• 3arn0wl@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    He ought to have sparked a constitutional crisis and refused to say it. Then he should have devolved the government.

      • Random Dent@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Presumably it’d mean either the end of the monarchy or the end of the government as we know it, so it’s a win-win for us lol

        • Random Dent@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean he’s 70-odd and has basically been powerless his whole life, if the options are to rock the boat or kick the can down the road and live out his last decade or two doing bugger-all in unimaginable opulence, I can see why he’d pick the latter.

          Like it’s not necessarily the morally right option, but I get it.

        • 3arn0wl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yes, I can understand that, but he’s been a lead voice on the environment a lot longer than most. I guess he’s swapped his beliefs & scruples for the trappings of monarchy, and that diminishes him rather than elivates him in my eyes.

          • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            You expected him to be making political statements as the monarch?

            The only reason the monarchy still exists is because the head of it remains apolitical.

            • 3arn0wl@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I guess I had some inchoate expectation that he’d be more influential. Sunak’s just turned him into a hypocrite.