King Charles will see the biggest anti-monarchy protests so far at his coronation

Since QEII passed away, there have been at least a dozen significant protests against the Windsors, mostly against King Charles. At this point, whenever Charles and Camilla turn up to a previously announced public event, there are at least 10-20 anti-monarchy protesters in the crowd. Recently, there have been even more protesters, like the Republic protesters outside the Commonwealth service in March, and outside the Royal Maundy service this month. Those are just the organized protests too – lone anti-monarchist activists have also disrupted Charles’s events by throwing eggs at him. All of which means that Charles is f–king terrified that the coronation will see large-scale protests and anti-monarchy demonstrations. The palace made a point of shortening the coronation procession from 4.5 miles (QEII’s procession) to 1.3 miles. A more limited space for Republic to stage what will probably be their biggest protest:

The leader of Britain’s largest anti-monarchist group says more than 1,350 people have pledged to protest during the coronation parade in May. Graham Smith, the head of Republic, said the demonstration would mark “the largest protest action” in the group’s 50-year history.

Republic activists will wear yellow T-shirts and wave yellow placards to create an “unmissable sea of yellow” along the procession route in central London, he said. When the newly crowned King passes in his gold stage coach, they plan to boo loudly and chant: “Not my King”. Most of the demonstration will be in Trafalgar Square but smaller groups of anti-monarchists will be dotted along other sections of the route.

Smith, 48, said activists would aim to arrive early in the morning to be as close to the barriers as possible. He stressed, however, that they were not planning any Extinction Rebellion-style stunts, because “it’s not a good look” and “doesn’t help the cause”. He added: “We want to make sure we have as many people as possible when Charles goes past, which we assume will be between 10 and 10:30am. You hope to be reasonably down near the front with a sea of placards. It’s a matter of standing out, making a very bold statement that there is a Republican movement and we’re not a nation of royalists. We have megaphones and an amplifier with a microphone. We should be unmissable.”

Smith said he had informed the Metropolitan Police of their plans. Anti-monarchists had been preparing for possible verbal clashes with royalists in the crowd, he added. He said he was not worried about arrests “because we’ve been very clear with the police what our plans are”. He added: “We’ve met with them twice and we have assurances about how they intend to police the event and the limits of their powers. We are aiming for a party atmosphere. We always try to engage with those people, keep it lighthearted. Some people get annoyed and upset, but most people accept the fact that people are allowed to protest. We’ve also got the police around if there’s any trouble.”

He added: “A lot of the people aren’t really staunch monarchists, they’re just there to see something that’s big or historic or whatever. We see them as potential republicans.”

Republic’s website invites potential protesters to sign a pledge, committing them to protesting in London or where they are based. Smith said that by 5:30 last night, 1,350 people had signed. “This will be the largest protest action we’ve done,” he said. “It won’t be the last.”

Demonstrations against the coronation are being planned in other parts of the UK. In Cardiff, the Not My King protest, organised by Campaign for a Welsh Republic, will meet at the Aneurin Bevan statue at 12.30pm, to march to Bute Park. The protest will be followed by what the group describes as a “big republican lunch”. In Glasgow, a march for independence is planned to run concurrently with the coronation services. A simultaneous protest will be held in Edinburgh at the National Monument of Scotland, with more than 250 people registering an interest in attending.

[From The Times]

As many have said before, it’s giving Trump inauguration. Remember the very first hours of Trump’s reign of terror, when he was having a hissy fit about crowd size? And then the next day, the anti-Trump Women’s March protests staged in DC and around the world were so much bigger. The problem for Charles is that his most vociferous “fans” and supporters really don’t care enough to come out for the coronation. The optics of this will be fascinating and it will be curious to see how the international media covers it. Ten bucks says that the demonstrations in Glasgow and Edinburgh will be huge too.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

55 Responses to “King Charles will see the biggest anti-monarchy protests so far at his coronation”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Flowerlake says:

    I am looking forward to it.

    You mentioned the Women’s March, so just sharing this:

    https://www.rawstory.com/trump-2017-womens-march/
    Movements like those are actively being destroyed by Russians trying to sow division.

    • Lia says:

      I should really fly to London over the weekend and join the demonstration! The flight costs only 160€!! It really looks like no one wants to go there as flights are usually more expensive on such a short term! 😂😂

  2. Aidevee says:

    At this stage, I think they’re actually shitting a brick that Extinction Rebellion show up. They have been very busy at the grand national and the snooker this week!

    • LadyE says:

      Much too long to go into to here, but I am not a fan of the glue yourself to art/road/etc Extinction Rebellion tactic. However, if they glued themselves to the golden carriage, I might have to rethink that haha!

      • Brassy Rebel says:

        Yeah, this would be quite counterproductive for the anti-monarchist cause. The idea is to appeal to fence sitters, not alienate them with attention grabbing antics.

  3. Barbara says:

    I love this for him

  4. blue says:

    Wow! Isn’t that about about $1million per mile for the new coach?

  5. Veda says:

    Will the Dukes of Thingamajig join this Republic protest because of their snub? I would if I was one.

  6. Jan says:

    Don’t be surprise if the police shut down the protest on ConAnation Day.
    The traffic control guys are planning to strike on that day.

    • HamsterJam says:

      Police can’t do anything about it if a ton of people decide to wear yellow that day.

      • Concern Fae says:

        They need something equivalent to the pussy hats. That really helped the pictures of the event stand out and be unmistakable as anything else.

    • Paulkid says:

      Security staff will be striking at Heathrow also. I would love it if his international guests were unable to attend due to worker’s grievances..

      • Robert Phillips says:

        I wonder if that could affect Harry also. I think he’s only going to fly in and fly out. He will probably go private. To work around his schedule instead.

  7. Harla A Brazen Hussy says:

    This couldn’t happen to a more deserving person! #AbolishTheMonarchy

  8. SarahCS says:

    Yesterday my hairdresser asked me what my plans were for the con-a-nation and I replied ‘ignoring it’.

    I don’t know if we’ll be having any protests where I live but I applause those heading into London to make a point.

    Interestingly, having been challenged on their pro-monarchy bias, one of the trending stories on the BBC this morning is ‘Does King Charles need a coronation’ and it ends on the delightful note of ‘but the idea that one man, who by accident of birth, is being anointed and set above the rest of us; who is unelected, and doesn’t represent Britain religiously or ethnically, jars badly’. YES IT DOES.

    • Brassy Rebel says:

      Coming from the increasingly sycophantic BBC that’s quite a statement.

      • SarahCS says:

        Yep. I almost didn’t click as I try and avoid anything about the royals on there and I was quite shocked that they had more than just the chap from Republic as the opposing view.

    • Becks1 says:

      wow. For the BBC that seems like a strong statement to be allowed. And yes, it does “jar badly.” That’s why Im sort of surprised they’re making such a big deal about this. Part of the appeal of QEII, in my opinion, is that people just accepted she was the Queen. She had been Queen for 70 years, many many people were not alive for or did not remember her coronation, and I think there was also a post-war patriotic feeling that enveloped that anyway. She was fairly newly married, two small children, a handsome husband – it made sense that her coronation was viewed very differently than this one.

      Anyway, all that to say – Charles making such a big deal of the coronation seems like its just pointing out to people how out of touch and archaic this institution is.

    • Isabella says:

      Charles is bad enough, no glamour or charm to offset anti-royals. But the visual optics with Camilla and her children are going to be just awful. I’m so glad Meghan is out of this mess.

  9. Linda says:

    I wish him R.A.I.N. So much of it.

  10. Amy Bee says:

    As he should. I wish Republic was more radical. It will get a lot more people on their side. I think public apathy helps the monarchy.

    • Peachy says:

      Extinction Rebellion has radical very well covered and all it seems to do is turn people off. I believe this group is on the right track…make a solid presence so those with doubts and dissenters know they’re not alone in their thoughts, don’t create a police response that makes people wary and establish themselves as the major group of anti-monarchy protestors.

  11. Oh goody!!! I hope way more turn out for this and they bring their quiche eggs to throw and let’s throw in some rain too.

  12. HamsterJam says:

    This is brilliant, all you have to do if you want to go is show up in a yellow shirt. No law against that. If there is a sea of yellow along the procession path it will be quite a statement.

  13. sara says:

    as much as i dislike the monarchy. they’re not going anywhere. the monarchy has been quoted to bring in hundreds to billion pounds for the british economy. he won’t be popular, and people will protest, but this lot isn’t going anywhere.

    • Tessa says:

      Charles is already messing things up. And incandescent bill is next in line

      • tamra says:

        I have heard that sites like the zoo and various places take in more money. How many people ever see the “Royals?” I think tourism would be just fine with “this is where they use to live.”

      • kirk says:

        Versailles gets 15M visitors per year.

    • MoBiMom says:

      So here’s a thought experiment: suppose the the monarchy is abolished and becomes part of the history of the UK. Will tourists stop flocking to the Tower of London? Will they stop forking over money to tour Windsor castle? Probably not (think about the annual income from tourists visiting Versailles). I’m just not sure that the tourist income argument relies on having an actual monarch.

      • MissMarirose says:

        Yeah, I agree. I’ve been to Versailles and Schoenbrunn Palace and they were packed with people, even though there isn’t a monarchy in France or Austria. Tourists will still come and spend money and, in fact, without the restrictions of the palaces being in use, more visitors will be allowed. That brings in more income.

      • The Recluse says:

        I think Buckingham Palace, which would make a great National Gallery, and Windsor Castle would be super popular with tourists. Right now, how much does anyone get to see because actual royals or their staff are in the way?

    • Flowerlake says:

      “Bring in” with what?
      People buying plates with the queen’s face on it?
      That’s not nearly that number.

      I literally don’t know any people that went to the UK for the monarchy and almost everyone I know has been to the UK at least once.

      Now, if you include castle visits and how much those attract visitors, you already get a much bigger number. Thing is, people still visit castles and palaces in droves in countries where there is no monarchy any more. Don’t need a monarchy for that.

      This is not meant against you, Sara, but against the people coming up with those numbers.

    • Gina says:

      #sara If I visit Britain, I’ll go to see Palaces, Gardens, Museums. Not interested to see old man in golden carriage. Though, maybe, I’ll check the carriage.
      It’s a myth that Royal Family gives boost to economy.
      History, art, architecture – these things are interesting, not living “relicks” from the past centures.

      • Fabiola says:

        It is a myth that the royal family brings in tourism but a lot of people still believe that unfortunately so they’d rather keep the royals.

    • equality says:

      It would be interesting to see an actual breakdown on that and who the money actually benefits.

    • Becks1 says:

      Agree with others. The monarchy doesnt bring in that much, castles and history bring in that much (just accepting that number for argument’s sake.) It’s not like you get to see the Queen at Windsor Castle. It’s not like I can pop over to Clarence house for tea with Charles. We went to London last summer and yes, we visited Tower of London and Windsor Castle. both of those were more for history than anything else. We also went to a Tottenham game. I feel like at this point the EPL probably brings in more money than the royals do.

      In spain, the Alcazar is Segovia is much more interesting than the royal palace in Madrid. In France, I would love to see Versailles and that’s a bucket list item for me, but they haven’t had a monarchy in centuries.

      The idea that any country “needs” a monarchy because of “tourism” is just not true.

    • lanne says:

      That number never held up to scrutiny. And Brexit has meant a large drop of European tourists to the UK. Inflation means fewer tourists in general from the rest of the world. If the economy doesn’t improve, and Brexit woes continue, the royal family will be increasingly called on to justify its existence. And they can’t blame the cost of the royal family on a biracial Duchess who hasn’t lived in the UK for 3 years now, and will never live there again.

    • Jan says:

      Versailles is most visited place in Europe, even without a Monarchy.
      Not sure which Museum in England get more visitors than any of the Royal palaces/castles.

    • Lorna says:

      Quotes from monarchists. Others have proved that those numbers are lies. Windsor Castle is the only one in the top 20 visited sites or at least it was before the pandemic. Tea at the Ritz or Harrods, the Cotswolds honey colored houses, authors like Dickens, Austen, and the Eyres and places they are tied to are visited more, and large houses like Chatsworth bring in the tourism. This royalty tourism stuff is ridiculous. If you emptied Buckingham Palace, St. James, Kensington, and Windsor Castle people would visit year round. Not that I’m for kicking out old people like the Duke and Duchess of Kent, Princess Alexandra, or the Gloucesters I’m not. Just make the spaces more open and you can afford more security and bring in more money. France and Germany got rid of their monarchy and have larger economies. They point out France’s protests, but ignore the English ones. The Crown Estates, Duchy of Lancaster and Duchy of Cornwall will then go back to the people.

    • kirk says:

      sara – re: your comment: “the monarchy has been quoted to bring in hundreds to billion pounds for the british economy.” – the most relied upon source for these incredible valuations is London-based Brand Finance, but they’re not terribly forthcoming on how they arrive at their estimate of economic contribution by monarchy. From the 2017 report, we find fairly standard language about the methodology of netting benefits against costs and applying discount rate per period computed from “growth rate sourced from the Office for Budget Responsibility.” However, consider the following information re: benefits and costs.

      Benefits include “estimations of indirect annual uplifts to the UK economy, based on Brand Finance’s research, analysis, and experience. For instance, the impact of Royal Warrants and Coats of Arms was estimated using notional royalty rates, illustrating what could reasonably be charged for their use as licensed trademarks.” What is their research, experience and analysis exactly? They’ve given an example. And in that example what they’re saying is they’re attributing a market value to monarchy insignia and deal grants as if the monarchy had value extending beyond that which has been conferred on them by the people – a broad based market if you will. Ask yourself if that makes any sense. What’s the size of the remaining market if the broad public no longer consent to be governed by monarchy?

      “Costs include the Sovereign Grant derived from the
      surplus of the Crown Estate, the annuity of the Duke of Edinburgh paid directly from the Treasury, earnings from the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall ceded by the state to the Queen and the Prince of Wales, and security expenses, among others.”
      1. They’re choosing to accept internal accounting performed by Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall without any oversight or review. Consider the millions of pounds held offshore in tax havens exposed by Panama Papers, Paradise Papers, etc. Should British taxpayers trust Duchy accounting?
      2. Security expenses – how many times have we seen public security forces decline to disclose their costs? The reason for nondisclosure makes sense when you consider they don’t want to risk exposing means and methods to persons intending harm. However, it’s an unknown cost. Are taxpayers given sufficient data that it could even be estimated? What are the security perimeters of the guarded palaces? When do protected persons / places need to be covered and how deeply?

      While Brand Finance is using standard computational methods for their valuations, I find their auxiliary assumptions regarding income questionable. I also find their reliance on internal duchy accounting and cost estimations with unknown factors unacceptable.

      • Lux says:

        This. If I could protest and make a cool sign it would be something along the lines of (bear with me here, no time to look up actual numbers):

        Averages:

        $Xm — Cost to maintain Clarence House for one year
        $X — Cost of round trip private jet for William’s 30 min engagement
        $X—Cost of Kate’s outfit for 30 min engagement

        $X—Cost of heating for one year
        $X—Cost of train ticket
        $X—Cost of rewearing an outfit

        Cost of Royals= X
        Value of Royals=
        Value of Royal patronage= negligible
        Value of looted goods by Royals= priceless

    • Isabella says:

      I’ve always wondered where that billions figure comes from. Sounds awfully bogus and contrived. In any case, I will be asleep in the U.S. when it occurs. Won’t have to endure wall to wall coverage.

  14. Beverley says:

    Meghan was to have been blamed for the protests and booing.
    Now they’ll be yours to enjoy, Chuckles.

    #CoronationSoWhite

  15. Mslove says:

    The chubbly is going to be a huge flop. I can’t believe Chuck will be flaunting his wealth & privilege in these hard times. Why would you celebrate this? My thoughts & prayers to the hungry children of Britain.

  16. aquarius64 says:

    I definitely want to see the protests. Instead of eggs, they may throw the coronation quiche at the Golden coach on the short ride back. The route also has the coaches passing the statue of Charles I, you know, the one that was beheaded?

  17. Saucy&Sassy says:

    The protests will be the best part of the day. I’ll be looking for pictures of that later in the day. Since this spectacle starts at 11:00AM in the UK it means it’s 3:00AM on the West coast. I can’t imagine people getting up to watch the Clowning at that time of the morning. For the East coast it would be 6:00AM. I don’t know how many people will get up to watch this. Afterall, it is Saturday and I suspect people will want to sleep in.

  18. AC says:

    That’s always their propaganda that the BRF is good for tourism, it pays for itself. But is it really. People would still visit the historic sites and many people still has a fascination with the UK whether the royal family exists or not. There’s still a lot of Americans who love the British accent and history. Nowadays it’s Movies/shows/social media influencers who influence travelers to visit the UK.
    So we were in France last summer, there’s no existing royal family in that country but it was still packed with tourists(esp American tourists wherever we went from Paris to the countryside). Took the kids and my nephew and niece to Disneyland Paris, and realized not only is DP one of the most visited tourist site in Europe, but they also invested billions of dollars to the region and is currently the largest private employer in France. Do the French citizens need to pay taxes to Mickey Mouse, Nope. In fact DP provided a huge tax generation to the country , and also still generated billions of dollars to the French economy that it exceeded the French government’s expectations.