3 ms·

I argue that because she focused so hard on being seen positively that she hurt the monarchy in the long run. Her son has nowhere to go but down. She also force

I argue that because she focused so hard on being seen positively that she hurt the monarchy in the long run. Her son has nowhere to go but down. She also forced the British Supreme Court to invent the idea that advice given to her can be unlawful, and did not stay out of politics as you said: she was laser-focused on making sure her privileges and money didn’t get touched by denying Queen’s consent. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vetted-more-than-1000-laws-via-queens-consent https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/feb/08/royals-vette... She didn’t want to have to wear seatbelts on public roads passing through her property. That’s being involved in politics; it’s just the public didn’t know about it.

sgt101 6y ago
"She didn’t want to have to wear seatbelts on public roads passing through her property." If this is your idea of a political issue then I strongly recommend the reading of newspapers and engagement with local institutions. Also, I am of "the public" and I knew, due to reading Private Eye which had reported on all this repeatedly for the last 10 or more years.
- philistine 6y ago
  I gave a really stupid sounding example. How about the denial of rights to long-term leasers on her duchies? Oh and maybe don't attack my character. My ideas can be vilified, but you don't know what I know or don't.
DanBC 6y ago
She didn't have to wear seatbelts on public roads through her property. The Queen cannot be prosecuted in England.
- myrandomcomment 6y ago
  She also does not need a drivers license, etc. as they are all issued in her name.
dghf 6y ago
> She also forced the British Supreme Court to invent the idea that advice given to her can be unlawful How did she do that?
- jen20 6y ago
  I imagine this is a reference to Jacob Rees-Mogg lying to the Queen [1] about the prorogation of parliament in order to prevent effective debate or scrutiny about Brexit proceedings. [1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49810261 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49810261
  - dghf 6y ago
    I guessed that was the context, but I didn't understand how the Queen "forced" the Supreme Court to rule in that way.

sgt101 6y ago

"She didn’t want to have to wear seatbelts on public roads passing through her property." If this is your idea of a political issue then I strongly recommend the reading of newspapers and engagement with local institutions. Also, I am of "the public" and I knew, due to reading Private Eye which had reported on all this repeatedly for the last 10 or more years.

philistine 6y ago
I gave a really stupid sounding example. How about the denial of rights to long-term leasers on her duchies? Oh and maybe don't attack my character. My ideas can be vilified, but you don't know what I know or don't.

DanBC 6y ago

She didn't have to wear seatbelts on public roads through her property. The Queen cannot be prosecuted in England.

myrandomcomment 6y ago
She also does not need a drivers license, etc. as they are all issued in her name.

dghf 6y ago

> She also forced the British Supreme Court to invent the idea that advice given to her can be unlawful How did she do that?

jen20 6y ago
I imagine this is a reference to Jacob Rees-Mogg lying to the Queen [1] about the prorogation of parliament in order to prevent effective debate or scrutiny about Brexit proceedings. [1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49810261 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49810261
- dghf 6y ago
  I guessed that was the context, but I didn't understand how the Queen "forced" the Supreme Court to rule in that way.