View Single Post
  #24  
Old 08-19-2017, 10:21 AM
Dangerosa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 22,508
Quote:
Originally Posted by carnivorousplant View Post
Was the execution of the French king seen as a horrible act by the British? I recall reading that it was at the time a shocking crime, and would create problems for kingdoms and government if people thought they could wack their rulers at will. But the English had already done it.
Yes it was. So was the death of the Romanovs.

As to Cromwell, his reign (and I think it was a reign, he was King in all but name - plus his idiot son inherited the Lord Protector title, IIRC) did substantially limit the powers of the monarchy - which is a really good thing - and changed the nature of British power. I don't have an issue with him at Westminster - I would in front of Buckingham Palace.

But I'm American. I happen to like the British Constitutional Monarchy as it stands. The consistency a monarch give you to "advise" is something we sorely lack - and it Elizabeth you've had sixty years of someone who is pretty intelligent and aware. I'm sure you get your duds - and it seems many people are not looking forward to Charles' (probably short) reign, but the PM smiling and nodding at Charles once a week for a few years seems a reasonable price to pay. And I know that the monarchy costs a lot of money - but so does our Presidency - especially currently - and we aren't getting the tourist dollars off of mugs with Trump's mug on them.