7 ms·

Rest in peace! I have always felt strongly against monarchy. Especially against the British royal family, more so as I am an Indian. They never apologized for

Rest in peace! I have always felt strongly against monarchy. Especially against the British royal family, more so as I am an Indian. They never apologized for any of the massacres (Jallianwala is just one example) or pogroms committed at their behest and in their name. I do believe they are a disgusting symbol of colonialism, racism, subjugation. It is very disturbing that a good part of the world and an entire nation validates them, bows to them officially. But again, he was a fellow human being after all - I hope he finds peace if at all there's something after this and I hope he was at peace and content towards the end.

smcl 6y ago
As a Brit I agree wholeheartedly with your first paragraph. Re your second, you are a much more mature and compassionate person than I am about this. I am completely ambivalent about his death. He was a very old man who lived a spectacularly privileged life and had little to no worries. I care not a jot whether he found peace.
- gadders 6y ago
  I think that says more about your character than that of the Duke of Edinburgh.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - smcl 6y ago
    What might that be?
    - gadders 6y ago
      Vindictive, with an adolescent desire to shock and offend?
      - monkey_monkey 6y ago
        Or perhaps mature and non-sycophantic to a man who mostly lived a life of privilege. Also, it's interesting that it's you that is casting personal aspersions...
      - smcl 6y ago
        Not having any strong feelings about the birth, life or death of the royals is an extremely mild sentiment that is shared by millions in the UK and billions across the globe. If you find it shocking, offensive or vindictive then I don't think the internet is the place for you.
        gadders 6y ago
        It's the urge to blurt it out to be controversial that is what I find childish.
        monkey_monkey 6y ago
        Actually it's you being emotional and childish. Calm down, dear.
        gadders 6y ago
        Hardly.
        smcl 6y ago
        The original commenter is an Indian who would have more reason than most to despise the Royal family and, frankly, the UK in general. Yet they showed genuine compassion and goodwill towards Philip. This was surprising and I thought it interesting to share that as a Brit I have nearly no feelings at all (other than my general dislike of the monarchy). This is a forum, we interact and share our opinions through these comments and what I said was pretty uncontroversial. If you are bothered by his passing then fine, I'm sorry for your loss. But maybe trying to pick fights on HN is not the most productive way to grieve.
- monkey_monkey 6y ago
  Agreed. I'm fairly sure many people of more actual worth die every day with no one here giving a shit. The monarchy is a relic that really should be dismantled.
- ephextom 6y ago
  > "had little to no worries" - As an infant, was evacuated from Greece with his (and his family's) life in grave danger. Spent his childhood mostly estranged from his family - As a young man, served on a naval ship as part of the campaign to defeat fascist Germany and Japan. At least once helped save his ship's crew from a German bombing attack. Probably faced many other threats to his own life and to his comrades. - Spent the rest of his life as an ambassador for his family and country, and counsel to his wife whose job it is to ensure the country and Commonwealth continues to function with stability and prosperity, including through political/economic crises, national emergencies, local/global cultural shifts, etc. - Attended 22,000 official events and delivered 5000 speeches. Was an early advocate for environmentalism and animal welfare. Conceived and headed a youth development organisation for most of his public life. - Endured family tragedies, relentless media/public scrutiny and criticism, and constant campaign against his family's wealth and role in the political system. You may not like him. Fine. I didn't care much for him, and I don't hold a great deal of pity for him for the difficulties he and his family have faced. But "little to no worries" is a giant leap.
  - smcl 6y ago
    I'm not going to debate the pros and cons of a dead royal. It is indisputable that he led an incredibly privileged existence, try to think what the life of your average commoner also born in 1921 was like if you are not sure.
    - ephextom 6y ago
      You brought it up and keep replying, so you've clearly got an axe to grind. Not a single person is denying he was privileged. Your implication is that a privileged life is a life of "little to no worries", which is frequently asserted by people who seek to attack the wealthy simply for being wealthy, but it is a deep misconception in most cases, and particularly so for a sovereign leader. I understand you feel it's important to express contempt for a rich person at the time of their passing, but that doesn't excuse falsehoods.
      - smcl 6y ago
nindalf 6y ago
I think it’s interesting that you’d blame this family for the horrors of colonialism. They haven’t had a say in British policy for around 2 centuries. Although the monarch meets the Prime Minister every week, they cannot tell the PM what to do, unless it affects the royal family personally. The PM listens to what they have to say but charts their own course. If you’re looking for someone to blame, Churchill deserves some. Many Prime Ministers before him as well. But I don’t think Philip deserves any. You call them a symbol, that’s all they are. They’re someone to point at and say “yeah that’s our country”, so no single politician can claim that mantle. As an Indian you must be aware how easy it is for a politician to claim they’re the personification of the nation (“India is Indira and Indira is India”). That cannot happen in the UK because the PM is merely a temporary caretaker appointed by the monarch. The symbolism matters. Source: The English Constitution by Walter Bagehot (1867)
- Thorentis 6y ago
  Unfortunately people are very quick to assign "generational guilt" these days. It's as if we've gone backwards, and are no longer capable of being individuals. "Oh, you're white/black/related to x/decended from y, did you know your ancestors did *that*?"
  - kmlx 6y ago
    because it’s much simpler for people to find external causes to their misery than looking at their own actions. nothing new, see “religion”.
    - andrepd 6y ago
      Yes, history is a figment of our imagination, every person's misery is due to their own actions. /s
  - bojan 6y ago
    They are quick to assign generational guilt because they still have to live with the consequences of what happened those generations ago.
andrepd 6y ago
Disappointing to see showers of downvotes for a respectable opinion, burying your thoughts under heaps of comments praising a useless dead monarch.
- cryptica 6y ago
  Rich people are all equally useless. They're all parasites who profit from the exploitation and monopolization of people and economic resources. There is no such thing as a 'self made' millionaire or billionaire. They just got lucky and most of the time somebody helped them.
- smcl 6y ago
  I only noticed now coming back to this thread that crossroadsguy's comment was flagged and marked as [dead]. I'm really surprised, the comment was absolutely fine. FWIW I vouched for it so it should be visible again.

smcl 6y ago

As a Brit I agree wholeheartedly with your first paragraph. Re your second, you are a much more mature and compassionate person than I am about this. I am completely ambivalent about his death. He was a very old man who lived a spectacularly privileged life and had little to no worries. I care not a jot whether he found peace.

gadders 6y ago
I think that says more about your character than that of the Duke of Edinburgh.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- smcl 6y ago
  What might that be?
  - gadders 6y ago
    Vindictive, with an adolescent desire to shock and offend?
    - monkey_monkey 6y ago
      Or perhaps mature and non-sycophantic to a man who mostly lived a life of privilege. Also, it's interesting that it's you that is casting personal aspersions...
    - smcl 6y ago
      Not having any strong feelings about the birth, life or death of the royals is an extremely mild sentiment that is shared by millions in the UK and billions across the globe. If you find it shocking, offensive or vindictive then I don't think the internet is the place for you.
      - gadders 6y ago
        It's the urge to blurt it out to be controversial that is what I find childish.
        monkey_monkey 6y ago
        Actually it's you being emotional and childish. Calm down, dear.
        gadders 6y ago
        Hardly.
        smcl 6y ago
        The original commenter is an Indian who would have more reason than most to despise the Royal family and, frankly, the UK in general. Yet they showed genuine compassion and goodwill towards Philip. This was surprising and I thought it interesting to share that as a Brit I have nearly no feelings at all (other than my general dislike of the monarchy). This is a forum, we interact and share our opinions through these comments and what I said was pretty uncontroversial. If you are bothered by his passing then fine, I'm sorry for your loss. But maybe trying to pick fights on HN is not the most productive way to grieve.
monkey_monkey 6y ago
Agreed. I'm fairly sure many people of more actual worth die every day with no one here giving a shit. The monarchy is a relic that really should be dismantled.
ephextom 6y ago
> "had little to no worries" - As an infant, was evacuated from Greece with his (and his family's) life in grave danger. Spent his childhood mostly estranged from his family - As a young man, served on a naval ship as part of the campaign to defeat fascist Germany and Japan. At least once helped save his ship's crew from a German bombing attack. Probably faced many other threats to his own life and to his comrades. - Spent the rest of his life as an ambassador for his family and country, and counsel to his wife whose job it is to ensure the country and Commonwealth continues to function with stability and prosperity, including through political/economic crises, national emergencies, local/global cultural shifts, etc. - Attended 22,000 official events and delivered 5000 speeches. Was an early advocate for environmentalism and animal welfare. Conceived and headed a youth development organisation for most of his public life. - Endured family tragedies, relentless media/public scrutiny and criticism, and constant campaign against his family's wealth and role in the political system. You may not like him. Fine. I didn't care much for him, and I don't hold a great deal of pity for him for the difficulties he and his family have faced. But "little to no worries" is a giant leap.
- smcl 6y ago
  I'm not going to debate the pros and cons of a dead royal. It is indisputable that he led an incredibly privileged existence, try to think what the life of your average commoner also born in 1921 was like if you are not sure.
  - ephextom 6y ago
    You brought it up and keep replying, so you've clearly got an axe to grind. Not a single person is denying he was privileged. Your implication is that a privileged life is a life of "little to no worries", which is frequently asserted by people who seek to attack the wealthy simply for being wealthy, but it is a deep misconception in most cases, and particularly so for a sovereign leader. I understand you feel it's important to express contempt for a rich person at the time of their passing, but that doesn't excuse falsehoods.
    - smcl 6y ago

nindalf 6y ago

I think it’s interesting that you’d blame this family for the horrors of colonialism. They haven’t had a say in British policy for around 2 centuries. Although the monarch meets the Prime Minister every week, they cannot tell the PM what to do, unless it affects the royal family personally. The PM listens to what they have to say but charts their own course. If you’re looking for someone to blame, Churchill deserves some. Many Prime Ministers before him as well. But I don’t think Philip deserves any. You call them a symbol, that’s all they are. They’re someone to point at and say “yeah that’s our country”, so no single politician can claim that mantle. As an Indian you must be aware how easy it is for a politician to claim they’re the personification of the nation (“India is Indira and Indira is India”). That cannot happen in the UK because the PM is merely a temporary caretaker appointed by the monarch. The symbolism matters. Source: The English Constitution by Walter Bagehot (1867)

Thorentis 6y ago
Unfortunately people are very quick to assign "generational guilt" these days. It's as if we've gone backwards, and are no longer capable of being individuals. "Oh, you're white/black/related to x/decended from y, did you know your ancestors did *that*?"
- kmlx 6y ago
  because it’s much simpler for people to find external causes to their misery than looking at their own actions. nothing new, see “religion”.
  - andrepd 6y ago
    Yes, history is a figment of our imagination, every person's misery is due to their own actions. /s
- bojan 6y ago
  They are quick to assign generational guilt because they still have to live with the consequences of what happened those generations ago.

andrepd 6y ago

Disappointing to see showers of downvotes for a respectable opinion, burying your thoughts under heaps of comments praising a useless dead monarch.

cryptica 6y ago
Rich people are all equally useless. They're all parasites who profit from the exploitation and monopolization of people and economic resources. There is no such thing as a 'self made' millionaire or billionaire. They just got lucky and most of the time somebody helped them.
smcl 6y ago
I only noticed now coming back to this thread that crossroadsguy's comment was flagged and marked as [dead]. I'm really surprised, the comment was absolutely fine. FWIW I vouched for it so it should be visible again.