archaeogeek
Banned
It's the Little Englander thing; they're seemingly convinced they had the upper hand since forever or something.
George VI Killed in Battle of Britain
- Thread starter Noravea
- Start date
It's the Little Englander thing; they're seemingly convinced they had the upper hand since forever or something.
That is correct. The Duke of Gloucester was pulled from his regular army duties in the field at the beginning of the war as he needed to be in Britain in case George VI did come to fatal demise. BY 1944 Elizabeth came of age and The Duke as sent to Australia to be Governor General.
A potentially big butterfly might occur in the US, where the shock of the death of a British monarch due to the war in 1940 might have broken down some of the isolationist resistance to both US aid to Britain and US preparedness, giving FDR a freer hand in preparing for what he saw as inevitable war. A better prepared US = a shorter war in all likelihood.
I'm also wondering whether the presence of an 18/19 year-old on the throne might have affected the postwar election that deposed Churchill and put Attlee in power. In a world with such a young monarch, Churchill might well be perceived as far more important to stability and therefore harder to defeat.
One thing I don't really have a handle on is whether it would affect support for the monarchy. One argument is greater support to honor the fallen George VI. The other is that having survived its darkest hour as a nation with a monarch not of age, perhaps the whole concept is obsolete.
And, residual anger over the death of George VI could result in a harsher treatment of Germany after the war. If something like the Morgenthau plan was implemented, there's no Wirtschaftswunder and a very different look to modern Europe.
I'm also wondering whether the presence of an 18/19 year-old on the throne might have affected the postwar election that deposed Churchill and put Attlee in power. In a world with such a young monarch, Churchill might well be perceived as far more important to stability and therefore harder to defeat.
One thing I don't really have a handle on is whether it would affect support for the monarchy. One argument is greater support to honor the fallen George VI. The other is that having survived its darkest hour as a nation with a monarch not of age, perhaps the whole concept is obsolete.
And, residual anger over the death of George VI could result in a harsher treatment of Germany after the war. If something like the Morgenthau plan was implemented, there's no Wirtschaftswunder and a very different look to modern Europe.
I'm not sure how far George VI's death would affect either the political situation or support for the monarchy. Most people have long realised by now that the monarchy doesn't exercise political power and hence the existence of a monarch of age to command his armies in the field is not a matter of life or death.
But the monarchy is a symbol for all of the British Empire to rally around. Elizabeth may become Queen in 40/41, but she won't take any royal duties until 1944.
Now, the reason I posted this was more of what would be the reaction today. Elizabeth would be the only Head of State to have ruled DURING World War II. And also, she may be more admired as well by people today.
Some of you have some very funny ideas. British (unwritten) constitution is quite clear-the King is dead, long live the King/Queen ' (delete as appro). So Lillibet suceeds 14 or not -quite immaterial really. Yes you can have a Prince Regent until she reaches maturity. As to how it effects the governence of the war and UK attitudes -I would say stiffens resolve still further and to this day Dresden is seen as rightful punishment (personally thats my attitude anyway).
As for insulting Philip-rather low. He's 90 for heavens sake. He's achieved a damn sight more than most of us on this website. He's a decorated war veteran and marched as was his right in the VJ commemorative parade. I really can't understand this lack of respect and pettiness that strikes some people seeing him as a target-so my challenge is-go serve your nation for 72 years, fight in a war, develop a leadership scheme and programme taken by several million kids, be chair of a leading enviromental charity, champion British enterprise and technology for over 50 years, etc etc etc.
As for insulting Philip-rather low. He's 90 for heavens sake. He's achieved a damn sight more than most of us on this website. He's a decorated war veteran and marched as was his right in the VJ commemorative parade. I really can't understand this lack of respect and pettiness that strikes some people seeing him as a target-so my challenge is-go serve your nation for 72 years, fight in a war, develop a leadership scheme and programme taken by several million kids, be chair of a leading enviromental charity, champion British enterprise and technology for over 50 years, etc etc etc.
it would also be easier to sit on your ass and not bother and be window dressing for your pretty Monarch of a wife.