• Bobmighty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    78
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    2 years ago

    I love the people in here standing up for him lol. An absolute fuckton of people die every day. Basically every moment has human death in it. No one defending him cares a single wit about them, but they’ll get wound up over this old man dying of something many many people die of daily.

    Considering everything that’s come out about the royal family, I can’t find a single care in me for him. I feel more for the countless faceless strangers dying worse deaths. This old pampered fuck will die well in comparison. He doesn’t need any sympathy from me.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        Don’t knock it, we get a day off when they die and a day off when we get a new one.

        Sometimes we get a day off when they’ve been on the throne for a set number of years.

        So for that reason I’d like to keep them.

        Give us two extra bank holidays a year, and you can King Ralph all these motherfuckers.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I mean, it did bring more money into the economy than it took out of it, same with Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral, so we could profit off of this

    • Pyr@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      And least he got to be king first :P

      I haven’t seen any new coins yet with his face on it. It may be the shortest run of coins with a new face. I’ve had the same face on my coins for my entire life, these will be the first with a new one.

      • Flax@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Shortest run was probably Edward VIII. My dad found a coin with Charles’s face on it. I also bought a few commemoratives. I think it’ll probably start appearing on £1 coins soon as they are the newest

  • computerscientistI@lemm.eeBanned
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    The royal family, including Charles are big proponents of homeopathy. Let’s see how much homeopathy is going to help him now. I’m sure at least as much as those alternative methods Steve Jobs chose helped him, back then…

  • Laura@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    oh no anyway

    but in all seriousness I hope he dies that guy is a piece of shit

      • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The redditors got it right for once?

        Why would you have empathy for monarchs? It’s the ultimate form of nepotism, believing that they can rule an entire country because of their bloodline. If they don’t abdicate the throne and dissolve the institution, they don’t deserve respect.

      • FALGSConaut [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Imagine pearl clutching for some ancient inbred royal dipshit. Literal medieval peasant brain. “Oh no won’t someone think of the million year old pervert who lived a long life full of luxury one can barely begin to comprehend” Fuck him, fuck his whole family, I hope every single royal gets aggressive untreatable cancer, that’s better than they deserve.

        TL,DR: dennis I didn’t vote for him!

          • FALGSConaut [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 years ago

            Mainly confused and surprised someone would support a monarch in the 21st century. You don’t even have the excuse that the queen has been in charge for your whole life so you feel obligated to support her out of a misplaced sense of loyalty or something. Some ancient failson gets to sit in a golden chair and you can’t lick his boots fast enough. It’s pathetic, you aren’t even worshiping someone who can claim they got to where they are on personal merit, he just had to wait for his mom to die and he almost couldn’t even do that! Monarchy is such a farce, I’d be embarrassed to support that shit

      • 7bicycles [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        2 years ago

        made me realise that this place is a piece of shit with absolutely zero empathy for anyone.

        Is every person the king of england or how do you get to this conclusion?

      • WittyProfileName2 [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        No one voted for the wanker, but we still have to pay to keep him and his incestous kin in riches while our fellow countrymen starve in the street.

        He wants pity, he should abandon this hereditary rule bullshit and take all those unelected peers up in parliament with him back to the medieval age where they belong.

      • purahna@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 years ago

        give us one singular solitary good reason we should have empathy for this decrepit, cheating, silver spoon mouthed, tax leeching, sex pest, waste of money and attention

      • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 years ago

        Not so, we have plenty of empathy for those who actually deserve it.

        Palestine will be free, long live the PFLP, long live Ansar Allah, full support to the DPRK in it’s quest to free their southern siblings from beneath the heel of the genocidal American empire.

      • LaLuzDelSol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        Nah its just a leftist echo chamber. They have sympathy for the working class, but are very prejudiced against the wealthy. Personally, I would guess Charles is a decent human being, like most people. Im sure hes done some shitty things over the course of a long and extremely public life, but pretty much everyone has. I disagree with the concept of royalty but that doesn’t mean I want all monarchs to drop dead. Not a lot of nuance on Lemmy.

      • T (they/she)@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I understand your frustration but I fail to understand why the need of empathy for a monarch of all people

  • DessertStorms@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    I was happy for a second and then remembered that karma is a bad take and that he will be getting the absolute best available healthcare and even if he does die, he will be doing so having gotten to old age, in extreme luxury and in more comfort than any of us will ever experience.

    I worry that if he does die soon it will only embolden royalist sentiment in this country as the grieving masses will cling on to the “young king” which the media will spin as “progressive” or whatever, and we’ll just keep getting further and further away from abolishing this disgusting establishment.

    We seriously need a King Ralph type thing to happen, only the people take over, instead of a stereotypical American. Turn Buckingham palace in to a community centre with a kitchen and a shelter and childcare and a free mental health clinic, and put those gardens to actual use…

    • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Karma is a lie white people tell themselves so they can continue to believe there’s justice in this world.

    • InformalTrifle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      I can understand you wanting to abolish the royal family (I do too), but I can’t understand your hatred of him personally, to actually be happy he has cancer. He doesn’t seem like a bad/evil person to me

      • atomicorange@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 years ago

        You don’t exterminate mosquitoes because they are evil, you get rid of them because they are parasites, unable to exist without feeding on you and your loved ones. They are disease vectors, it’s us or them.

        The royal family feeds into hierarchical structures. They benefit from our subjugation. They knowingly and intentionally contribute to death and misery worldwide for their own benefit. If Charles was a decent man he’d abdicate.

      • DessertStorms@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        If sitting on a gold throne, in a gold room, riding around in your gold carriage, covered in jewels, none of which were (or ever could be) “earned”, but rather pillaged, without even knowing what a days work feels like, while the people you’re parading your “god given right” to lord over, and whose wealth you hoard privately overseas, are having to choose between heating and eating as they work 3 zero hour jobs just to survive - isn’t considered evil in your mind, it is your moral compass that is the problem, not me feeling momentary joy when a cancer gets cancer.

      • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        He cheated on his wife, very publicly for years. Idk about your views but maintaining a mistress immediately excludes you from being a good person. Charles was a prick for a long time before he started committing to charity, conservation, social outreach programs, etc

        • Swuden@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          No disagreements about about him being a prick, but wishing cancer and even death on another person seems pretty wild to me.

          • DessertStorms@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 years ago

            Please point to where anyone wished cancer on anyone?*

            Also, the fact that people don’t feel sorry for the filthy rich old man getting what is almost certainly an age related disease (because it’s not like he was exposed to the levels of shit food and air and stress that gives the rest of us cancer), is wild to you, but the existence of a “god appointed” ruler that leeches off of his people while they struggle to survive isn’t, says a lot more about you than me not giving much of a shit does about me…

            *E: you know what? Even if I had, wishing death on a person whose entire existence depends on the oppression (and death) of others on a mass, almost unimaginable scale, is still less morally repugnant than defending them. ¯\(ツ)
            Eat the fucking rich - they’ve brought it on themselves.

          • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            I don’t think that wishing death on someone is always bad but I don’t really get it for King Charles

    • twinnie@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      What exactly do you hate about him? Is it his stance on climate change or the Prince Trust maybe? The Royal family are an important source of culture, tourism, and soft power when the UK’s overseas influence is waning. What good to you think will come of getting rid of them?

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The UK truly is in shambles if their tourism industry and culture depend on a cabal of ghouls siphoning vast amounts of wealth from the people purely for show.

        Personally, I like to think the people of the UK have a lot more to them than their vestigial rulers.

      • Zellith@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The Royal family are an important source of culture, tourism, and soft power

        The Royal family isnt an important source of tourism.

        • atp2112@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 years ago

          Palaces like Versailles and Sanssouci get millions of visitors every year without a group of racists and pedophiles around and actively in power to give it some greater meaning.

      • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        What good to you think will come of getting rid of them?

        We’d become a proper modern country where the person who represents the nation is chosen by the nation? We’d move on from a system where who’s up front simply depends on who their mum or dad were? We’d rid ourselves of a system trained with centuries of imperial exploitation, racism and subjugation? We’d open up new tourism opportunities, with the palaces and castles being available for anyone to visit, a la Versailles?

        And that’s just off the top of my head.

        • lazynooblet@lazysoci.al
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 years ago

          It doesn’t explain why you have so much venom. I see the royal family as British heritage. I don’t see how having a monarchy with no real power has any effect on the day to day lives of British people. Certainly not enough to explain the hate.

          • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            2 years ago

            You know what else is a British heritage? Famines in India.

            Aristocracy is privilege without any kind of merit whatsoever. It costs the tax payer millions and undermines democracy.

          • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 years ago

            a monarchy with no real power

            I don’t know if it’s that you don’t know anything about the royal family, or that you don’t know anything about how power works, or both.

            • lazynooblet@lazysoci.al
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 years ago

              They have influence, not governing power. Sure you could argue they don’t deserve the influence they have just for being in that position. The main point however is questioning the /hate/. I know you’re not the poster who I was replying to, but I didn’t want to distract the point of my post. Why should we hate the monarchy so much?

              • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                We shouldn’t hate the monarchy, necessarily. We should hate monarchy as a concept.

                It’s archaic, it formalises and legitimises unbelievable levels of inequality and elitism, and it gives rise to at least the strong possibility (and in the UK’s case at least, the actuality) of a tiered legal system, with some laws simply not applying to some people because of their position.

                It’s a repulsive idea, based on historical might and hereditary right, and with no regard for democracy or equality of all people.

                • lazynooblet@lazysoci.al
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  That makes sense. I agree with that. Thank you.

                  I felt somewhat disheartened that the response of a guy announcing he has cancer is filled with such toxicity.

              • Arthur Besse@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                They have influence, not governing power

                The old man that this post is about literally does have governing power, not only in the UK but also in 14 other countries including Australia and Canada. A common argument made by monarchists is that the monarch’s actual influence is negligible, and their governing power should be ignored because it is only ceremonial.

                As Wikipedia puts it:

                Royal assent is the method by which a monarch formally approves an act of the legislature, either directly or through an official acting on the monarch’s behalf. Under a modern constitutional monarchy, royal assent is considered little more than a formality. Even in nations such as the United Kingdom, Norway, the Netherlands, Liechtenstein and Monaco which still, in theory, permit their monarch to withhold assent to laws, the monarch almost never does so, except in a dire political emergency or on advice of government.

                But… there is a catch:

                screenshot of the top of wikipedia "royal assent" article showing "Not to be confused with King's Consent."

                It turns out that there is also a less formal process (or a “parliamentary convention”; another part of the UK’s heritage is having an “unwritten constitution”, whatever that means) called King’s Consent whereby the monarch, in secret, is consulted before parliament is allowed to debate anything which might affect their personal interests. And it turns out, a lot of things might affect their personal interests, so, this procedure has been and continues to be used to review, shape, and in some cases veto, numerous laws before they are allowed to be debated by parliament. You can read more here.

                🤡

              • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 years ago

                sorry, but arent the crimes of their fathers the sole basis for our worshipping them, allowing tbem political power and sending the pricks millions upon millions of tax payer pounds?

                you dont reckon its a little disingenuous to complain about people shitting on their heritage when said heritage is the entire argument for their existence

                • lazynooblet@lazysoci.al
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  You’re not wrong. I take the view that our history, be it good or bad, is part of who we are as a people. However, I wouldn’t want Britain to abolish the monarchy without good reason, and something that occured in the here and now rather than the past.

                  There are some replies to this thread that have enlightened me on the power the monarchy holds, which I don’t agree they shoud have. I initially thought the monarchy was a symbolic relic, but it seems it’s not the case.

          • Zellith@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            So some guy came to England, killed another guy who claimed to rule it, and now we have to watch their family spend eternity in decadent luxury because “British Heritage”. pfft.

            Tell you what. I’ll go perform some actions that make myself king, and then a few generations from now my family will be British heritage. Then we can all be happy.

          • Aggravationstation@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 years ago

            I don’t see how having a monarchy with no real power has any effect on the day to day lives of British people.

            Then what the hell is the point in the amount of tax money that we spend on them? If tourism is such a big money spinner for the country then getting rid of them and keeping the related buildings would still bring in money without having to pay for the decadent lives of these parasites.

    • ☭ Comrade Pup Ivy 🇨🇺@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      I have… I have also bribed the cancer, and I have also started to write the chant. I am thinking of doing a remix of the catchy Lizzie’s in a box with a Charley’s in a box but leaving the rest the same. I also think once he is gone the guy who got banned from having eggs in public in the UK should be allowed to have eggs agian.

        • To summarize, a man Patrik Thelwell threw an egg in the general direction of Charley, the court ordered a 500 m restraining order (I will agree perfectly reasonable) from Charles and his wife, and the other is he is banned from publicly possessing eggs. That was late 2022, early 2023 he was arrested on suspicion carrying eggs. They also alegedly have counter terrorism following them.

          I understand that all in all this is quaint considering what the US would do if for example eggs where thrown in the direction of Joe Biden, Offically the sentence was a year of community service (along with the no eggs and restraining order) but it still seems beyond rediculous. and I would say what the US would do is incredably extreme. The restraining order and Community service would have been sufficent

      • Tangentism@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Maybe you should go wash your mouth after all the bootlicking.

        The guy was born into an anachronistic system where he has had absolute privilege and his family indulged in political interference (a lot to their own benefit) despite claiming to just be impartial figureheads.

        Last summer a football player had to campaign to keep free school meals going through the summer so millions of kids in poverty could fucking eat.

        So what if some privilege cunt has arse cancer?

        • HandBreadedTools@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Lmfao apparently it’s “bootlicking” to point out a criminally online take. I, for one, don’t think people should be judged based on circumstances out of their control, like where or when they were born. There are plenty of reasons to dislike the dude, like no really there are so god damn many, but him being born into it is not one of them.

          I’m not even saying you shouldn’t be pleased to see his death, just that making jokes about the suffering that occurs from cancer is a take so distant from reality of course you’ll only see it online. If you are genuinely pleased by hearing about someone’s cancer diagnosis, you should really do some self evaluation.

          If you think him dying from that will purge the UK of the monarchy, I have a bridge to sell you. There are actual things you could do to help end it, the original comment I replied to isn’t one.

  • Phegan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 years ago

    It’s a bummer that his reign may not last long enough for the British to decide that maybe a king is a bad idea.

  • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 years ago

    Could this new development mean that it is possible that his reign may not be a bit shorter than his mother’s?

    • systemguy_64@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      I dunno if we want to see a 142 year old Charles. We saw how decrepit Phillip looked by the 2000s, and then in 2021. Imagine what another 40 years will do on top of that.

  • Guy Ingonito@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    2 years ago

    It will be so funny if he takrs a sharp turn downhill and dies. Dude was famous for never getting a chance to be king and then to go out so quickly would be * chef’s kiss *

      • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Do you think they have any compassion for the random proles like us? Like they could divest themselves of wealth to help people, and just live luxurious lives instead of gold flakes in food lives.

        I think any human being with enough compassion to deserve treatment as anything more than a hostile enemy would do that

        • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          2 years ago

          I think they’d have compassion enough to not laugh at somebody’s cancer diagnosis, yes.

          I’m all for disliking the institution. Doesn’t mean I think he deserves to have cancer or it would be funny if he died.

          • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            2 years ago

            He literally chooses every single day to actively ignore the plight of the people he claims to rule. He does nothing

            Every single day he actively chooses to ignore suffering, probably even cracks jokes about it, while actively working to preserve his enormous privilege and protect his kin from facing consequences for their heinous actions. He stands at the head of an institution of violence, racism, cruelty, and exploitation and every single moment of his life he chooses to side with that over any earnest attempt to redeem their reputation.

            The entire justification for their privilege is so insane it makes phrenology look respectable.

            He is horrible, he could help so many people with a few words and the equivalent of pocket change but he chooses not to for fear of starting a process that ends with him living as one of the ordinary citizens he claims to protect. It’s fucking bananas that you think there is some moral reasons to extend civility to such a monsterous person.

            • sunbeam60@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              If you think I’m defending the monarchy, think again. I’m defending compassion.

              • naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                2 years ago

                It’s not brave or noble to police expressions of anger at oppressors it’s just foolish. It won’t make society better, civility is just a tool the powerful use to enforce the status quo.

                He chooses to let someone starve over feeding them, this is fine a civil behavior. I call him a fucking cunt for doing that and wish death upon him and this is uncivil behaviour and I lack compassion? nonsense, it is compassion that fills me with rage.