[F1Qy94GJ55]

> Spending his life serving the country. Rest in Peace.

The man was almost 100 years old, almost 30 when India and many other countries got independence from British after a long multi-decade struggle, with many many innocent dead. Frankly I see him as a wealthy old man from a very influential family who should have done better. Am I wrong that this was my first though after seeing this comment? Am I supposed to feel sorry for the royal family and their lack of "freedom"?

[Milner08]

I think you can feel sorry for them as people, while also being unhappy with their actions over the years and their position of power.

To me the reaction in the UK (for example all BBC radio stations are broadcasting the same crap news about him all day) has been way more over the top than I expected, but I can see the impact he has had on UK diplomacy over the years but it still seems highly out of proportion.

[Symbiote]

There is a dedicated complaints form, if you wish to write to the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/death-duke-of-edinburgh-tv-cov...

[Fazel94]

It is in answer to "spend his life to serve the country" part, thus a totally called for clarification.

[TrevorJ]

>Am I wrong that this was my first though after seeing this comment?

Yes.

[F1Qy94GJ55]

why?

[simonh]

Let's just say it tells us an awful lot more about you than it does about him.

[F1Qy94GJ55]

Am sorry if this touched a nerve because not everyone sees the British royal family as perhaps you do, I suppose I cannot reward service and loyalty to a cause alone, specially when the cause was colonization and oppression of many many other people.

[simonh]

Personally I see them as a somewhat irrelevant but harmless relic of a bygone era, about which I am largely indifferent. Philip certainly had his flaws, but he was also a brave and resourceful man. The only way he directly touched my life is that both my daughters took part in the Duke of Edinburgh Awards Scheme, which they thoroughly enjoyed and had a very positive influence on their lives.

Thanks Phil.

[F1Qy94GJ55]

> somewhat irrelevant but harmless relic of a bygone era, about which I am largely indifferent.

Many old people, still alive, lived a good chunk of their lives in what was a British colony then and he was the prince then too. Neither was it that far back in history, nor was it harmless :) You can be indifferent like many others and celebrate the British monarchy, but I suppose I cannot, like many others.

[ksec]

>colonization and oppression of many many other people.

There are probably valid reason why Indian hate the Brits. But not all period and all colonisation are bad and involves oppression. And I am sure there are some good involves that people excluded for their own interest. AFAIK Modern India is united to become one because of the Brits. The Turks also at one point ruled India.

[stjohnswarts]

Not really, no more wrong than people who do think they will miss him. As with most things in life it's about context.

[jariel]

You can think anything you want.

The man had a very difficult upbringing, risked his life fighting Nazis and then did his family duty for the rest of his life. He was witty and funny until the end.

Gandhi was a pedophile who slept with young boys and girls almost his entire life, and who refused 'foreign medicine' (antibiotics) on the basis of principle for his dying wife, but took 'foreign medicine' (quinine) to save his own later. At the same time, leading a major liberation movement. History is complicated.

[TwBJHghcam]

One mention of a relevant but unpopular opinion and we find ourselves at whataboutism and denigrating someone totally different targeted loosely based on a guess of the op's nationality (but guess this won't be flagged / taken down)

[ksec]

Then why do it in a new and obscure account?

[dr-detroit]

Most people on HN are temporarily emberassed billionaires who see the royals as peers.