Heh, that’s a good one. They are planning to send something to those countries already, but it’s immigrants.
Anyway, at this point some say the British royals are a net benefit for the country as a tourist attraction. Paris has Disneyland, London has Buckingham… 🤷
The “ostentatious lifestyle” is what drives the souvenir market.
You go to Buckingham, and can buy all sorts of random junk with a photo of the monarchs, royal symbols, and whatnot. They’re even collectible!
Last time I was at Versalles, they were selling… hat umbrellas. Like, seriously? Come on, at least sell some toy guillotines with a series of monarchs with detachable heads, or something… but that seems to be too grim for the general public, so… hat umbrellas. 🙄
They do have a lot more soft power over the government than many give them credit for though, plus some (so far) unused actual power that they only don’t use by tradition (which these days is more clearly a bad idea to rely on than ever). Plus all there’s all that money that goes into the pageantry of it (royal weddings, etc).
I feel like it’s be one thing to let them keep their royal titles, but they shouldn’t be enmeshed with the state in any actual way imo.
I don’t know how much power the British royalty actually have, but probably more than other royal families since the British monarch is also the head of the Anglican church. That not only has them enmeshed with the state, but also breaks church-state separation. 🤷
The pageantry, is what drives the souvenir market: for every birth, coming of age, marriage, coronation, random events, then death… and rinse and repeat, there is a ton of souvenirs getting sold, commemorative coins, random mementos, etc.
Like, right now, Sotheby’s is auctioning… the set props from the series The Royals. Not even the actual things, just the props, and they start “cheap” at only 800-1000£ the cheapest. Sure they’re supposed to donate any benefits to charity, but then the series itself was only so successful because of the pageantry.
Turns out the state collects taxes on all of that, so the money spent on monarchs, is more like an actor’s salary. They also get other sources of income, like donations from businesses to act as international representatives, profits from the businesses they own themselves, or bribespresents from foreign representatives for their mediation in trade negotiations.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !news@beehaw.org
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
Let him be the last and turn their houses into museums with the money going to the countries they demolished
Heh, that’s a good one. They are planning to send something to those countries already, but it’s immigrants.
Anyway, at this point some say the British royals are a net benefit for the country as a tourist attraction. Paris has Disneyland, London has Buckingham… 🤷
French palaces make money without supporting the austentacious lifestyle of monarcht.
Much less
The “ostentatious lifestyle” is what drives the souvenir market.
You go to Buckingham, and can buy all sorts of random junk with a photo of the monarchs, royal symbols, and whatnot. They’re even collectible!
Last time I was at Versalles, they were selling… hat umbrellas. Like, seriously? Come on, at least sell some toy guillotines with a series of monarchs with detachable heads, or something… but that seems to be too grim for the general public, so… hat umbrellas. 🙄
They do have a lot more soft power over the government than many give them credit for though, plus some (so far) unused actual power that they only don’t use by tradition (which these days is more clearly a bad idea to rely on than ever). Plus all there’s all that money that goes into the pageantry of it (royal weddings, etc).
I feel like it’s be one thing to let them keep their royal titles, but they shouldn’t be enmeshed with the state in any actual way imo.
I don’t know how much power the British royalty actually have, but probably more than other royal families since the British monarch is also the head of the Anglican church. That not only has them enmeshed with the state, but also breaks church-state separation. 🤷
The pageantry, is what drives the souvenir market: for every birth, coming of age, marriage, coronation, random events, then death… and rinse and repeat, there is a ton of souvenirs getting sold, commemorative coins, random mementos, etc.
Like, right now, Sotheby’s is auctioning… the set props from the series The Royals. Not even the actual things, just the props, and they start “cheap” at only 800-1000£ the cheapest. Sure they’re supposed to donate any benefits to charity, but then the series itself was only so successful because of the pageantry.
Turns out the state collects taxes on all of that, so the money spent on monarchs, is more like an actor’s salary. They also get other sources of income, like donations from businesses to act as international representatives, profits from the businesses they own themselves, or
bribespresents from foreign representatives for their mediation in trade negotiations.Pretty sure the British don’t have a separation of chuch and state like the Americans do, especially since there is a new bill about that