Harry and Meghan

Wahaay said:
I'm happy to have a discussion but if you're going to adopt the high moral high ground at least be consistent.
Who exactly are these royals who had strong links to National Socialism in the 1930s and how does it make them Nazis ?
Click to expand...
There were rumours about Edward and Mrs Simpson being pally with Herr Ribbentrop but was never sure how much credence to give them.
I did see an entertaining b movie where the Germans were plotting to take him into custody to setup as a puppet...

Seems like being involved with an American woman leads to exile for princes of the realm!
 

Support for Hitler's Germany was reasonably strong in the Upper class in the early 30's. It wasn't just the royals but more widely among political and upper class generally. But it has to be taken in context - coming out of the 1920's, there was a global economic crisis and Germany seemed to be taking a strong approach. Added to that the main concern was communism and Russia which Germany was seen as a bulwark against. There was also sympathy post WW1 where the Treaty of Versailles was seen as being pretty harsh on Germany and there was also a simmering general anti-Semitic undertone in Europe broadly, probably fueled by the economic situation - not unlike the Brexit background where general economic issues can be attached to the "outsider" along with a influx of Jews in the late 1800's and early 1900's from the pogroms in Russia. There was also a long standing affinity with Germany notwithstanding WW1 - especially among the royals and peers (actual family in some cases). There was a general increase in similar political groups across Europe - Italy, Spain and UK (at one point the Blackshirts in England had the potential to be a significant political force). Wasn't just the UK - there was quite a lot of sympathy in the US as well. So all in all not surprising that there was some goodwill to Hitler.

But there weren't many "Nazi's" per se - the goodwill disappeared pretty quickly after the invasion of Czechoslovakia. Though it does seem Mr & Mrs Edward Windsor continued to be sympathetic and were seen as a possible security threat.
 
Don't forget Freiherr Günther Hubertus von Reibnitz, dedicated Nazi and father of Princess Michael of Kent.
Queen Vicky grandson Wilhelm II or Germany and George V were, obviously, first cousins. They were all related (Spain, Romania, Belgium, the lot of them).
 
EmmDee said:
But there weren't many "Nazi's" per se - the goodwill disappeared pretty quickly after the invasion of Czechoslovakia.
Click to expand...
That's open to debate. The goodwill disappeared when Germany started invading other countries and it was obvious that war was likely. The goodwill didn't disappear because they were opposed to the ideals of National Socialism.
 
One of the what ifs of history is the early death of Frederick III of Germany.
He was liberal and married to Queen Victoria's daughter, favoured a more democratic Germany,
He died after only 3 months on the throne aged 56.
A very good episode of the Fall of Eagles covered it.
 
EmmDee said:
But there weren't many "Nazi's" per se - the goodwill disappeared pretty quickly after the invasion of Czechoslovakia.
Click to expand...
I think it was a little bit after that. After the invasion of Czechoslovakia, the UK, France & Italy signed the Munich Agreement with the Germans, effectively throwing the Czechoslovakians under a bus. This was somewhat apologised for by Margaret Thatcher some 50 years later. But yes, Czechoslovakia and an Anschluss were key events in the run up to the war.

On the royal backing of the Munich Agreement:
The British population had expected an imminent war, and the "statesman-like gesture" of Chamberlain was at first greeted with acclaim. He was greeted as a hero by the royal family and invited on the balcony at Buckingham Palace before he had presented the agreement to the British Parliament. The generally-positive reaction quickly soured, despite royal patronage.

Munich Agreement - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
 
I didnt realise this until I watched the Crown but Prince Philip saw a lot of action at a relatively young age serving in the Royal Navy in WWII and was in Tokyo Bay during the Japanese surrender.
 
Sophrosyne said:
I used to like Harry, but his telling “his truth” ad nauseum has killed any regard I had for him.
Click to expand...
They are ghastly people, the lot of them. I never liked any of them.
I'm delighted that the institution itself is being damaged because as a concept it (royalty) is repugnant to the ideals of equality and constitutional democracy.
 
While it is all nonsense, the Royals are probably good value from a tourism viewpoint.
 
he's totally delusional - poor fella.. so undignified.. morto for them..
 
He is like a spoiled boy who never grew up. And is still throwing his toys out of the pram...
 
jan said:
he's totally delusional - poor fella.. so undignified.. morto for them..
Click to expand...

joer said:
He is like a spoiled boy who never grew up. And is still throwing his toys out of the pram...
Click to expand...
He's in good company though as the rest of them are as bad of worse.
His family are a bunch of dysfunctional inbred craven weirdos.
Unlike his grandmother he hasn't spent tens of millions of pounds of what should be tax payers money to keep his sex abuser uncle out of prison.
 
I do find it strange that no one in the UK is prepared to say anything negative about her.
 
Purple said:
That's not a good enough reason to have them though. I'd forego the revenue and have everyone equal under the law.
Click to expand...
Like here, you mean, depending on who you play golf with, went to school with, or who owes you favours?
 
mathepac said:
Like here, you mean, depending on who you play golf with, went to school with, or who owes you favours?
Click to expand...
No, not like here at all.
In Britain the monarch is better than you. Legally and constitutionally they are better than you. You can never have their job. You can't sit on a Jury which tries them. In fact they cannot stand trial. That's trial by your peers; your peer is your equal and the monarch has no equal. They could rape your child and they cannot, under British law, be held accountable. The reason Judges in the UK are made Lords is so that they can preside over the trial of a member of the aristocracy.

If you don't have the right accent and aren't from the right background you simply won't progress in vast areas of business and public life.
That stratification is embedded.

Of the UK's 57 Prime Ministers 20 went to Eton. 30% of MP's went to Private Schools and their private schools are vastly more expensive and exclusive than our ones (Eton, ironically, at around €20k a year for a day student, isn't that expensive).
 
I think we and they vastly underestimate the extent which Britain is still a feudal society.

In Scotland: The Green MSP and land reform campaigner Andy Wightman reckons that half of the country's rural land is owned by only 432 landowners - a picture that has remained largely unchanged in recent decades. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-47963208

The reason Ireland is such a different society is due to the changes in land ownership here in the end of the 19th century early 20th century.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register