Is the system of nurturing Royals from birth inconsistent with the modern world?

After the death of Diana, The Royals seemed to attempt to modernise in their treatment of William and Harry - but now this seems to have backfired with Harry marrying a person very much removed from Royalty, and now he seems to more or less wish to quit being a Royal, although still requiring huge security commitment.

Should people be left to nurture themselves, then we select Royals from the population at adulthood, via some means?

11 Answers

Relevance
  • Favorite Answer

    Yes. Royalty in general is inconsistent with a modern world.

    • Mario
      Lv 4
      2 days agoReport

      5 TD shows how many royal **** lickers are on here. They have NO argument other than sentiment.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Clo
    Lv 7
    2 days ago

    Is the system nurturing in untitled rich people inconsistent with the modern world?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    2 days ago

    No. Times don't change. People just like to think it does. But it doesn't really. The earth is still moving as it was 10 billion years ago. 

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Mario
    Lv 4
    2 days ago

    Royalty is inconsistent and out of touch with contemporary society.,

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 2 days ago

    It was Diana who tried to give her children a more normal childhood in hopes that they would be well-adjusted.  Seems to have worked with William as he seems qualified and happy in his role.  We're not sure yet as to Harry's values and motivation.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    2 days ago

    Selecting a head of state is what happens in other countries and becomes political and divisive. Macron in France is president with less than half the electorate voting for him, for example. The hereditary system gives a result that the majority of people can accept. The fact that Macron's stepchildren are less in the spotlight is more down to how the media is managed.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 days ago

    Children in MOST families nurture their kids from birth.   I'd suggest that actually Royal children may not be as individually looked after as most kids of non-royal families are, with no nannies.   Harry has said before that he wished he wasn't royal and now he has Meghan to back him up, he's able to put his wishes  into action.   I don't blame him/them but why he had to do it quite like this, going directly against his grandmother's wishes (apparently) is beyond me.   I thought he respected and loved The Queen.   Seems not to be the case when it comes to his wife and her wishes!!   I hope he wakes up before it's too late because I can't believe this wasn't the plan from day one!

    • He only went against he wishes because the information had already been leaked to the press, she knew what he wanted to do but, wanted to delay releasing the information until it could be discussed by the family. The leak put an end to that.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 2 days ago

    His funding was never made an issue, it has ALL been pure speculation, mainly by seedy tabloids and ignorant people on here.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    2 days ago

    Not at all.

    Real families nurture their children.

    As for Harry’s wife. Her history should say why she is not suitable, divorced, been around several blocks, her family problems, her relationships with ‘friends/husband’ only until they are no longer useful.

    But of course the race baiters focus on get race, not her vile grasping personality.

    She only started playing the race card when details of his manipulation of Harry, issues with staff and hypocrisy were reported, before that she loved the media fawning over her.

    Harry is clearly mentally fragile and the constant toyching of him by his wife is a kind of carer relationship, she is pulling his chain. 

    Sadly he was more interested in being ‘modern’ than marrying someone suitable,someone without her baggage, family feuds (which she has now replicated in Harry’s) and hypocritical gold digging.

    She wants to be adored, but without any scrutiny.

    Cake and eat it from me-gan-toinette.

    • Verulam
      Lv 7
      2 days agoReport

      This hanging onto him suggests to me more of a 'look at what I've managed to grab' than any carer action.  

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    2 days ago

    "marrying a person very much removed from Royalty"

    What does that even mean?

    Anyone who isn't born into royalty would fall into that.

    Or maybe that was a veiled attempt at racism?

    I don't have a problem with Harry and Meghan.

    What I have a problem with is the vicious racism of the press and others.

    Your question also has a logically flaw in it. Royals are a dying breed. It used to be royals married other royals, but there are very few royal houses left and it just isn't just realistic to think they can marry other royals. That leaves marrying commoners like Diana and Meghan. Second, IMO what has to change is the way the British royal family operates. It's much too regimented and stuck in tradition, they need to loosen up. If you're not the immediate successor to the throne you should be allowed to have a normal life. Harry is what, sixth in line to the throne; he shouldn't be burdened with a ton a official duties.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.