[highwaylights]

Again this is something I assume that must have been very frustrating too. She couldn’t just say “that’s not right” and intervene because that’s not within her remit in a democratic system.

I can’t begin to imagine how many times she must have had to bite her tongue over the last 73 years.

[_alxk]

No, they actively lobbied over the years of her reign to preserve their economic benefits. They enjoyed this luxury and made attempts at preserving and expending it. Elizabeth was not a passive victim of her birth circumstances.

[noodleman]

>Elizabeth was not a passive victim of her birth circumstances.

It's so strange that this even needs to be said out loud. It's not edgy to say that someone born into her position has benefitted from it. For a place that claims to be a meritocracy, the UK has some strangely dissonant beliefs.

[highwaylights]

Not sure who this needed to be said out loud to.

It’s not edgy to explain something everyone already knows. The royal family benefits from the taxation of UK citizens.

“For a place that claims to be a meritocracy, the UK has some strangely dissonant beliefs”

Are you.. States-splaining.. to me right now?

“Elizabeth was not a passive victim of her birth circumstances.. the UK has some strangely dissonant beliefs”.

I don’t know if you’re from the US or not, but if so this is the most ironically hypocritical thing I’ve ever read.