It is for these reasons that Charles should abdicate in favor of his son, Prince William
If he wishes to preserve the royal family for the next century, Prince Charles should abdicate the throne when Queen Elizabeth II passes away.
Charles’ first weakness is his enduring lack of common sense. We gained a new insight into this failing, Tuesday, when the BBC reported on the prince’s 2007 investment in a carbon trading company. The investment was fully legal, but Charles then lobbied on behalf of reforms that would benefit the company, without acknowledging his conflict of interest.
It was a serious error of judgement.
Still, this is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Charles and common sense.
In 2015, a trove of previously secret letters from Charles to various British government officials became public. Those letters shredded Charles’ credibility as a politically neutral actor, by showing how he had lobbied numerous government ministers on everything from hospital construction to fishing to military procurement decisions.
The issue here is that Charles, like all British royals, is supposed to be above politics. But as the next in line to the throne, Charles has a special imperative to adopt a public image of impartiality. Even then, it’s not just politics. Charles has also repeatedly influenced permitting decisions on architectural designs, for example. This is in stark contrast to the queen, who is renowned for her non-partisan leadership. In 2007, former Prime Minister Tony Blair explained that “She will assess situations and difficulties, and will describe them … but without ever giving any clue as to sort of political preference or anything like that. It’s quite remarkable.”
Charles’ second weakness is his charisma deficiency. While this does not matter on paper, the royal family must be able to adapt to the changing expectations of a changing British society. Queen Elizabeth II has retained the public’s affection over her record 65-year reign, but as the aftermath of Princess Diana’s death attested, that affection can’t be taken for granted. Unfortunately, Charles lacks his mother’s reflexive instinct to inspire.
In that vein, while Christopher Hitchens was unfair in describing Charles as a “slobbering dauphin,” as king, any of Charles’ gaffes would attract immediate ridicule in the British press. Over the period of his reign, these might cause irreparable damage the royal family’s reputation.
It is for these reasons that Charles should abdicate in favor of his son, Prince William. Unlike his father, William has a knack for both the high ceremony of royalist life and already holds the public’s trust. In addition, William’s family provides exceptional public relations benefits to the royal family as it earns continued relevance in the 21st century.
Ultimately, when the time comes, Charles will have to ask himself whether his reign would be in the best interests of Britain and the royal family. I believe it would not be.
Source: washingtonexaminer com
Tags: Prince William, Prince Charles, Queen Elizabeth II, Queen, Elizabeth II, Damage, Family Reputation, Monarchy, British Royal Family, Royal Family