would the British political establishment really go as far as assassinate their monarch, if he were to refuse to cooperate with the ruling party and would not be willing to abdicate ?
What if Edward VIII never abdicated?
- Thread starter Paul Simmons
- Start date
would the British political establishment really go as far as assassinate their monarch, if he were to refuse to cooperate with the ruling party and would not be willing to abdicate ?
No. All these weird scenarios (inc. serious historians like Roy Jenkins in his Churchill bio!) wildly overestimate both Edward's courage, IQ and subtlety when it comes to the myth of Quisling Eddie.
Ah. We were discussing WWII, so I thought you meant the King who had reigned then.
Edward aside, what would the possible reactions of the ruling British political class be to a hypothetical intelligent, somewhat popular monarch that tries to get his way and would not abdicate under any circumstances in, say, the 20' and 30'. Said monarch would also be willing to resort to manipulation and all sorts of political maneuvering.
(inspired in my question by OTL king Carol I of Romania)
When Chamberlain resigned, Edward might have named Lord Halifax rather than Churchill as PM. Halifax would have made peace with Germany. A huge disaster.
Last edited:
Why would Edward do this? He got on better with Churchill than George VI did.
Last edited:
Yep, Churchill and Edward were very good friends from WWI until 1940- to the point of nearly wrecking Churchill's career in 1936.
Cook
Banned
That’s a bit melodramatic. No, the Monarch is bound by rules and traditions far stronger than any laws. This it England of the 1930s and ‘40s we’re talking about here.
No, a disapproving look and polite cough would have been enough.
It was by way of background detail. Another amusing detail is that while it is the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force, it is the British Army; the army tracing its history back to Cromwell and Parliament’s defeat of Charles I.
That seems like a contradiction. A hypothetically intelligent monarch would know that his position rests on lines of tradition, duty and loyalty running in both directions. He would know that the king can have a quiet word with the Prime Minister and that’s as far as his authority goes. The British were more subtle than the Ottomans and Buckingham Palace differs from the Sublime Porte in that the gates aren’t locked, but it is a gilded cage none the less.
It was not his decision to make; he accepted the name recommended to him. The decision was already made in the corridors of the Palace where the real power resides; Westminster, not Buckingham.
Last edited:
Okay, let's take a hypthetical intelligent, devious, stubborn, and otherwise popular monarch who simply won't stop speaking in support of Hitler, refuses to abdicate, and refuses to stop giving interviews or move to the country unless forced. I'd guess the Prime Minister would have a quiet word with the military, who would quietly shuffle him off to the country by force. The papers would simply say that he was on vacation or something.