Then, in the presence of centrifugal forces at both regional and ethnic, the monarchy is a symbol of national unity. In times of war (Libya, Afghanistan ...), Queen, army chief, is the embodiment of expertise of the United Kingdom in the military. Last point: despite one side obsolete, conventional and proud of it, Elizabeth II is universally praised for the sacrifices made for the performance of his difficult task.
That is why the republican movement remains very much a minority. During the annus horribilis of the early 1990s - divorce, Windsor Fire, death of Diana ... - The Republican movement is mounted in the polls, reaching its highest level during the famous first week of September, the death and funeral of Diana.
But some Britons do not like scenes of hysteria during that week. Diana's supporters were recruited mainly among ethnic minorities, sexual, and in women of lower class. The deep country, outside London and outside these groups, defended the monarchy and there has been, all other things being equal, a little of what happened in May 1968 student revolution and the cons-conservative revolution.
The republican movement is not very active today, it is limited to certain intellectual classes in London. But there is a republican movement that I call "passive", they are Muslims, and part of the Caribbean community, which does not recognize this institution, white, aristocratic and Protestant.
The marriage of William and Katherine have no impact on the estate. To speak colloquially, we jump all in Windsor, but the generations ... Charles succeeded to the queen at his death, and William will succeed his father when the latter died. The money of marriage is not controversial. First, it is a ceremony that is neither state nor private, it is between the two.
Result: the cost of marriage itself - the reception, flowers, dress, transport ... - Is provided by the Queen, the Prince of Wales and Middleton, on their own pot. The State participation is limited to the deployment of soldiers, police and part of the transport carriage. As well as aircraft flying over Buckingham Palace.
The City of London dealing with her cleaning, while the media must pay the full cost of their operations that day. The cost is very small, as desired by the government in a time of austerity. Each major princely marriage, we are witnessing an explosion of products derived from a taste variable, flags, banners, etc..
The British like that to the extent a country is both patriotic and festive. That said, given the choice of date, between two bridges in April and May, some take three weeks vacation. So there is both an exodus of some of the indigenous population and an influx of tourists to limit pressures on public transport.
But in the current gloom, the princely marriage is quite welcome. The only prerogative which remains: the queen reigns over the swans, whales and sturgeons. In theory, that's all. If Parliament were ordered to the guillotine, she would be forced to sign its own death sentence. However, in practice, the monarchy, which has no political role, has an influence on the life of the Kingdom in the following areas.
The queen, princes and others play an important role in charitable institutions, which are very important in the UK, and help raise funds. Another important area of religion, since the queen is the head of the Anglican Church, which is the state religion. She has a say in the appointment of certain prelates.
Queen Elizabeth II remains head of state of fifteen Commonwealth countries, not least Australia, Canada, New Zealand ... Moreover, the Commonwealth continues to shine, as shown by the entry of two non-English speaking countries, Mozambique and Rwanda, who were never British colonies. The queen is the leader of this association and plays an important role when it comes to defending the interests of the Commonwealth address two real anchors of British diplomacy, the European Union and the United States.
The role of the monarchy as a symbol of the Commonwealth is likely to decrease with the successors of Elizabeth II, who have more or less known the greatness of the empire. The answer is no, because this is not a state affair, but an event halfway between state business and private ceremony.
Cathy Middleton has no political role if it is a role of representation abroad alongside her husband. Unlike Diana, Catherine Middleton never tried to overshadow her husband, she is there as support. The real risk is due to the economic chaos of the United Kingdom. There is an anarchist reinforced by the student movement opposed to the increase in admissions in universities, who promised to disrupt the royal wedding.
Strongly criticized during protests against the G20 and those listing fees, the police do not know very well how to turn, alternating between strength excess and laxity. The situation in this regard can be dangerous. The monarchy has the right image on the manufacture of objects, and thus receives a percentage of their sale price.
The product is integrated into the general operating budget of Buckingham Palace. A royal wedding reports that it costs more because of the tourism benefits, but with a limitation in this case: the effect of two to three weeks of holidays that take many Britons. The English are very patriotic and always have been.
The monarchy, the symbol of the ancient grandeur of the empire, two world wars and a victorious admittedly botched decolonization but has made quite naturally, is associated with the pleasure of being British, which still prevails. The Windsors have learned from the "peoplisation" Diana era, they became more colored wall.
The tabloids are less interested in Windsor for a reason: they sell less than football stars or television. Unlike France and the entire European continent, the United Kingdom has never experienced anti-aristocratic revolution and has never been militarily occupied since 1066. The nobility are kept all its attributes.
Its power is essentially land - the most beautiful parts of London belong to three dukes - and mundane. Strangely, at the margins of society, mainly in the countryside, the British aristocracy causes of indifference tinged with amusement. It has no political power, as shown in 2005 banning hunting with hounds, she defended tooth and nail.
It is very clear that in general the royal family symbolizes England's past. Formal, committed to maintaining the class system, white, Protestant and, frankly, conservative, even reactionary. It is certainly true of the queen and her husband the Duke of Edinburgh. This is less of Prince Charles, known for his courageous struggle for diversity.
It was he who opened the Royal Guard to blacks, and who wants to change the institutional system by putting on the same footing all the major religions. It is also very open to Buddhism. However, with William, we are in between. It is a military attaché to the order and hierarchy and social class, very conscious of his aristocratic and royal status, which hangs around his peers.
On the other hand, marriage with a commoner, his knowledge of Africa and the fact that he has never traveled much and lived a jet-set, involve an open mind. But the fact remains: the monarchy is struggling to adapt to multicultural Britain. Never. William inherited Diana's concern for others.
Obviously. With his brother Harry, he established his own philanthropic organization which works for former offenders, children with AIDS, etc.. Still, it is not the type to walk around by bicycle through the streets of London. He is conscious of his royal status, and intends to keep the monarchy above the fray while retaining its mystical.
Catherine Middleton and should be molded easily into this philosophy to adopt a low profile to keep this legendary image of the monarchy. Stars do not let themselves be seized. Undeniably from Monaco, the Windsors are in another place. They are also from Spain, a country more or less the same size.
This is due partly to the durability - it dates back to ancient times - in the past greatness of England, and the fact that it remains the guarantor of democracy. Apart from Cromwell for some years, Britain has always been a parliamentary democracy and the monarchy in the minds of many people around the world, is linked to this institution.
In addition, there is the Commonwealth. Marc Roche is the author of the first official biography of Queen Elizabeth II, entitled The Last Queen (La Table Ronde, 2008) and two other books on the British royal family, Diana, a Death Foretold (Scali, 2006) and A household three (Albin Michel, 2009) moderated by Emma Chat Chevallereau 
That is why the republican movement remains very much a minority. During the annus horribilis of the early 1990s - divorce, Windsor Fire, death of Diana ... - The Republican movement is mounted in the polls, reaching its highest level during the famous first week of September, the death and funeral of Diana.
But some Britons do not like scenes of hysteria during that week. Diana's supporters were recruited mainly among ethnic minorities, sexual, and in women of lower class. The deep country, outside London and outside these groups, defended the monarchy and there has been, all other things being equal, a little of what happened in May 1968 student revolution and the cons-conservative revolution.
The republican movement is not very active today, it is limited to certain intellectual classes in London. But there is a republican movement that I call "passive", they are Muslims, and part of the Caribbean community, which does not recognize this institution, white, aristocratic and Protestant.
The marriage of William and Katherine have no impact on the estate. To speak colloquially, we jump all in Windsor, but the generations ... Charles succeeded to the queen at his death, and William will succeed his father when the latter died. The money of marriage is not controversial. First, it is a ceremony that is neither state nor private, it is between the two.
Result: the cost of marriage itself - the reception, flowers, dress, transport ... - Is provided by the Queen, the Prince of Wales and Middleton, on their own pot. The State participation is limited to the deployment of soldiers, police and part of the transport carriage. As well as aircraft flying over Buckingham Palace.
The City of London dealing with her cleaning, while the media must pay the full cost of their operations that day. The cost is very small, as desired by the government in a time of austerity. Each major princely marriage, we are witnessing an explosion of products derived from a taste variable, flags, banners, etc..
The British like that to the extent a country is both patriotic and festive. That said, given the choice of date, between two bridges in April and May, some take three weeks vacation. So there is both an exodus of some of the indigenous population and an influx of tourists to limit pressures on public transport.
But in the current gloom, the princely marriage is quite welcome. The only prerogative which remains: the queen reigns over the swans, whales and sturgeons. In theory, that's all. If Parliament were ordered to the guillotine, she would be forced to sign its own death sentence. However, in practice, the monarchy, which has no political role, has an influence on the life of the Kingdom in the following areas.
The queen, princes and others play an important role in charitable institutions, which are very important in the UK, and help raise funds. Another important area of religion, since the queen is the head of the Anglican Church, which is the state religion. She has a say in the appointment of certain prelates.
Queen Elizabeth II remains head of state of fifteen Commonwealth countries, not least Australia, Canada, New Zealand ... Moreover, the Commonwealth continues to shine, as shown by the entry of two non-English speaking countries, Mozambique and Rwanda, who were never British colonies. The queen is the leader of this association and plays an important role when it comes to defending the interests of the Commonwealth address two real anchors of British diplomacy, the European Union and the United States.
The role of the monarchy as a symbol of the Commonwealth is likely to decrease with the successors of Elizabeth II, who have more or less known the greatness of the empire. The answer is no, because this is not a state affair, but an event halfway between state business and private ceremony.
Cathy Middleton has no political role if it is a role of representation abroad alongside her husband. Unlike Diana, Catherine Middleton never tried to overshadow her husband, she is there as support. The real risk is due to the economic chaos of the United Kingdom. There is an anarchist reinforced by the student movement opposed to the increase in admissions in universities, who promised to disrupt the royal wedding.
Strongly criticized during protests against the G20 and those listing fees, the police do not know very well how to turn, alternating between strength excess and laxity. The situation in this regard can be dangerous. The monarchy has the right image on the manufacture of objects, and thus receives a percentage of their sale price.
The product is integrated into the general operating budget of Buckingham Palace. A royal wedding reports that it costs more because of the tourism benefits, but with a limitation in this case: the effect of two to three weeks of holidays that take many Britons. The English are very patriotic and always have been.
The monarchy, the symbol of the ancient grandeur of the empire, two world wars and a victorious admittedly botched decolonization but has made quite naturally, is associated with the pleasure of being British, which still prevails. The Windsors have learned from the "peoplisation" Diana era, they became more colored wall.
The tabloids are less interested in Windsor for a reason: they sell less than football stars or television. Unlike France and the entire European continent, the United Kingdom has never experienced anti-aristocratic revolution and has never been militarily occupied since 1066. The nobility are kept all its attributes.
Its power is essentially land - the most beautiful parts of London belong to three dukes - and mundane. Strangely, at the margins of society, mainly in the countryside, the British aristocracy causes of indifference tinged with amusement. It has no political power, as shown in 2005 banning hunting with hounds, she defended tooth and nail.
It is very clear that in general the royal family symbolizes England's past. Formal, committed to maintaining the class system, white, Protestant and, frankly, conservative, even reactionary. It is certainly true of the queen and her husband the Duke of Edinburgh. This is less of Prince Charles, known for his courageous struggle for diversity.
It was he who opened the Royal Guard to blacks, and who wants to change the institutional system by putting on the same footing all the major religions. It is also very open to Buddhism. However, with William, we are in between. It is a military attaché to the order and hierarchy and social class, very conscious of his aristocratic and royal status, which hangs around his peers.
On the other hand, marriage with a commoner, his knowledge of Africa and the fact that he has never traveled much and lived a jet-set, involve an open mind. But the fact remains: the monarchy is struggling to adapt to multicultural Britain. Never. William inherited Diana's concern for others.
Obviously. With his brother Harry, he established his own philanthropic organization which works for former offenders, children with AIDS, etc.. Still, it is not the type to walk around by bicycle through the streets of London. He is conscious of his royal status, and intends to keep the monarchy above the fray while retaining its mystical.
Catherine Middleton and should be molded easily into this philosophy to adopt a low profile to keep this legendary image of the monarchy. Stars do not let themselves be seized. Undeniably from Monaco, the Windsors are in another place. They are also from Spain, a country more or less the same size.
This is due partly to the durability - it dates back to ancient times - in the past greatness of England, and the fact that it remains the guarantor of democracy. Apart from Cromwell for some years, Britain has always been a parliamentary democracy and the monarchy in the minds of many people around the world, is linked to this institution.
In addition, there is the Commonwealth. Marc Roche is the author of the first official biography of Queen Elizabeth II, entitled The Last Queen (La Table Ronde, 2008) and two other books on the British royal family, Diana, a Death Foretold (Scali, 2006) and A household three (Albin Michel, 2009) moderated by Emma Chat Chevallereau
No comments:
Post a Comment