In the future, please link directly to the article or video as the main link.
this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
525 points (98.0% liked)
Not The Onion
20624 readers
2179 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They can't call him sir, that's an honorific in England that has meaning and he lost all formal titles, legally he isn't a sir anymore he's a Mr.
load more comments
(2 replies)
sounds like staff need to give Randy Andy the old Red Eye (Visine in beer-gives you the shits).
Specifically the red eye formula drops. Too much, or the right amount depending on how you look at it, can actually kill a person.
He should be working at McDonald’s f this scumbag
I think we really should stick to calling him “Prince Andrew.” If we don’t we’re letting the monarchy separate itself from him…but that’s bullshit; he has the privilege of being a prince and his status as prince is not just what gave him the liberty to be a monster, but I think we can assume it’s what actually made him a monster.
The Andrew formerly known as a prince.
I heard a very interesting argument that if the Royal family can remove Andrew from the line of succession, then the line itself can be manipulated, and anyone else could be added. In that case, what is the point of having a royal family?
I’m not sure what the point is in any case. Whatever about how the monarch is chosen…having a monarch is bad! And this monarchy is particularly bad!
A lot of people have a tendency to want to show loyalty to their country by showing subservience to some rich arrogant asshole that surrounds themselves with gold. See the how a significant percentage of the US population think of Trump for example.
If there is no King the subservient portion of the population will create one. It's better to have a King that doesn't have any actual power so that won't happen. The subservient part of the population don't really care that their King has no political power, they just want to bow to someone to prove their loyalty to the country and see some pomp and pageantry. For a lot of people the concept of a country is too abstract to understand so they need some person to do all kinds the ceremonial stuff so they can express their loyalty to the country by showing loyalty to that person.
Similar to how having a separation between government and religion, it's a separation between government and all the ceremonial pomp and pageantry stuff.
Sure, I wouldn't directly care if there was monarchy was eliminated, but a lot of other people would. And those people would start voting in some wealthy asshole to rule over us like a king. And that's something I definitely don't want. So just give the subservient types someone they can bow to so it doesn't impact the rest of us.
The line has been manipulated several times by Parliament, including the selection and elimination of kings.
The point of the royal family now isn't to be a defined lineage, but an agreed upon vessel to hold power when Parliament temporarily breaks. Even then, Queen Elizabeth II was kind of shit at it.
I kind of feel like the Royal line has been nothing but manipulated. Usurpations, rule changes, and exceptions to primogeniture have been there since the beginning.
It'd be nice if this led to just getting rid of the concept of royal families in general
A monarchy is a family business. Anyone in the family can run it. Monarchies are inherently unstable when the monarchs die because of this.
Authoritarian forms of government will be unstable when there's no clear line of succession. It's the reason why monarchies come about. It's not like people don't understand that it's extremely arbitrary, it's just that it's better than the alternative: civil wars whenever whoever is in power dies. It's an agreement among various lords that it's better they just accept that person over there that's the son of the King will someday be King rather than having a civil war when the King dies.
And sure civil wars would still happen, but most of the time the succession would happen without bloodshed. When there's no line of succession, it's just constant power struggles when the leader dies.
Of course democracy is a far better way to determine who will run things, but that requires a literate population to work. Which didn't exist throughout much of human history. Sure, there were republics throughout history, but they'd usually become monarchies when the illiterate masses would decide they liked that Julius guy (he threw the best parties!) and hated that Brutus guy who killed him, even if the Julius guy was becoming a tyrant.
So monarchies suck, but they're better than civil wars. So when the population becomes too dumb, it sucks, but it's better than the alternatives.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(9 replies)
Yeah but he got killed by his own son.
A huge piece of shit in almost every respect, but the character had his moments of poignancy.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
His staff are on record as saying they call him "the cunt" when he's not around. I forget which interview that was but it was a former staff member on a TV interview.
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Yes, sir. Flagon of ale for the child rapist, sir. And absolutely nobody has done anything untoward in it, sir".
load more comments
(1 replies)
Why does this fucker get royal staff?
He's still uber rich. Between being mummy's favourite and being the literal shaddy deal's man for the British government for a while, he probably has more money than he would be able to spend.
Sir Pedophile
The only good royal is dead royal.
Being a monarch or nobility of any kind is a crime against humanity. And yes, this applies to all, no exceptions. I don't care how "constitutional" a monarch is. No one should have inheritable legal status or power. Inherited wealth is bad enough. Every king or noble should have to give up their title or give up their head.
People upset about the monarchy don't have any real problems in their lives.
Congrats, you must have a real easy life if you're doing the revolutionary cosplay thing over the fucking monarchy LOL.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The pedophile traitor deserves a single finger salute and tell him to fetch his own beer.
Should be calling him by a number
Here is your beer “Sir” …
He is getting used to it I guess. "Sir" is a pretty big demotion from "your royal highness".
load more comments
(1 replies)
I'd literally tell him to "fuck off I'll call you Nonce Andrew, and if you threaten me I'll go to the press and tell them even more shit that will get you in prison, you fucking nonce. Now get on your knees and apologise. And then I'd film it, and send it to the press"
Good luck having rights while working for any of the royals
https://londondaily.com/buckingham-palace-banned-ethnic-minorities-from-office-roles-papers-reveal
The existence of royals means the state that has them believes people are not born equal, therefore any state with royalty does not actually believe in human rights or enforce them by definition.
Bang on point. During this debacle the royals have maintained that it wont affect the larger royal family, because it's not a family business. While declaring that god appointed them above all else by virtue of being from the royal family. It's time to get rid of them. And I don't just mean eject them and let them run with the money and property. Every last penny in reparations. This foreign occupation of the UK has gone on too long.
"not a family business" carrying a lot of weight there eh
An unfortunate (to understate things more than a little) hold over from the days when the royals were the state.
Given that the MET police have been implicated in the files, and their current stance of "We are arresting you for holding a sign that says you're against genocide" It looks a lot like the police don't believe in human rights either.
Well, technically, we (Brits/Canadians) all work for the royals.
As ever, the rich stay rich and everyone else greases themselves against the wheels in their service :/
Not to sound like some kind of left wing exteemist but it really would be nice if our work actually went towards making the planet a better place, instead of giving those with the power to make the rules taller towers and deeper bunkers.
load more comments
(2 replies)
People are very negative but they don't understand the house of windsor and how tradional it is. What else is traditional. The stockades.
I think it's particularly hilarious that for all the talk of tradition, the house of "Windsor" was a name chosen during WWI, barely more than a century ago. The original name was "Saxe-Coburg and Gotha", but somewhat awkwardly German bombers built by Gothaer Waggonfabrik and popularly known as "Gothas" happened to be dropping explosives on London.
load more comments
(4 replies)
view more: next ›