royals pr team have dropped the ball on this one. The pledge is optional and essentially meaningless, although I'll feel obligated when in Westminster abbey. But I'm fine with that - I used to do the same for the queen when in scouts/ cubs, pretty much every time I've every attended a church of England ceremony etc - I feel it's along a similar level, although obviously with more prominence.</span>
Reading through the thread it's worth pointing out, that this this is the first time the pledge has ever been put to the public. I assume it's because in all previous coronations all of the dukes lords and ladies had to procession up an pledge personal allegiance to the king/queen in a massive feudal train. KC has removed this from the ceremony and instead ask the public, if they would like too do so, trying to make it less feudalism more inclusive etc.
If your a royalist, fine, possibly a good move as they will feel more inclusive . However If your a republican this will piss you off. If your some where in the middle I'd assume it'll also jar. The polls show there are far more middle ground and republicans in the UK than not. This added with the media headlines in the subject and I'd bet public royal support dropped over the last few not increased - it should have been announced on the day so those interested/ watching could decide, those not bothered would be none the wiser.
Anyway, I'll do a thread on my day after the event if I get time or if anyone's interested - hence my first comment on this thread.
The cringe gets worse. GB news are now starting their day with the national anthem.
Another quality STW hot take. You utter belter.
Well you would say that!
I have worked closely with a lot of ex-military and have attended Shrivenham on a staff course.
I know the military mindset and unless it's a matter of complete lack of self awareness, then "conditioning" is the only explanation.
The cringe gets worse.
I was curious how the mail was spinning it. Even the main articles are somewhat ambivalent today (with one article from a GB nut and another more sensible one).
The comment section though really isnt in favour.
GB news are now starting their day with the national anthem.
The Dubai one?
Not a hope in hell I’ll be joining in - more likely I’ll respond with a single digit of my right hand. What out of touch gammon came up with the idea in the first place???
I know the military mindset and unless it’s a matter of complete lack of self awareness, then “conditioning” is the only explanation
I agree, and I grew up around and still know a fair few serving and ex armed forces personnel.
UK military training is indoctrination into a hierarchical system with the Royal family at its head.
You want people to potentially give their lives for their country? Then you need instill a certain amount of blind allegiance in them.
Interestingly, I'd say the higher the rank, the less true this is. I know a couple of quite high ranking ex-army officers, and they're both surprisingly left wing and liberal in their outlooks now.
Even housemate thinks it out of touch, embarrassing and distasteful.
A lot of people I know think Charles is a bit of and angry dictator and this is him stamping his feet.
tjagain
Full Member
Can we elect a new king? Who is your nomination? I go for Chris PackhamHe’d get my vote 👍
Well, it's the familiarity isn't it? Once you get a taste for a nepotistic leadership, it's hard to go back.... 😉
A lot of people I know think Charles is a bit of and angry dictator and this is him stamping his feet
I'd argue the opposite - this part of the ceremony was originally the Dukes, Lords etc pledging their allegiances, bi-proxy those that live on their land would be included. Thankfully we've moved on from this & many(most) of those that would traditionally take part in this haven't even been invited. However the traditional of the order of the ceremony has been maintained by opening it up to all, as well as the length of the ceremony reduced by a significant margin (hours), as everyone that wants too says it at once.
By removing the old feudalistic part and inviting all of the people of the UK we can all individually decide if we want to bother. As ever those that won't seem to be the most offended.
As ever those that won’t seem to be the most offended.
Offended? Or just pointing out the absurdity of a public pledge of allegiance to the King’s line of inheritance, including those who are still at prep school, someone who used the vast wealth of the crown to buy off someone they took advantage of together with convicted sex traffickers, and even those not yet even born and their dependents (whoever marries into the family). Happy for people to make this blind pledge if they want, but don’t expect everyone else to “keep quiet” to allow the King their dignity in the coming week. We’ll speak up if we want to. Now is as good a time as any.
This feels like a misstep to me. I strongly suspect most of the population are relatively agnostic about the whole thing. Inviting people to swear allegiance is forcing a more opinionated stance. I was happy to quietly ignore the coronation but I certainly would not swear allegiance.
The other thing that seems obvious to me is that they should have banged out the coronation after the funeral. It would be the same invite list, everyone was already all dressed up, security was in place and he was technically already the King. It would have saved millions and tonnes of CO2 without all of the international dignitaries having to fly in for a second event.
Funeral, break for a cup of tea and a sausage roll, take off black armbands and crack on with crowning party. Bish bosh bash, done.
As ever those that won’t seem to be the most offended.
Brilliant analysis there! Those who find it offensive so won’t do it are the most offended.
They should commandeer public address systems and all broadcast channels across the nation so we can have some 'Village of the Damned' type action, with seemingly ordinary people stopping in unison at the self-checkouts to loudly hail our new overlord.
As ever those that won’t seem to be the most offended.
Of course we are! It's a crass thing to even "invite" people to do. To even do so, shows what contempt the Royal family and their hangers on think of the people of this country.
The man who wants me to swear my allegiance to, wanted to be a tampon! One of his heirs is Andrew Prince of Nonce! Why would I want to support a medieval cult?
Apparently, the FA has asked the clubs to play the national anthem on Saturday. That will go well at some grounds.
Offended? Or just pointing out the absurdity of a public pledge of allegiance to the King’s line of inheritance, including those are prep school, someone who used the wealth of the crown to buy off someone they took advantage of together with convicted sex traffickers, and those not yet even born. Happy for people to make this pledge if they want, but don’t expect everyone else to “keep quiet” to allow the King their dignity. We’ll speak up if we want to.
Well someone has a bee in their bonnet. 😉 No ones stopping you speaking up, I'm just pointing out that those with least investment seem to have the most to say.
I agree with you btw, I feel the public pledge is out of touch and diversive.
But in previous coronations you'd have been included in that pledge if you liked it or not. Now you have a choice.
They should commandeer public address systems and all broadcast channels across the nation so we can have some ‘Village of the Damned’ type action, with seemingly ordinary people stopping in unison at the self-checkouts to loudly hail our new overlord.
This is why they were testing the emergency alert system, makes you think...
By removing the old feudalistic part and inviting all of the people of the UK we can all individually decide if we want to bother.
Its still feudalistic. Have you read the pledge?
I don't really understand pledges and oaths.
Is it like that time in 1981 when Charles said
"...forsaking all others
keep thee only unto her
so long as you both shall live...
To love and to cherish
Till death us do part
According to God’s holy law..."
and then just ignored it all when it became inconvenient?
Is that how it this new one works?
Its still feudalistic. Have you read the pledge?
Not if you don't say it... There is a choice.
This is why they were testing the emergency alert system, makes you think…
I'm with Three, so at least I'm safe when the signal is sent out to activate the vaccine. I just have to somehow evade all the others after they turn.
I am a citizen not a subject
I think that's the message that's been lost in the media....
Previously the landowner where you live would have said these words, you would have been a subject included within that persons allegiances if you liked it or not. No choice. It's been changed so there is a choice - say / don't say 🤷♂️
Watch it on the telly/or don't 🤷♂️
I think it's good for debate about the RF and their place in the UK, but a huge cock up on their part for gauging the mood, hopefully they will take note.
I think the bigger story is how conviniently the event is timed. Local elections on Thursday, and most of the votes won't be counted and results released till late Friday. Any disaster for the Tories and newsworthy gains by Labour/Greens/Lib Dem plus any problems with voter ID will be completely overshadowed in the media by this nonsense all weekend. Which is quite convinient really isn't it.
The pledge is optional and essentially meaningless, although I’ll feel obligated when in Westminster abbey.
It's none of my business, but I doubt anyone will be checking, and there will be a fair few attendees that wouldn't be expected to say the pledge even by the most ardent royalist e.g. foreigners
I think the bigger story is how conviniently the event is timed.
Okay - who chose the date of the elections and when did they do it? Who chose the date of the coronation and when did they do it?
That Twitter thread is worth reading. Thanks.
Yeah, discovered yesterday(30th April) is National Tabby Cat Day. I'll have to keep that in mind for the family mog.
King pointless ?. No interest.
It’s ok, environmental impact has been sorted https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65447193
well good question - from wikipedia:
The Duke of Norfolk, Edward Fitzalan-Howard, is in charge of organising the coronation as hereditary Earl Marshal. A committee of privy counsellors will arrange the event.
In October 2022, the date of Charles and Camilla's coronation was announced: Saturday 6 May 2023 at Westminster Abbey Buckingham Palace set the date to ensure sufficient time to mourn the death of Queen Elizabeth II before holding a joyous ceremony In November 2022, the government proclaimed that an extra bank holiday would occur on 8 May, two days after the coronation.[ On 20 January 2023, Buckingham Palace announced plans for the coronation weekend between 6 and 8 May
From reading that I would say that a lifelong Tory had a chinwag with the current government with a few suggested dates and came up with one that would suit all parties...well not ALL parties obviously.
oh please “Invited” is softer sounding than “asked”, straws being clutched for there. Does it sound soft when invited to help police with their inquiries ?
You didn’t read the thread then?
“ All who so desire … “
Come down to the station if you so desire… or in more day to day speak… come down to the station if you want to… yes, that sounds “softer” and has a different meaning.
more straw clutching News organisations going to report on the press releases they are sent from the Arch dicks office.
A committee of privy counsellors will arrange the event.
I love the fact we still have officials whose role originated from those hanging about the monarch while he took a shit.
The Royal wipers
I'll pledge allegiance if non-adherence means I lose my extra bank holiday. Otherwise - nah, you're alright, ta.
At least we get an extra day off as a result of all this tosh.
Its all good as Ant and Dec will be attending, high brow tv personalities that they are.
I have worked closely with a lot of ex-military and have attended Shrivenham on a staff course.
Ooh, you must be a badass. Sounds a lot like 'some of my best friends are {insert demographic to validate point}'.
Doing a staff course at Shrivenham is in no way shape or form impressive, officers routinely get rinsed when any of their dits start with 'when I was at Sandhurst/Staff College'.
You want people to potentially give their lives for their country? Then you need instill a certain amount of blind allegiance in them.
You're just as bad. What utter shite.
All the risks i've been exposed to over the course of my career were never for the country, they were for my friends and colleagues who were also at risk in those moments. The crown and country bit is added in retrospect by the MOD and media, lets people feel better about the loss or some shit.
I'll take my 24 years of actual experience, not some weak-ass attempt at association. Trying to validate a point with some pretty thin, if not made up associations is pretty pathetic.
I'd suggest you lay off reading Commando comics or hanging out with officers if you want to have any chance at understanding the military and how the pointy-end works.
More importantly
Its a big welcome back to MidlandTrailQuestGraham who was a very regular poster. Been awsy on a sabbatical for a couple of years. Nice to see you again
It's almost a century since any other European royalty had a coronation service - King Zog of Albania in 1928.
Cost of living crisis crime
they were for my friends and colleagues who were also at risk in those moments.
I was under the impression(according to a mate who was 'in') that it was all about the testing bonuses, the beery post exercise nights and the fact you get to throw hand grenades.
Ooh, you must be a badass. Sounds a lot like ‘some of my best friends are {insert demographic to validate point}’.
Doing a staff course at Shrivenham is in no way shape or form impressive, officers routinely get rinsed when any of their dits start with ‘when I was at Sandhurst/Staff College’.
Shrivenham was interesting, looking in from the outside at how the military mindset works. The majority very right wing, closed minds, would refuse to take any criticism of their organisations from various speakers.
The only really cynical military people I met, were on their way out and were quite scathing of the whole thing.
All the risks i’ve been exposed to over the course of my career were never for the country, they were for my friends and colleagues who were also at risk in those moments.
I bet they were. That's the "trick". You have been taught to feel like that.
I don't doubt the bravery or the skill of the UKs armed forces but to think that some kind of "conditioning" is not involved is nonsense.
As for the Crown, why do the military have so many portraits of the Queen/King everywhere?
Why are all the lesser royals always dressed up in military costume?
officers routinely get rinsed when any of their dits start with ‘when I was at Sandhurst/Staff College’.
I think there may be some military jargon involved and I am basically guessing at the meaning of "rinse" and "dit" here.
As for the Crown, why do the military have so many portraits of the Queen/King everywhere?
Isn't the monarch notionally the top top brass, though the PM is in practice the overall commander?
Essentially yes. Monarch, but delegated to the government.
Tradition is a bit thing in the military. I can understand it, but was never really fully at ease with it. It's probably a good thing I left the country.
would refuse to take any criticism of their organisations from various speakers.
As an organisation; the British Army is, y'know, pretty good at what it does. And it's been pretty good at what it does since oooohhh about 1707. I think it can probably get away with shrugging off some criticism
Shrivenham was interesting, looking in from the outside at how the military mindset works.
Attending a few lectures at Shrivenham as a civilian and thinking you have some insight into 'the military mindset' puts you in the same category as walting airsofters and COD players thinking the same.
'Military mindset' because, yes everyone serving is incapable of independent thought and are all one homogenous group who think the same. Like Muslims? Scots? scousers? Football supporters?
That’s the “trick”. You have been taught to feel like that.
No, it's comradeship and loyalty. A bond forged by shared experience of danger. Something you've clearly never experienced if you think 'it's a trick'.
As for the Crown, why do the military have so many portraits of the Queen/King everywhere?
Err.. because he/she is the commander in chief of the armed forces?
Why are all the lesser royals always dressed up in military costume?
Some are honorary colonels in chief. Many have served, often in operational theatres. They are entitled to wear it. Refering to military uniform as 'costume' betrays your true attitude to the military. You've as much insight into the military as I have into Grand Prix driving, because I went on the dodgems once.
As an organisation; the British Army is, y’know, pretty good at what it does. And it’s been pretty good at what it does since oooohhh about 1707. I think it can probably get away with shrugging off some criticism
I'd agree, although it is a slow and ungainly beast in regards to change. It gets there eventually, painfully slow as it can be. But there are reasons for that.
This is mostly because change is pushed upon by people who've attended a staff course as a civilian and think they understand...
They are entitled to wear it. Refering to military uniform as ‘costume’ betrays your true attitude to the military.
I'd disagree. I'm not aware of a member of the royal family that wears the rank they earned on their own merit from the time they served. They also flip between uniforms of the different services - I'm assuming in their honorary capacity. To that end I can see the costume analogy.
* I served. Actually 'shared' a desk with Andrew on 815 Squadron (I say shared - I was a young midshipman on holdover and in need of place to work and let's just say his desk was rarely used).
More broadly the services are a broad church like the society they are drawn from. Well, arguably a bit narrower. Within that broad church there will be a fair number of vocal and visible 'traditionists' who have a certain stereotypical view of queen(now king) and country. Also a certain predisposition to to share Britain first posts, largely because the BF hooked them with some of their simple narratives. But that is only a fraction of the services - don't tar all of us/them with the same brush.
Also a certain predisposition to to share Britain first posts, largely because the BF hooked them with some of their simple narratives. But that is only a fraction of the services – don’t tar all with the same brush.
Not all but much more than a fraction.
There's many who serve and who are very much an empty uniform, I get more bent out of shape about those sorts than a Royal acting as Colonel-in-Chief.
Not all but much more than a fraction.
You cannot say that with any confidence. Unless it's the confidence of an idiot.