FleaInNYCbanner.jpg

? ABBA: Eagle | Main | Viva Las Vader ?

March 28, 2007

King William, please

PrinceWillliam.jpg

Agent Bedhead once again steals a march on the Flea by being first to post calls for William to succeed the throne (I lifted the photo too). Whatever amusement value might come from the current heir attempting the job, there is a whiff of the 1930s about the man. If, as I suspect is likely, Parliament is going to have to be suspended to address the problems that need to be addressed we cannot rely on Charles to do the job.

As it stands, we have a Royal Navy forbidden to defend itself; half of which is to be moth-balled in any event. Once London is lost - to fire or to the sword - and the Court removed to Oxford there may be one remaining chance to set things to rights.

All we can do Update: Arthur Herman states the problem succinctly. I find I am full of a deep and abiding fury.

America always looks better when a couple of frigates flying the Royal Navy's White Ensign are side by side with those flying the Stars and Stripes. U.S. sailors also know that in a real fight, the men of the Royal Navy, which our navy men still call the "Senior Service," will never let them down.

That contribution has never been vital to America - yet it was a badge of honor for Britain. It had echoes of past glory as an empire, of course, but also of Britain's historic role as protector of a civilized and stable world order, and specifically the role of the Royal Navy. The British navy had wiped out the slave trade; it had single-handedly defied tyrants from Louis XIV and Napoleon to Hitler; and it served as midwife to the ideas of free trade and the balance of power.

Now those days are gone for good.

Posted by Ghost of a flea at March 28, 2007 07:24 AM

Comments

Perhaps I'm mistaken but I don't think the Queen can designate her own successor... isn't that right reserved to Parliament since 1688 (Glorious Revolution and all that)?

Posted by: Chris Taylor [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 28, 2007 09:41 AM

According to the linked Wikipedia article, the process is governed by the Act of Union (1800) according to provisions dating back to the Glorious Revolution. Though as I am calling for rule by Privy Council it is arguably a moot point.

Posted by: Ghost of a flea [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 28, 2007 09:49 AM

Though I think we also have some leg room if Parliament declares Charles "naturally dead"; a fact which seems self-evident.

Posted by: Ghost of a flea [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 28, 2007 09:55 AM

While I am being particular, I want to clarify that I mean rule by Privy Council without specific reference to the Cabinet committee of the Privy Council.

Posted by: Ghost of a flea [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 28, 2007 10:04 AM

The Queen might convince Charles to voluntarily abdicate under the grounds that he simply isn't fit to be King. See Duke of Windsor precedent...

Posted by: agent bedhead [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 28, 2007 10:50 AM

I'd say that the lad needs a tour or two in Iraq first to really solidify what's what in his mind and then he'd be rather ideal I think. What combat service did Charles see? Defense of the last vestiges of the empire vs William's fight in defense of Western Civilization?

Posted by: Montieth [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 28, 2007 01:33 PM

I saw a bit of a special on PBS about Charles. It was narrated by a Scottish woman, and was kind of schizophrenic -- sympathetic to Charles and his early non-monarchist yearnings (as opposed to his stuffy old trad-royal-Brit dad Phillip), until they got to Diana, and then of course it flipped over to "poor, poor put-upon Di." And then after she croaked it was back to "poor Charles was never allowed to be himself." Anyway, there was this one bit where they mentioned how he really wanted to concentrate on art and stuff, but bad old dad made him go to military school and so on. I remember thinking, "You know, when you are England, you don't get to mess around with playing artiste."

Posted by: Andrea Harris [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 28, 2007 07:04 PM

Not to be a prig but I called for them to skip Charles and go to William quite a while ago. Charles would be a disasterous King.

Posted by: Andrew Ian Dodge [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 29, 2007 03:32 AM