• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Prince Harry and Meghan to give up HRH titles

Infinite Chaos

Infinite Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
23,833
Reaction score
16,132
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Prince Harry and Meghan will no longer use their HRH titles and will not receive public funds for royal duties, Buckingham Palace has said. Link.
Click to expand...

Hopefully they find peace from all the sniping and racial undertones behind the criticism. The one person to come through in shining light has been the Queen who clearly references her grandson remaining part of her family.

So far, we know:
  • give up HRH titles
  • repay £2.4 million that was spent on a building that needed rebuilding anyway.

So... what will the red-tops and the Telegraph do now for whipping boys?

Personally, I wish them happiness.
 
You just wait a minute, oops, thought I gave a damn about them or the royals...
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Hopefully they find peace from all the sniping and racial undertones behind the criticism. The one person to come through in shining light has been the Queen who clearly references her grandson remaining part of her family.

So far, we know:
  • give up HRH titles
  • repay £2.4 million that was spent on a building that needed rebuilding anyway.

So... what will the red-tops and the Telegraph do now for whipping boys?

Personally, I wish them happiness.
Click to expand...

The Queen will no longer support them financially. They cannot represent the Queen abroad.

I guess this is what is called a "hard Megxit". /s
 
Good, hope it starts something evolutionary... the whole idea of birthright into royalty and aristocracy should have died with the end of the Dark Ages.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Good, hope it starts something evolutionary... the whole idea of birthright into royalty and aristocracy should have died with the end of the Dark Ages.
Click to expand...

The entire concept of birthright into the aristocracy comes from the accumulation of property and titles, which are passed on to successors. This is why the queen is the single largest property holder in the UK. But one does not have to be royal to profit from the accumulation of wealth. Such dynasties exist in places like the US as well.
 
Rogue Valley said:
The Queen will no longer support them financially. They cannot represent the Queen abroad.
Click to expand...

Harry was left millions by his mother, even more by the Queen Mother and is still likely to inherit when the Queen or Charles dies.

Rogue Valley said:
I guess this is what is called a "hard Megxit". /s
Click to expand...

You notice that the same papers that pushed a near xenophobic and relentless case against anyone who was against Brexit were also the ones who muckraked most about Meghan?
 
Well his Granny wouldn't have been Queen to begin with but for some American vagina leading another royal astray
 
All these British nobility titles and stuff is confusing. So he cant be called a prince anymore or what?
 
PoS said:
All these British nobility titles and stuff is confusing. So he cant be called a prince anymore or what?
Click to expand...

He was born a Prince and remains a Prince - it's the "His Royal Highness" title that is being given up.

All this still depends on whichever paper you read - the papers that traditionally serve older, more conservative readers say it's a "hard Megxit" and the more liberal papers say a mutually agreed deal has been achieved. The Sunday telegraph writer stated on BBC this morning (I'm watching right now) that the print papers never focused on race and that it was just the online versions of selected newspapers.

My eyes and memory tells me very different from what the Sunday telegraph writer thinks happened and she thinks it was all down to buzzfeed rather than actual newspapers focusing on Meghan's race. The thing that will hurt Harry most is that some within the Royal Marines were unhappy about continuing to have Harry as symbolic "Captain General."

Maybe the Commandos will be happy with Prince Andrew instead....
 
Infinite Chaos said:
He was born a Prince and remains a Prince - it's the "His Royal Highness" title that is being given up.
Click to expand...

lolwhut? Those are two separate titles? Now Im even more confused. How many titles does Ginger Harry have?
 
William has an 'I'm an asshole' type of face. LOL.. I don't know, I don't or follow him/them at all.. It's just looking at William he looks like a prick. Just sayin..
 
PoS said:
~ How many titles does Ginger Harry have?
Click to expand...

He currently has lots - including Duke of Sussex. He's also Earl of Dumbarton and Baron Kilkeel... That's not including all the military monickers he's about to give up like "Captain-General" of the Marines, Honorary Air Force Commandant of the Royal Air Force Base Honington or Honorary Commodore-in-Chief of the Royal Naval Commands’ Small Ships and Diving.

PoS said:
lolwhut? Those are two separate titles? ~
Click to expand...

This bit isn't quite clear - he won't suddenly stop being a Prince but I think (different accounts in different papers) he won't and can't be addressed as "HRH Prince Harry" and it will probably just be Prince Harry. That stuff is just for formal occassions.

What you have to remember is that as a kid his big dream was being a serving soldier doing his bit on the front line but the title and family background meant he was a target for the Taliban and by extension - his fellow soldiers. He was always happier being "Captain Wales" than he was "Prince Harry" so counter to what you read in the press - he won't be unhappy about losing those titles.

As he himself said a few years ago when in the military “Definitely. I’ve always been like that. My father’s always trying to remind me about who I am and stuff like that. But it’s very easy to forget about who I am when I am in the army. Everyone’s wearing the same uniform and doing the same kind of thing. I get on well with the lads and I enjoy my job. It really is as simple as that.”
 
PoS said:
All these British nobility titles and stuff is confusing. So he cant be called a prince anymore or what?
Click to expand...

They let him keep the title of prince in case he ever wishes to resume serving the crown......i.e. for a post-divorce return to his senses.
 
tenor.gif


and that's my opinion on the entire Royal family
 
Irredentist said:
The entire concept of birthright into the aristocracy comes from the accumulation of property and titles, which are passed on to successors. This is why the queen is the single largest property holder in the UK. But one does not have to be royal to profit from the accumulation of wealth. Such dynasties exist in places like the US as well.
Click to expand...

Which is why inheritance taxes were introduced.
 
Aristaeus said:
Which is why inheritance taxes were introduced.
Click to expand...

Inheritance tax is one of the oldest taxes in the world - even the Romans had it. What is clear though is that there are few inheritance tax systems that are truly fair to all.
 
And all mostly because of...

Wait for it...

Pigmentation


I'm glad Jesus Christ isn't alive today.
 
Irredentist said:
The entire concept of birthright into the aristocracy comes from the accumulation of property and titles, which are passed on to successors. This is why the queen is the single largest property holder in the UK. But one does not have to be royal to profit from the accumulation of wealth. Such dynasties exist in places like the US as well.
Click to expand...

That is entirely false.

The entire concept of birthright into aristocracy comes from the accumulation of and passing down to heirs the most extreme versions of governmental power and aristocracy, the entire concept of birthright into wealth comes from the accumulation of and the passing down to heirs wealth and property.

The difference is vast.

Someone in the 2nd income quintile passing to their kids a house and nice nest egg is wildly different than what happens in the UK with royalty passing down vast wealth and property even though there is little power left being handed down with.

A dynasty existing does not mean targeting everyone who has something to pass to their kids.
 
OrphanSlug said:
That is entirely false.

The entire concept of birthright into aristocracy comes from the accumulation of and passing down to heirs the most extreme versions of governmental power and aristocracy, the entire concept of birthright into wealth comes from the accumulation of and the passing down to heirs wealth and property.

The difference is vast.

Someone in the 2nd income quintile passing to their kids a house and nice nest egg is wildly different than what happens in the UK with royalty passing down vast wealth and property even though there is little power left being handed down with.

A dynasty existing does not mean targeting everyone who has something to pass to their kids.
Click to expand...

They are not particularly different. The only reason aristocracy is able to pass down governmental power is because of their claim to and control of territory, from which they are able to extract wealth just like modern dynasties extract wealth from their own property.
 
Irredentist said:
They are not particularly different. The only reason aristocracy is able to pass down governmental power is because of their claim to and control of territory, from which they are able to extract wealth just like modern dynasties extract wealth from their own property.
Click to expand...

The history books would very much disagree with you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom