• Chainweasel
      link
      fedilink
      English
      461 year ago

      No, he’s completely out of the running unless all of King Charles children and grandchildren mysteriously die

    • Lath
      link
      fedilink
      251 year ago

      I think it’s primogeniture monarchy, so it’s from parent to child. Next in line is Charles’ firstborn.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    171 year ago

    I just got my first Chucky Buck this weekend, we can’t switch to a new currency this quickly! Our economy is in shambles!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      See mate, the mint make a profit on money, do you think it costs £50 to run off one of them little plastic things.

      Edit: just realised you were one of our dear Canadian brethren. See hoser, the Canadian mint make a profit on money, you think it costs a loonie to strike of them little metal things?

  • Art35ian
    link
    fedilink
    3
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    So, Harry is next in line, right?

    /s

    I’m just fucking.

  • Laura
    link
    fedilink
    531 year ago

    oh no anyway

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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        111 year ago

        Yeah, hot take, but he’s underrated. Monarchy is dumb but at least this guy is progressive and personally kind.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          61 year ago

          Him and his current wife visibly mocked Inuit throat singers and have a long history of being childish and rude during events that are supposed to honor them. Personally kind to whom?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Just sounds like a rich dude to me. Like, I think this is the main reason he’s unpopular, but aristos often keep a harem and Diana herself seems overrated.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        61 year 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.

      • Thordros [he/him, comrade/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        34
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “Could it be that the zero empathy is because the man is reviled globally for good reasons?”

        “No, it’s the colonized who are wrong.”

      • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        241 year 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.

      • 7bicycles [he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        191 year 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?

      • FALGSConaut [comrade/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        251 year 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]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            71 year 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

      • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 year 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.

      • WittyProfileName2 [she/her]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        191 year 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.

      • T (they/she)
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

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

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    771 year 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 *

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        71 year 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

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          61 year 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            81 year 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.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                41 year 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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    141 year ago

    Oh no. A rich person with access to the best medical care in the world is sick. What ever will we do.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    371 year ago

    Would be weird for the longest serving monarch to be replaced by the shortest serving one.

    Which raises a good question… who was the shortest serving British monarch?

    Oh, of COURSE there’s a Wiki for that…

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_monarchy_records

    "The shortest-reigning monarch was Lady Jane Grey who ruled for 9 days from 6 July until 15 July 1553 (although she was only proclaimed queen by the Lords of the council on 10 July). Her husband Lord Guildford Dudley was her consort for the entire reign, making this the shortest tenure of the male consort of a female monarch. Note: Jane’s reign is disputed.

    The king with the shortest definitively known reign was Edgar the Ætheling who ruled for 2 months, 12 days in 1066 before submitting to William the Conqueror. Some records indicate that Sweyn Forkbeard reigned for only 40 days in 1013–4.[7]"

    Queen Elizabeth II died 9/8/2022, so Charles has already been in 514 days. He’s good…

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    131 year 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.

    • Flax
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      It isn’t. Our head of state is a kind old man while most other countries have some form of psychopath