Many disagree with the idea of a monarchy, plus it is Charles who already is pretty unpopular, PLUS millions of £££ spent on this one day while many can't afford to even eat

It's not. SOME aren't in favour, most don't have a strong opinion either way, but 'meh' doesn't go viral, only extremes of opinion (either for or against).

It wasn't considered a clusterfuck so much as a whythefuck. When the queen was crowned three generations ago, the country had just come out of something awful, she was young and hopeful, and royalty still meant something. Now the country is in a mess and getting deeper, and he's old and tired, and most of us can't see the point. And the pledge of allegiance was a complete lead balloon.

Some people disagree that their taxpayer money has gone to such an ostentatious display when many people are struggling due to inflation and the economic crisis. Furthermore, some people dislike King Charles due to the entire scandal with Diana when he was younger. Last but not least, some people believe that the most monarchy is an antiquated figurehead that is no longer irrelevant especially when the country is dealing with Brexit.

Generally, the UK government is a s**t show and ruining the UK economy to the point where more families live in poverty than since the 2nd world war. The Royal family own massive tracts of the UK and are one of the riches families in the World, yet us UK tax payers are paying for the Coronation. If Charlie had popped his hand into the family coffers with a 'this ones on me lads' we'd have all been a bit happier.

Brit here - the coronation was a clusterfuck first because the police very aggressively arrested and roughed up a LOT of people who were either peacefully and silently protesting in ways that had been pre-agreed with the police, as well as people who weren't protesting at all but simply got caught in the fallout (including women charity workers protecting prostitutes at 2am, and journalists covering the protests), in a very flagrant abuse of power and total oppression of free speech. Second, it's an insane amount of tax payer money at a time when the UK is horribly struggling - a huge percentage of families are reliant on food banks, the supermarkets are empty, healthcare is almost non-existent if you're not rich. Charles could have had a perfectly nice coronation without spending SO much money

It is not considered a clusterfuck. Some people are against the monarchy, as is their right, and some people would find reason to complain however it was done. Many are in favour of the monarchy. I suspect most are not too bothered either way but happy for extra day off work.

They used a lot of money from taxes that were from citizens of the UK which could have otherwise been used on other matters like the NHS, or helping to pay for schools, or things like that. The money was instead spent on the coronation, which spent like, a lot of money. There are also republicans who believe we should elect our head of state, instead of the title being passed down. :) * edit: not everyone thinks it's bad, just this is what ppl who think it's bad might think

Quite a few things went wrong from musicians turning down the "honor", to horses reversing into the crowd, Charles getting all p!ssy because they had to wait in the queue, and other silly stuff. No one needs this level of excessive opulence waved in their hungry, stressed faces. Money's tight, and this is how it got spent.

Speaking as a Canadian, when they announced we'd be putting Charle's face on our money, that's when I knew we were ready to ditch the Monarchy

I’m not British, and I can you the world is very much OVER this colonizing monarchy!

Just the fact children are starving as these priveledged wank stains see fit to blow £100+ million on an archaic institution. Just the fact Food banks have had council/Gov't funding cut to pay for it! Just the fact the twat has £billions of our own stolen money to pay for his own puff piece. Yeah.... I'm pissed off!

I was at work for the whole coronation. I was probably awake before the royal family was. So I'm not the best source for this but I can still give a general idea of what I think this is: Now I can't go into too much detail as I'd like. Messages caps and so on so here is a summary: - Queen Elizabeth II was epic. Widely loved - Charles III was her son. Married another Royal Princess Diana who was also widely loved - Diana had two kids. Will and Harry. Everyone loves Will, Harry is a huge disappointment and a spoilt brat - Diana dies. No one knows who or why but she's dead. Clearly not an accident. Charles Marries Camilla, someone he was having an affair with - The Queen did not like Camilla. She made contingencies before she died to make her queen Consort, not queen - Charles is a good Charity worker. Good farmer also. Not too sure about a good leader - Charles becomes King, makes Camilla Queen against Queens wishes - Will will be my King and Kate my Queen. Charles is a good man but...

Overall enthusiasm for monarchy is falling, quite rapidly so among younger generations. But active support for republicanism isn't rising, YET. We are most definitely on the 'meh' phase of final stage monarchism.

well from what I know lots of people still dislike Charles and Camilla especially because eof everything with Diana, the royal family is full of drama, (hence them saying harry is ready to leave, to get out of more drama) and just overall chaos I guess

Let's put it this way. Just over twenty million UK residents watched the coronation. There are over sixty six million people in the country. What's that tell you?

Because MILLIONS were spent on it when they don't even have money for absolute BASIC infrastructure, like filling potholes or FEEDING their people. They spend millions on each of those crowns, both of which contain stolen jewels from countries they invaded and refused to return.

Not everyone, I know large sections of the community who are very pro-monarchy, and I know very few people who aren’t. They cost the taxpayer very little (£1.20 ish a year) in comparison to how much revenue they bring in and subsequent taxes, employment etc. I would rather they used their inherited money through hundreds of years of service for the betterment of the community, than have people like Elon Musk using his vast wealth for vanity projects.

No. It’s that Prince Harry has the issue. I personally think the monarchy is kinda of cool. Watched it here in the US

We are divided between those who will accept King Charles as our King moving forward(Gonna be a real disconnect for me as I've only been alive for Queen Elizabeth's reign so will take a while to adjust to it) and those who say at a time when people are struggling to pay their energy bills or put food on the table, that a cornation like this is a massive waste of taxpayer's money and should have been shelved until the economy was in a better state. Fact is, the longer we waited to do this ceremony, the more uncertainity the country would have had had going forward, but the royal family doesnt really have much power anymore. They are figureheads, a tourist attraction at best, a waste of taxpayer's money at worst so people are always going to be of two minds on this.

Yes, yes and yes

The majority of the population are in favour of the monarchy...

I don't understand it either, I'm a Royal Family fan

US here not UK but I think the world would have preferred they skipped Charles and went straight to William. My American ancestors would probably be rolling in their graves but I might pop over to London for Williams coronation. Frankly I think I know why they wouldn't let Charles marry Camellia to start with. I don't think the children of C&C would have been quite so... photogenic

It's worth noting that the tweeter here is aligned with Harry and Meghan. Lots of us had a very nice day.

I think it's just anti-monarchists trying to insult it. Their opinion, I suppose.

A lot of people are having to rely on food banks in the UK and this cost the people of the UK millions of £'s that we had no say in. A lot of people think they are an outdated idea and should be scrapped or maybe turned into a tourist attraction.

Maybe because Charles is considered so? -and don't get me started on the 'side piece'.

Yes isn’t it awful that taxpayers money has been spent for the second time in seventy years on a coronation when every candidate for the American presidency has taxpayers money spent every four years. The monarch is the chief diplomat and has far more experience than any president would have. Many international incidents have been avoided because of our monarchy. People have been carrying placards saying not our King. If a president was voted in that they didn’t vote for would they say not our president? It makes me sick when I think of everything that the queen, Prince Charles, as he was, and other members of the royal family have done for this country and they get no gratitude at all. King Charles is a great guy as I’m sure people would realise if they actually met him. As to the commonwealth which ill informed people seem to think equates to the British empire, it has nothing to do with that. King Charles was voted in as Head. It wasn’t automatic.

I heard he will abdicate the throne soon

This comment has been deleted.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

We can only guess what sordid narrative the dirty little social climber cooked up, and as for why harold the glovepuppet is laughing, that is anyone's guess. He turned his back on the house of Windsor and is shunt.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

1) It isn't. 2) He is. 3) There is no such consensus, except in the minds of those who consider that setting themselves apart from a majority somehow indicates an intellectual superiority. They are the equivalent of 13 yr-olds who think that making a rude gesture behind the teacher's back shows them to be big, bold, and bad. Being a part of the majority does not necessarily make one a sheep just as expressing dissent does not make one a member of a cognitive elite.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

It’s Harry who is massively unpopular, ranking third from the bottom of the list of royal family members.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

It’s Harry who is massively unpopular, ranking third from the bottom in the list of royal family members.

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

The majority want a monarchy, as illustrated by the turnout on the day. Most of us thought it was a fantastic day. As for those who claim they can't eat, do away with your gert big TV, your latest mobiles, and primani rags and learn to cook

Nope, because he's not a working royal anymore

"Lucky Sperm Club Membership" does not guarantee the ingredients required for members of a solid monarchy.

I doubt the British citizens would agree that the monarchy is cheaper than having a head of state...and they technically have both a prime minister to fund and a monarch. Taxes are so high in the UK and the cost of living is higher than any other European country or the US or Canada.

Tell that to the subjects of King George III.