Skip to main content

Remove Prince Harry from the line of succession?

Well this is a new one.

So, personally, while I have no vested interest here and I'm not a UK Citizen, my vote would be "no". And this isn't just a personal preference thing. I have a few technical reasons and a few on the more personal side. So let's dispense, shall we?

On the technical side, being a "working royal" has never been a factor in succession. In fact, as the monarchy has slimmed down over the years, the number of those with no formal duties who have remained in the line of succession has only increased. The remove the son of the King while many lower in line who aren't working royals still exist would be lunacy.

In fact, his place in line and his relationship the King are also very good reasons NOT to eject him.

While modern monarchies are not under constant threat of assassination, every monarchy needs a line of succession with heirs who have some level of legitimacy. Being directly related to a living monarch is about a strong a claim as one can have. In a monarchy such as the UK has, it is also important for heirs to be relevant. The biggest threat to the monarchy is not assassination or a lack of heirs, but rather the government deciding that they are no longer needed.

So, taking this into account. Who is after Harry? Prince Andrew. Whoops! Do you still want to skip over Harry? If you also eliminate Andrew and his family, then we start delving into even less relevant royals.

None of this is really all that pertinent though. As most have stated; at present, the odds that Harry will ever become King are basically non-existent. Why this does matter is setting precedent for future generations. The only way that the King would remove his son from the line of succession would be through a motion to change how the line of succession is determined in general. Likely, such that it maintains the current limitations and adds that they are recognized as working royals.

But, as birth rates decrease, it becomes increasingly important for future generations to not prune too far.

Especially since, outside of leaving royal duties behind, Harry has not really done anything which should otherwise exempt him. There has been internal squabbling, but that is just social unrest. And if half of what he says turns out to be true, then even the claims that these things he has done are "bad" would be brought into question as well.

Which brings us to the personal side, or the "what-if?" scenarios. To date, Harry seems to be predominantly opposed to racist and other exclusionary behaviors taken inside the monarchy by staff and members of the family. And also with some of the policies which exist to maintain a clean image for the royal family. On the surface, eliminating these things would make the monarchy more approachable and relevant. It also opens them up to risk, which is likely why the policies exist. 

However, beyond the fact that what Harry seems to want to open up the royal family to risk by tearing back some of secrecy and restraint. It otherwise seems like he would want changes that would actually improve the odds of the monarchy remaining relevant and for longer. The biggest risk he brings personally is exploiting the situation for lucrative TV contracts, but that would likely also be a moot point if the monarchy reformed to his liking as he would likely just try to re-enter that lifestyle and live off the ample income which he used to receive for that lifestyle.

In short, a lot of what people dislike about Harry at present are tied to:

  • How he perceives he and his family were treated and
  • What he feels he needs to do to survive
Both of those seem likely to disappear if he ever did inherit the throne, OR, more simply, if the root causes of his frustrations were actually addressed.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Are these the lies of EV owners?

This article rather enrages me. My first issue is this; the article is quite long, but it only covers 2 points: EV Owners claim charging at home is simple EV Owners don't think people regularly take long trips The second issue I have is that I have no clue what sources they use to draw these conclusion. Let's eviscerate this article, shall we? For the first, the argument largely stems from data which shows that PHEV users are REALLY bad at charging regularly. And this IS actually true. At least from the studies I've seen. It fails however to get to the bottom of "why". Rather, it just assumes that people are finding it more convenient to pay for gas. Let that sink in. They are assuming that all people who act like this are doing so because they FIND IT MORE CONVENIENT TO DRIVE AWAY FROM THEIR HOUSES TO PAY MORE MONEY . The only way it is more convenient is that, when you've forgotten to charge, filling up with gas is faster. If you read the studies, you will...
Post a Comment
Read more

Avatar Netflix Thoughts

Only about half done the series so far and my thoughts are not what I expected. I expected to either love or hate the adaptation and I don't feel either. I understand those who are disappointed. I had similar frustrations with the LotR and Hobbit movies. As many have pointed out however, my expectations don't make the movies bad. They just make it difficult for me to enjoy them.  Most of the complaints I've read fall into similar pitfalls. From my perspective, all of the changes made, make sense. The original TV series was a cartoon and it was aimed at a younger audience. Animation makes special effects trivial, but also makes goofy interactions more acceptable. Trying to take a character like Sokka and bringing them to live action without some serious character overhaul was never going to work. Similarly, some (artificial) constraints, like series length have an impact on story telling. One such change is a scene in the opening where Aang is "flying" (according t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Investment Strategy

I'm not certified of anything. So, this is not financial advice. Just some thoughts on my strategy and an excuse to put this in writing somewhere. The hardest part of investment, in my experience at least, has been sticking to a plan. The biggest part of that problem is not actually defining what my plan is. Another part of it, especially in the beginning, was simply the lack of experience and information from which to make a plan. It is hard to get past that latter one without some time. After all, everyone starts out without any real experience. There are a few things I like to define in my plans these days: How am I breaking up my investments? Usually, this is in terms of how long am I planning to invest a sum of money. In most cases you'll have a bunch of different financial goals. All with very different time horizons. Then, for each investment, what does that mean? What does my risk look like? For my retirement funds, I'm still a ways from retirement. So, I'm not ...
Post a Comment
Read more