#the monarchy

[pansexual-lilychen]

the european urge to contact everyone you know to let them know the queen has died

[useless-englandfacts]

Best tweet about this that I've seen thus far -

https: //twitter.com/ stavvers/ status/ 1567861075 189678084 (without the spaces obvs)(thought you'd appreciate it, we love a bit of history)

ex-fucking-SCUSE me?

[for-valour]

I adore finding original true colour footage of our lovely King George VI ❤️

There is so little available that I am always surprised to see his tanned skin (from spending so much time outdoors!) and the brightness of his ribbon medals.

Check out the way he just eyeballs the camera for a split second. You better look sharp and behave! Bertie’s always watching you…

King George VI and Queen Elizabeth visit the Telecommunications Research Establishment (TRE) at Malvern College, Worcestershire, in 1944. Source: The Imperial War Museum

gifs made by: @for-valour

[sophiamcdougall]

[ID @agentdedf1sh : Your queen could fucking do something?! I thought she was just eye candy at this point.]

Oof, so OK. The very broad strokes version, leaving out a lot of major caveats: our system is a fudge between our desire to be a democracy and our reluctance to get rid of the monarchy because it makes us feel fancy and the one time we cut a king's head off it was upsetting and resulted in 11 years with no Christmas. The fudge is that the Queen has immense power but she can't use it. Now you might think "so functionally she doesn't have any power" and in ALL OF OUR EXPERIENCE INCLUDING HERS YOU WOULD BE RIGHT! [Mostly, see the link above.] But it is theoretically possible to engineer circumstances in which the fact that all that power is legally, constitutionally still there would become horribly relevant after all. So here's how it works. Only the Queen has the power to appoint or dismiss a Prime Minister, who governs for her! Because she is the Sovereign! The PM can't dissolve parliament or call elections without her permission! So that's clearly not democratic, how can we make it so? Well, she only gets to appoint someone who commands confidence in the House of Commons. The simplest way that happens is like this:

There's an election

One party gets a majority of seats, i.e most MPs in the House of Commons support the leader of that party.

The leader of that party goes to the Queen and says "I'm here from Parliament, they want me to form a government, may I do that, please?"

She has to say yes even if she hates their guts, and now that person is Prime Minister.

So, in all of our experience, only 1 & 2 actually do anything and 3 & 4 are just a silly little ritual that doesn't matter and we just let it happen to be cute. The Queen is not supposed to be involved in politics and she "gives permission" to whoever Parliament tells her to give it to. And if the leading party or Parliament as a whole wants to dump a Prime Minister? Well they have various ways of making it clear that It's Over, and the PM goes to the Queen and resigns, of course! NOTE: Going to the Queen is the only way a PM can quit and despite how the press are reporting Johnson's "resignation" he has not done this. EXCEPT. Like certain other *cough the US* systems the whole thing hangs together on the assumption that no one would ever be a dick about any of it. But what if they did. What if the leading party, or Parliament as a whole, voted to get rid of the Prime Minister and he just ... didn't go to the Queen and resign?

In that scenario, MPs could make it impossible for him to govern, but they couldn't actually, legally, fire him. They have no constitutional power to make him not Prime Minister any more. They've never needed that power before because it's always been taken for granted that any PM rejected by their party would of course honorably accept their fate. The only person who has the until-this-point entirely theoretical power to sack the PM? The Queen.

Parliament COULD go ahead and elect a new leader who could duly go to the Queen and say "can I be PM please?" But that still wouldn't, in itself, de-Prime-Ministerify the existing PM.

So this would put the Queen in a positon where only she could fire the rogue Prime Minister, and she should because she's supposed to honour the will of Parliament. But there is no Parliamentary mechanism for prompting her to do this, and it would certainly look and feel a lot like getting involved in politics, which she's absolutely not supposed to do. Especially as in this scenario the PM probably still has at least some MPs supporting him -- so essentially we're imagining a scenario where Parliament has torn itself in two and by sacking the PM the Queen would be picking a side! So what if -- being very old and frail and finding herself in a situation she's never been in before and which was never supposed to happen, a situation where instead of just rubberstamping the request to be PM of anyone in front of her as she has her entire adult life, she has to make a decision ... what if she makes the wrong call?

Hopefully, after today's events, this is all interestingly theoretical now. But as I say. Johnson has not actually resigned yet.

[n7punk]

because no one else is fucking writing it up on tumblr and i want to remember this bonkers moment: for those who doesn't use tiktok or twitter/just haven't come across it, kate middleton has been "missing" for two months (last photographed on christmas) because she was supposedly at the hospital (later at home, somehow leaving the hospital without being seen) recovering in privacy from a "planned abdominal surgery" (that despite being "planned" she needed to suddenly cancel her engagements for), which is fine, but the total lack of photographs/video and history of coverups and mistreatment in the royal family made people suspicious and ask for proof of life (just a photo, the royal family is constantly being photographed), which didn't happen for 70 days, when a single photo of probably-Kate being driven by her mother popped up, but the photo was so grainy it didn't convince some people.

now today the internet is on fire because they finally posted a high-res photo of her with her kids (sans William, supposedly he took the photo), except it's so clearly-yet-subtly photoshopped around her head that it almost looks like AI generated it. people immediately started tearing it apart and then several media outlets (including AP) put out notices to their partners not to share the photo because even THEY believed it had been edited. so the royal family had to put out a statement, right? well the statement from kate's twitter (supposedly written by her, except we know from harry that they would put out press statements "signed by him" that he had never seen) says "Like many amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing", making the story that kate herself photoshopped a different head on the picture to idk, hide her wrinkles or something (hilarious notion that she would do this instead of someone on pr, especially when the photographer was supposed to be WILLIAM but now she's taking the fall), and then she signed it with the letter "C" (her full name is Catherine with a C), which as far as I can tell is something she does very occasionally (the last time she did it before this photo and the following photoshop statement that i could find is another family photo on christmas last year), but it's as if they're trying to affirm that trust us bro, kate is the one tweeting.

also now there's articles being posted about william's alleged mistress and out of nowhere there's a supposed paparazzi photo of kate driving around when days before the british media said they weren't going to post anything of her until she returned to royal duties, almost like they got the greenlight to do damage control. anyway people should get time to recover from surgery but this whole thing is either shady or ludicrous.

[dispatchesfromtheclasswar]

[meltingangels]

Tumblr the second that the Queen kicked the bucket:

[allthecanadianpolitics]

An Alberta judge has dismissed an Edmonton law student’s challenge to the legal profession’s mandatory Oath of Allegiance to the monarch. Prabjot Singh Wirring had argued the portion of the oath mandated by the Legal Profession Act that includes pledging allegiance to the sovereign violates his Charter rights to religious freedom and equality. Wirring, who is an Amritdhari Sikh, said he is only allowed to pledge allegiance to a divine being in the Sikh tradition and not Queen Elizabeth, who was the reigning monarch at the time his suit was filed. He said the Oath of Allegiance to the queen was incompatible with his beliefs and filed a statement of claim last year against the Law Society of Alberta and the Alberta government.

Continue Reading.

Tagging: @politicsofcanada @abpoli

[otherpens]

[feathered-serpents]

The grim reaper was at the coronation

This is. The funniest thing that has ever happened

[windsorburg0510]

The Queen and Members of The Royal Family attend Trooping the Colour 2023 💂🏻‍♀️💂🏽‍♂️💂🏼

Please watching my Video until the end!!

Today, The Queen and Members of The Royal Family attended the annual Queen’s Birthday Parade known as Trooping the Colour.

The event took place on Horse Guards Parade in London, and The Queen travelled down The Mall from Buckingham Palace in the Scottish State Coach.

The Parade was also attended by HRH Prince Peter,The Duke of Windsorburg, HRH Jame Prince Crown, The Duke of Edinburg, HRH Henry, The Duke of Wellington who rode out as Royal Colonels of various regiments.

HRH Princess Margrethe, The Crown Princess, HRH Princess Victoria,The Royal Princess,The Duchess of Edinburg and The Duchess of Wellington, attended and travelled and waiting to The Queen Arrival.

During her reign The Queen has attended Trooping the Colour every year, However over 1400 parading soldiers, almost 300 horses Cavalry took part in the ceremony today.💂🏻‍♀️💂🏼💂🏽‍♂️

The Colour of the 1st Battalion Grenadier Guards Grenadier Guards were "trooped" at the Parade. The colours (flags) of the battalion are carried (or trooped) down the ranks.

The Queen’s actual birthday is 5 October but is officially celebrated in June with Trooping the Colour, which has marked the official birthday of the British Sovereign for over 350 years.

_______________________________________________

Thank you so much for watching my video or post until the end.

The Horse Guards Will release to download in the future soon!!

Thank you for great CC 👇🏻

gorgeous carriage @annadedanann

@felixandresims @thejim07 @the-regal-sim @themarblemortal @batsfromwesteros @goldensanctuarysims @awingedllama @bank42n @cliffou29 @dvqve-d-briga @happylifesims @itskingfalcon @melonsloth @normalsiim @royaltysimblr @sims4studioofficial @theroyalsims

[useless-englandfacts]

wait a minute…

[isthisabattleship]

Another day on normal island.

[for-valour]

Happy Heavenly Birthday to His Majesty King George VI; dearest Albert Frederick Arthur George; and, of course, our darling Bertie.

128 years old today, and forever handsome & delightful ❤️

14 Dec 1895 - 6 Feb 1952.

The Duke of York visits Penarth, South Wales , 1921. GIFs made by @for-valour

[fixing-bad-posts]

[Image description: A Twitter text-post, by @realMatJThompson, edited blackout poetry style. Resulting text is below.]

---

Imagine being a country with a king

Submitted by @angry-spanish-marxist

[im-a-goat-in-disguise]

I see my country is having a normal one today