Putting King Charles III on British currency bucks a global trend to honor diverse national heroes

The US doesn't have a monarch and is just 58% white. The UK has a monarch and is 87% white. One size does not fit all. Having the monarch on the currency doesn't stop others from also featuring on banknotes, and they will no doubt be more diverse in the future. But the King will be on the currency of the UK. Other nations can do as they wish. The Commonwealth is not an Empire, membership is voluntary, many nations are republics and some have their own monarchs.

The US minted the Susan B. Anthony dollar coin from 1979 to 1981, but minting was halted due to poor public acceptance, probably because it was the same size and looked similar to a quarter. Also, Americans are very traditional and conservative when it comes to currency. The $2 bill never caught on, either.

It is required that the monarch and head of state is on the currency of the country. With note currency one side can be used to honour someone.

Theres nothing wrong with tradition. It provides people with a sense of place and history.

Replacing a serving monarch with other figures, in a country with a thousand year old history of putting the monarch on its coin is just yet another attempt to wipe Britains history. Every single passing day somebody wants to erase history in the West.

Only the West must be diverse, everywhere else, like Japan, can do whatever they please. I NEVER, EVER! see any real pressure on any Asian country or African country or Latin American country to take in migrants from cultures very different to there own.

When is this hypocrisy and double standard going to end?

The UK has a monarch and is 87% white.

There have been 10 million migrants come to the U.K since 2000. The country is flooded. Brexit was, in part, about getting that migrant flow to something approaching reasonable. I seriously doubt the U.K is 87% white.

In Australia, where the queen is depicted on the $5 bill, spirited debate continues about whether or not to keep her image, replace it with King Charles or break with tradition and use an image of an indigenous Australian instead

Indigenous Australians dont even represent 5% of the Australian population. Its one thing to feature famous indigenous Australians on the currency and thats already been done, its another to feature an individual on every coin and banknote from a culture that doesnt represent the vast, VAST majority of Australians.

The new King is not Australian, but is still the head of state and comes from a culture which represents probalby 50% of the population with the majority ethnicity in Austraila being British ancestory and secondly of various European ancestry.

Why should the 95% support it? No, i dont think its appropriate, but sure anything erases white people from the country in which they are the majority is perfectly acceptable it seems.

Look at the state of the UK right now. Politically and economically it is embarrassing. So no surprise that they cannot move on from putting this royal family all over their bank notes instead of cultural and historical heroes.

Many of those 87% (as GBR48 proudly declares, 87% white) would never accept any diverse heroes. And putting the royal family on banknotes is yet another example of the brainwashing of these British subjects.

The Commonwealth is not an Empire

Ahahaha That's quite funny. What is it then? Is it just a coincidence that commonwealth countries were also the same countries subjected to that invading empire?

@TigersTokyoDome

'The Commonwealth is not an Empire

Ahahaha That's quite funny. What is it then? Is it just a coincidence that commonwealth countries were also the same countries subjected to that invading empire? '

It's a free association of sovereign states, has no formal constitution or bylaws, and no legal obligations among it's members. The overlap between the territories of the British Empire and membership of the Commonwealth is because, as they became independent, countries were invited to become members of the Commonwealth. But some chose not to (eg. Myanmar), some joined but later left (eg the Republic of Ireland, South Africa, Pakistan), and some members were never part of the British Empire and have joined only relatively recently (eg. Mozambique in 1995, Rwanda in 2010)

There have been 10 million migrants come to the U.K since 2000. The country is flooded. Brexit was, in part, about getting that migrant flow to something approaching reasonable. I seriously doubt the U.K is 87% white.

Matt Hartwell, please don't write lies and right wing politics. Check the UK Office of National Statistics, it's governed by a right wing government. It states clearly that the UK is 87% white. Yet again these lies about 'floods' of immigrants proves to be fake.

In the UK today we cannot find our suitcases in airports and sometimes cannot depart due to the lack of staff. Restaurants and pubs have to close because of a lack of staff. There is a severe shortage of Nurses, Doctors, cleaners, and transport staff. All of these jobs used to be covered by immigrants to the UK.

Brexit was an unmitigated economical disaster and yet in October 2022 we have Matt Hartwell writing about how Brexit was needed.

The Commonwealth is not an Empire

The Commonwealth of Nations, simply referred to as the Commonwealth, is a political association of 56 member states, the vast majority of which are former territories of the British Empire

It was originally created as the British Commonwealth of Nations through the Balfour Declaration at the 1926 Imperial Conference, and formalised by the United Kingdom through the Statute of Westminster in 1931. The current Commonwealth of Nations was formally constituted by the London Declaration in 1949.

The head of the Commonwealth is Charles III.

LagunaOct. 18  11:28 am JST

The US minted the Susan B. Anthony dollar coin from 1979 to 1981, but minting was halted due to poor public acceptance, probably because it was the same size and looked similar to a quarter. Also, Americans are very traditional and conservative when it comes to currency. The $2 bill never caught on, either.

The $2 bill was made during the Bicentennial era and fell out of use during the 80s. Its impact was lasting however. Homophobes now say 'three-dollar bill' instead of 'two-dollar bill' to lip off about and slam gay people. The Susan B. Anthony coin wasn't totally round, but even with the polygonal shape the size similar to a quarter deep-sixed its chances right from the start.

There's been some changes in our quarters lately. Recently I found one celebrating Harriet Tubman and there's more commemorating Black Americans to come.

Also, Americans are very traditional and conservative when it comes to currency. The $2 bill never caught on, either.

American currency is quite boring, especially compared to Aus currency which is known to be at the pinnacle of design.

The U.S misses a big opportunity with their boring notes I reckon.

Matt HartwellToday  07:46 pm JST

Also, Americans are very traditional and conservative when it comes to currency. The $2 bill never caught on, either.

American currency is quite boring, especially compared to Aus currency which is known to be at the pinnacle of design.

The U.S misses a big opportunity with their boring notes I reckon.

The US does have 'dull' money compared to other nations. Everything is printed in either green or black ink. Canada has colorful bills and the $1 'loony' coins and especially the $2 'tooney' coins (concentric silver ring around a gold circle depicting a polar bear) are pretty cool. And the (long defunct) South Vietnamese bills that my uncle brought back from that war are colorful too - red, purple, etc.

There's another thing to figure in here. Chinese money may be colorful and interesting as well, IDK. But would you want your wallet to be stuffed with bills featuring Mao's scowl?