General News about Joachim, Marie and Family Part 5: September 2019 - December 2020

[Muhler]

No, that's your impression.

You see a woman who is arrogant and now irrational for speaking out in indignation for her husband.
I see a human being, who genuinely feel her husband is being treated unfairly and says so openly.

She wasn't angry on her own behalf or felt sorry for herself. It was for her husband. Is that a flaw?
We all have flaws. One of mine is that I that I try to see things from the opposite angles and give people the benefit of doubt. Even when it's about people I don't like.
I don't hold it against someone for defending and speaking up for someone they love, even if I think they are wrong. On the contrary. I think that's an admirable trait.

You don't care how much they do. Well, that is very much the issue here. The issue is whether Joachim should continue to receive his apanage, while in France where "all he is doing is going to school all day. He doesn't do any work for DK or the DRF." Well, I just listed two things he did.
And QMII seem to believe he is. The governments said OK, so...

It's not like this is March 2020 and we haven't seen even a glimpse of J&M.
So how about giving them a little space before yelling: "Strip Joachim of his apanage!"

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

Well, yes. Some of it is my impression. Hence the I think part And your impression is different – the beauty of discussion forums. But I don't think it can be debatable that what the press asked Joachim isn't unreasonable as Marie insinuated. And I believe I've spent a lot of time in here arguing what that's not just my opinion.

I think it's a bit tiresome that in all our discussions on the subject of J&M, you try to push some narrative where I'm supposedly incapable of seeing things from other people's perspectives when in reality, it's not black and white like that. I think it's perfectly possible that Marie genuinely feels that she and Joachim are treated unfairly. I just hold very little sympathy for that because the basis on which the press has been "criticising" them (again, not so much criticism as confronting them with facts) is completely legitimate and J&M's seeming unwillingness to accept that does have arrogant undertones to me. Of course royals are humans and humans are flawed, but that doesn't mean you can't hold them responsible for their flaws.

Yes, it's about Joachim's workload for EB and BT because the little-to-no engagement count he's mustered so far juxtaposed with the court's statement that their patronages wouldn't be affected by the move enables the press to run their favourite (and presumably the most click-responsive) narrative in all their stories on the DRF: Are the royals worth the money we spend on them? And please, no one's been yelling anything Joachim was asked if he thought it was defendable for him to continue to receive apanage on the basis of undertaking two engagements over the course of three months. Something the press would've had a much more difficult time asking him if the court had been open about how the move would affect their workload.

 

[kalnel]

Question for the Danish posters: Is service in the military (even in military training) perceived as "different" from royal duties? I would have guessed both would be viewed as service to Denmark, so I've been surprised to see how much controversy this has generated.

Also, what do you all make of the stories that Joachim and Marie may not ever return to Denmark to live? Again, stories about this caught me by surprise. I had the impression that Joachim was fairly popular with the public.

 

[Muhler]

Indeed, things are not black and white. That is very much the point I have been trying to make for the past pages.
My other point is that royals too are human beings and sometimes they act and react like human beings. (And thank heavens for that! Who wants soulless robots for royals?) A nuance that tends to be missing from your points.

You say the questions by the press were justifiable. I say they were provocative and out of place, considering the circumstances. I.e. a reception at the highest level in a foreign country.
Unfortunately but IMO very understandable Joachim reacted with anger - and the press got their story. Well, hurrah...

Apart from that I will argue that Joachim is right.
He is serving his country and the DRF while in France.

As I understand it, he was pretty much invited personally to attend the staff course by the French President. - As a part of the increasing military co-operation between DK and France BTW. Not least in Sahara, but now also very much between our navies.
Joachim has to be qualified, otherwise it would be an embarrassment. He is.
He has a staff education behind, otherwise he would not have been made a full colonel. He also has considerable staff experience behind him, both in the Defense Command and at brigade and division level.
He is fluent in French, is very well versed in French culture and on top of that is Francophile. Even better, he is full-blooded Prince to Denmark, which protocol and diplomatically is a huge advantage. And he has a lot of experience in regards to diplomacy and representation.
All that will in my estimation put him ahead of practically all other Danish officers at his level.
Ergo he is serving Denmark. Both by attending the course as well as help tying strings to certainly future higher French military staff officers as well as diplomats (who also attends part of this course.)

Joachim and our Marie are currently the highest ambassadors, so to speak, Denmark has in France and they have represented Denmark on two occasions - two months into their stay there.
Ergo he is serving the DRF.

France don't invite Joachim to attend one of the most prestigious military courses, just because of his pretty blue eyes. It is in French interests to have close connections with their allies. Here via Joachim, who is at a level, where he is actually heard. I.e. he is not just any army colonel.
Ergo Joachim is serving Danish national interests.

Okay, perhaps someone should have explained all that before he even went to France. Indeed, perhaps they should.
However, it is very much my impressions that when it comes to Joachim, quite a few have a tendency to have a very selective hearing. Willfully or not...

It's fun to play the "bad brother" of the family, I doubt very much it's much fun to be literally hailed as the "bad brother."
And as I have pointed out so many times before in this debate, Royals are humans too and sometimes they feel unfairly treated and sometimes they snap.

Joachim didn't choose his life.
He was born to be the spare. - He accepted that. QMII has expressed her admiration for that.
He was not allowed to become a firefighter or whatever he dreamed about becoming. You are gonna be a farmer, Joachim, and take over a derelict manor. - Joachim did that.
And while being a farmer, you are going to attend your royal duties. Also during the years where your older brother was away studying in USA, sailing the North Atlantic or being away for weeks at a time with the Frogman Corps. Or while trekking in Greenland. - Joachim did that.
Then he got divorced from at the time probably the most popular woman in DK. And he took the full heat of that and had to suck it up. - He sucked it up.
He had to throw in the towel at Schackenborg and was declared a public failure. Admittedly that wasn't handled that well. And it is here in my view that we see the first real cracks in Joachim's armor.
If I'm allowed to speculate for a moment, I will not rule out that he was suffering from a depression. hence why we haven't seen that much to him in a DRF context.
Anyone who has had a depression or undergone therapy will know that you don't get over that easily. And you can easily relapse.
That BTW is one of the reasons for my little pet-theory that J&M are now quietly opting out of the DRF.
It is admittedly only speculations, perhaps more for those who believe royals can be humans too.

And please, don't tell me that Joachim could just have opted out of the DRF earlier. Look at the mess that has created in Norway. Joachim could not opt out without rocking the boat too much.

So yes, Joachim is right.
And Marie is right in defending him.

Question for the Danish posters: Is service in the military (even in military training) perceived as "different" from royal duties? I would have guessed both would be viewed as service to Denmark, so I've been surprised to see how much controversy this has generated.

For some it is, as is evident from this discussion. I happen to agree with you, that military service can also very much be serving the DRF.

Also, what do you all make of the stories that Joachim and Marie may not ever return to Denmark to live? Again, stories about this caught me by surprise. I had the impression that Joachim was fairly popular with the public.

Never truly popular. In the 90's when Frederik was seen by many (including myself) as immature, Joachim was respected more than liked, for acting royal and tending to his royal duties.

IMO Joachim has inherited his fathers mantel so to speak. In every soap-opera, which is unfortunately also what royals families are and presumably always have been, there has to be a favorite villain. Today that's Joachim.
Joachim is more introvert than say his brother, he also has a more stand-offish personality, that some like to call arrogant. He is not easy to like.
That's trait he shares with many people - until you get to know them.
I respect him a lot, and as you know I sympathize with him, but I doubt he and I would ever be friends.

 

[eya]

The next six Wednesdays Prince Joachim tells in a number of TV programs the history of the Danes.


'“Let me say right away: I’m nervous today. For tonight there is a premiere on the TV program “Prince Joachim tells …”, where I tell and explain Danish history in the best broadcast time. This past year I have been part of the editorial team behind and visited Tallinn in Estonia, where the myth of our flag, Dannebrog, originated. All to describe faith, democracy, school, borders, law, and symbols, and how this has become part of us throughout history.
The first part can be seen tonight on DRK at 20.45. I hope you guys will watch. Sincerely, Prince Joachim.“



https://www.instagram.com/p/B387tS1A5_d/

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1179515725573534

 

[JR76]

I agree with everything Muhler has said about Joachim and Marie lately. He's been given a rough ride by the media lately because of a situation where the main blame lies with how it's been communicated and handled by the Royal PR not with him personally.

 

[polyesco]

Thanks everyone for their points of views.
I still don't agree with how Marie responded. Telling people they should be proud...well they can make that decision themselves.
This French course is worthwhile in my opinion for Joachim, but the Danes do have a right to question.

The next six Wednesdays Prince Joachim tells in a number of TV programs the history of the Danes.


'“Let me say right away: I’m nervous today. For tonight there is a premiere on the TV program “Prince Joachim tells …”, where I tell and explain Danish history in the best broadcast time. This past year I have been part of the editorial team behind and visited Tallinn in Estonia, where the myth of our flag, Dannebrog, originated. All to describe faith, democracy, school, borders, law, and symbols, and how this has become part of us throughout history.
The first part can be seen tonight on DRK at 20.45. I hope you guys will watch. Sincerely, Prince Joachim.“



https://www.instagram.com/p/B387tS1A5_d/

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1179515725573534

thanks Eya.
It does look interesting, (Im still working on my Danish though)

more info
H.K.H. Prins Joachim medvirker i tv-programmet "Prins Joachim fortæller..." | Kongehuset

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

It is so wildly redundant to have to repeat myself over and over again because you insist on putting words into my mouth or reading various motives into my posts, so I'm not exactly sure what point it serves to continue this discussion. A few notes, however:

Indeed, things are not black and white. That is very much the point I have been trying to make for the past pages.
My other point is that royals too are human beings and sometimes they act and react like human beings. (And thank heavens for that! Who wants soulless robots for royals?) A nuance that tends to be missing from your points.

I think you see what you want to see, Muhler. Perhaps I'm guilty of the same – but please spare me the nonsensical narrative that I'm somehow emotionally detached because I disagree with you and refuse to buy into a narrative that because royals are flawed beings like the rest of us, they shouldn't be held accountable for said flaws. It's such a childish attempt to derail the discussion and the argument I'm making, and frankly not a good look for someone who on several occasions has attempted to lecture me on the basis of being older and more experienced than me.

You say the questions by the press were justifiable. I say they were provocative and out of place, considering the circumstances. I.e. a reception at the highest level in a foreign country.
Unfortunately but IMO very understandable Joachim reacted with anger - and the press got their story. Well, hurrah...

The timing of the questioning has no impact on whether or not the questions themselves are justifiable. It will never be unreasonable for the press to confront Joachim with a clear discrepancy in the information communicated by the court and how it's actually being done. It'll also never be unreasonable for the press to ask him to elaborate on a job he receives full funding from the Danish state to undertake.

Additionally, it's my understanding that this was the first opportunity the press had been given to ask them these questions. If they have dodged requests for comments ahead of the reception, it's naïve to think the press won't make use of the occasion to inquire.

Okay, perhaps someone should have explained all that before he even went to France. Indeed, perhaps they should.
However, it is very much my impressions that when it comes to Joachim, quite a few have a tendency to have a very selective hearing. Willfully or not...

Wouldn't know that, would we? Because once again, they didn't try to explain. And I think experience shows that when Joachim has actually attempted to open up about himself and what he's doing, he's received a positive response (the documentary from 2017, the interviews he did for his 50th birthday and the documentary series that premiered today – alongside the very lovely IG post he put out about it – comes to mind).

It's very easy to hide behind the idea that everyone have bad intentions for you and to grow comfortable in that position. My argument is just that it's not sustainable in the long run (and it definitely won't improve their situation) if Joachim and seemingly also Marie let this idea get in the way of rational thinking.

(...)

So yes, Joachim is right.
And Marie is right in defending him.

For starters, great nuance!

As for your op-ed on how Joachim is "right": Sure he is. I just don't see how it relates to the point I'm making. I haven't questioned whether or not they should be allowed to bring their apanage to France – on the contrary, I think it's perfectly justifiable as he's there in capacity of his job with the Danish military.

And if that had been all Marie said in that interview, I wouldn't bat an eye. But suggesting that the press is unreasonable for asking questions about them enjoying tax-payer money outside of the country (something they didn't seek permission for) while tallying zero in-country engagements (despite the fact that their own court assured that the move would have no impact on their ability to maintain their engagements) is simply indefensible to me. Regardless of how tiresome it must be to have to clean up their own comms department's mess, which is what this comes down to, it's not sustainable to essentially tell the press (and as such, the Danes – regardless of the talk in the streets of Mariager, EB and BT would not keep digging if their readers weren't interested) to keep their noses to themselves. It's perfectly possible to let it be known that she supports her husband without tiptoeing the border to, for lack of a better word in English, magtfuldkommenhed.

I agree with everything Muhler has said about Joachim and Marie lately. He's been given a rough ride by the media lately because of a situation where the main blame lies with how it's been communicated and handled by the Royal PR not with him personally.

Absolutely. But surely the press is not to blame for the communications department's ****-ups? So they should direct their frustrations at their own court's ridiculous handling and not the press asking legitimate questions.

 

[Muhler]

It is so wildly redundant to have to repeat myself over and over again because you insist on putting words into my mouth or reading various motives into my posts, so I'm not exactly sure what point it serves to continue this discussion. A few notes, however:



I think you see what you want to see, Muhler. Perhaps I'm guilty of the same – but please spare me the nonsensical narrative that I'm somehow emotionally detached because I disagree with you and refuse to buy into a narrative that because royals are flawed beings like the rest of us, they shouldn't be held accountable for said flaws. It's such a childish attempt to derail the discussion and the argument I'm making, and frankly not a good look for someone who on several occasions has attempted to lecture me on the basis of being older and more experienced than me.



The timing of the questioning has no impact on whether or not the questions themselves are justifiable. It will never be unreasonable for the press to confront Joachim with a clear discrepancy in the information communicated by the court and how it's actually being done. It'll also never be unreasonable for the press to ask him to elaborate on a job he receives full funding from the Danish state to undertake.

Additionally, it's my understanding that this was the first opportunity the press had been given to ask them these questions. If they have dodged requests for comments ahead of the reception, it's naïve to think the press won't make use of the occasion to inquire.



Wouldn't know that, would we? Because once again, they didn't try to explain. And I think experience shows that when Joachim has actually attempted to open up about himself and what he's doing, he's received a positive response (the documentary from 2017, the interviews he did for his 50th birthday and the documentary series that premiered today – alongside the very lovely IG post he put out about it – comes to mind).

It's very easy to hide behind the idea that everyone have bad intentions for you and to grow comfortable in that position. My argument is just that it's not sustainable in the long run (and it definitely won't improve their situation) if Joachim and seemingly also Marie let this idea get in the way of rational thinking.



For starters, great nuance!

As for your op-ed on how Joachim is "right": Sure he is. I just don't see how it relates to the point I'm making. I haven't questioned whether or not they should be allowed to bring their apanage to France – on the contrary, I think it's perfectly justifiable as he's there in capacity of his job with the Danish military.

And if that had been all Marie said in that interview, I wouldn't bat an eye. But suggesting that the press is unreasonable for asking questions about them enjoying tax-payer money outside of the country (something they didn't seek permission for) while tallying zero in-country engagements (despite the fact that their own court assured that the move would have no impact on their ability to maintain their engagements) is simply indefensible to me. Regardless of how tiresome it must be to have to clean up their own comms department's mess, which is what this comes down to, it's not sustainable to essentially tell the press (and as such, the Danes – regardless of the talk in the streets of Mariager, EB and BT would not keep digging if their readers weren't interested) to keep their noses to themselves. It's perfectly possible to let it be known that she supports her husband without tiptoeing the border to, for lack of a better word in English, magtfuldkommenhed.

Hmm, did I strike a nerve?

I must admit I'm confused (probably because I'm old.) Now we are all of a sudden in agreement!
Joachim should continue to receive his apanage. - Fine, now that is in place. And as such we also agree that Joachim was right.

As for asking permission. Both the former and the present government has okayed Joachim receiving his apanage while in France. There has been no major move, let alone a majority, in the Parliament, questioning that decision. Not before, nor after the recent general election.
So Joachim is right in the sense that he has secured the right to continue receiving his apanage.

The press has very much gone after Joachim himself, in regards to receiving the apanage in France. Despite the fact that the decision was not his. That was up to QMII, approved by the governments and ultimately by the Parliament.
So Marie was right in saying that Joachim has been treated unfairly.

You have on several occasions ridiculed Joachim for being angry and for "whining" just to mention two examples.
You demand, literally, that they remain rational at all times and are answerable presumably at all times to the press.
I don't say you are emotionally detached. I say you have shown a deliberate lack of compassion and empathy in regards to Joachim in particular, but also Marie in this matter.
Now you are angry with me for pointing that out. You feel, I conclude, I have treated you unfairly, harshly, overbearing etc. That a very human feeling. A human trait royals also have...

Royals are humans. They too get angry. They too get irrational. They too become stubborn. They too feel unfairly treated from time to time. And sometimes they lash out.
That's the main-point I've been trying to hammer in over the last pages of this thread!
And that is something I believe is crucially important to keep in mind.

The next six Wednesdays Prince Joachim tells in a number of TV programs the history of the Danes.


'“Let me say right away: I’m nervous today. For tonight there is a premiere on the TV program “Prince Joachim tells …”, where I tell and explain Danish history in the best broadcast time. This past year I have been part of the editorial team behind and visited Tallinn in Estonia, where the myth of our flag, Dannebrog, originated. All to describe faith, democracy, school, borders, law, and symbols, and how this has become part of us throughout history.
The first part can be seen tonight on DRK at 20.45. I hope you guys will watch. Sincerely, Prince Joachim.“



https://www.instagram.com/p/B387tS1A5_d/

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1179515725573534

I watched the first segment, lasting 30 minutes, and focusing on religion in Denmark.
Okay, such a huge topic as religion from basically the Bronze Age to modern day cannot be more than introductory in 30 minutes. As such I thought it was bit shallow. It could hardly be anything more.
We saw Joachim as part narrator (something he does very well! You can tell he is used to giving lectures and speak in front of a crowd) and part acting on behalf of the inquisitive viewer. I.e. talking informally with various Danes in the know - and more importantly allowing those he spoke to to speak. (Quite a few docu-hosts could learn from that!) You can sense von Lowzow's style in this.
It has been very much noticed that Joachim addressed and was addressed with informal you.

So in conclusion: I don't think this is a series I will watch twice.

I understand it is very much intended to be used in schools as a basis for the topic, who are we, the Danes? And how did we become, who we are?
It can, I think, perhaps also be used as a basic introduction to Danish history and culture for foreigners.

 

[polyesco]

Joachim got good reviews from his documentary.
https://www.bt.dk/royale/prins-joachim-overrasker-eksperter-det-var-et-klogt-valg
And it was pointed out that this time he did not correct anyone for not using the formal "you". Everyone can learn

Maybe I have missed things but I dont feel Marie has received unreasonable criticism. I think the press is pretty warm to her. That's why I was shocked with her reaction. And still, telling people that they should feel proud was an error.
But we will see her in two weeks in Denmark. She has a few events lined up and that is great to see.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

Hmm, did I strike a nerve? (...)

No, you resorted to petty ad hominem because you seemingly can't handle that someone disagrees with you. Insinuating that I deliberately dehumanise J&M is about as ridiculous as if I was to accuse you of backing certain narratives for not speaking out against the crowd that routinely comes rhythmically snapping from the shadows on here whenever Mary takes a breath. Nonsensical. Just because I don't subscribe to your idea of categorising Marie's misdirected frustration as a "human reaction", doesn't mean I'm either incapable of or unwilling to be empathetic to her and Joachim when empathy is due.
So no, Muhler, you didn't "strike a nerve", and no, I'm not "angry with you" (trust me, I have better things to do than to waste time and energy getting angry every time some insignificant man is condescending to me on the internet ), I'm just not someone who takes patronisation and the twisting of my words to fit your narrative lying down.

Maybe if you read my posts less selectively, you would've noticed that our agreement that Joachim bringing his apanage to France is justifiable isn't sudden and has been my stance all along. But as I've also said repeatedly, whether or not Joachim was right in his comments to EB has no impact on the point I'm making, so it's beyond me why you keep wallowing in that.

The press has very much gone after Joachim himself, in regards to receiving the apanage in France. Despite the fact that the decision was not his. That was up to QMII, approved by the governments and ultimately by the Parliament.
So Marie was right in saying that Joachim has been treated unfairly.

First, the government has not approved them bringing the apanage to France. Both the former and current governments have refused to act on the court failing to formally seek permission to lift the apanage out of the country – saying they consider the stay a study abroad-like situation – but that doesn't equate approval. And definitely not parliamentary approval. Joachim is an intelligent man. Suggesting that he hasn't been able to ask the court to simply abide by the constitution is belittling his intellect.

It is also not singlehandedly because of the lack of parliamentary ratification that the press has "gone after" rolleyes Joachim. Naturally, it was brought up pre-move. Were you expecting them not to write about a breech of the constitution? If the court/J&M didn't want the press to dig into it, they could've just followed procedure. If they wanted to shake the perception of arrogance, they could start by not acting as if they're above the rules. (So no, no unfair treatment from the press, just an impressive lack of foresight from the court).

As I've explained at length multiple times now, as I see it, the main issue in regard to Marie's comments on the press being "unreasonable" is that the court's statement about their patronages remaining unaffected by the move has legitimated inquiries into the subject of their apanage (i.e. questions that Marie define as "unreasonable"). It's not that I don't understand that it can be frustrating to have to deal with a communications department as hopeless as the DRF's and if Marie had kept her "lashing out" at "come on now, he's here in capacity of his job with the military, of course it's reasonable to bring the apanage", I would've backed her 100%. But the moment she essentially tries to silence legitimate inquiries from the press rooted in a statement their own court has put out, that's a no-go. And yes, royals are flawed beings like the rest of us, but if J&M can't rationalise that they have their own court (and/or their lack of communication) to blame for these inquiries, I think they've grown a little too comfortable in their positions of privilege.

On a slightly more positive note, I really like what I've seen of Joachim's documentary. Anna von Lowzow is a great historical documentarist (she also has possibly the best royal documentary of all time, En kongelig familie, on her resume). Narratively a bit messy but at the same time I like the idea that they've dedicated each episode to a specific subject. I agree that Joachim has inherited QMII's impeccable knack for storytelling and I agree with Sebastion Olden-Jørgensen's point in the BT article above that it was nice to see Joachim being himself and in his right element.

I think what I loved the most though was the message Joachim put out on the DRF's Instagram account ahead of the premiere. It was sweet and personal, and you could tell from it that it was a big moment for him. It also made me wonder why he and Marie don't pull a CP and Sofia and get themselves their own IG account. I think it could do wonders for them and their image to be able to showcase more of their work and their lives and not necessarily have to be tied up to the formality of the DRF's official account. I know I'd follow them

 

[Muhler]

Just a moment: It's up to the head of the DRF to handle matters regarding the apanage for the various members. That's QMII, not Joachim, not Benedikte, not M&F. That's the chain of command.

It's up to the government to advise the Monarch whether that's a good idea or not. In fact it's one of the foremost jobs of any PM.

Joachim will not and cannot bypass QMII. So he is not the one who should ask for approval by the government and/or Parliament.

The Constitution is open to interpretation in regards to the apanage.
It says a member of the DRF cannot receive an apanage while living/residing abroad. (Without an approval by the Parliament. So a "retirement-apanage" could perhaps be a possibility. But that's for another discussion.) But it doesn't say that a member of DRF is prohibited from receiving an apanage while being stationed abroad. In the service of the DRF and/or Denmark. I.e. the royal in question is still on the job, so to speak. In contrast to a DRF member who has decided to settle and live in another country. (Doing a Madeleine, for comparison.)

The Danish monarch has traditionally considerable power and long reins in regards to the internal affairs of his/her family. The Parliament has avoided micromanaging the DRF. - As I understand it, in order to maintain the integrity and independence of the Monarch. (Say the Monarch can't be "influenced" by whatever government is in power, by the government withholding or granting funds and permissions to the DRF.)

Could all this have been handled better? Of course it could. That's the great thing about hindsight. You can always do better afterwards.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

The subject of the lack of permission still doesn't really relate to the point I'm making at all (aside from the fact that following procedure would've made everything easier for J&M), but I also don't believe I've ever insinuated that Joachim himself should've shown up at the doorstep of the parliament and asked for permission
However, Joachim is presumably capable of thinking for himself and I fully trust that he could've insisted that procedure was followed – especially since it's pretty obvious that he was gonna get the heat for not doing so. Hence my comment that the suggestion that he's just being puppeteered around is belittling his intelligence. But it's also beyond point who should've asked, bottom line is that if they wanted to avoid the press hullaballoo, they should've asked.

Writing it off as something that's simply clearer in hindsight just doesn't hold. You don't have to be a communications major to know that bypassing the rules will rub people the wrong way and be a meaty story for the press. Looking for ways to interpret the constitution differently rather than acknowledging that it was a glaring mistake for the court not to be arsed to ask for permission – something they would've been granted immediately – is just a reach and I hope you stretched before doing it.

 

[Muhler]

So he should have asked his mother to ask the Parliament for permission to receive his apanage while in France?
Just in case QMII and her advisors couldn't figure out what to do themselves I presume?
I think she can.

Why is it obvious he would get heat for getting his apanage while studying in France?
Frederik studied at Harvard and he continued to receive his apanage. In fact the discussion back then was not about his apanage but the costs of having two PET officers there with him, in an additional apartment.

So there are different rules for Peter and Paul? Or rather Joachim and Frederik?

And as for the governments, both of them, if they thought it was a really bad idea for Joachim to continue receiving his apanage while in France, why didn't they let it be known to QMII?
It's not like it was a total surprise that Joachim was going.
It was after a direct invitation by President Macron and would have involved two senior government ministers: The Minister of Defense and the Prime Minister - of both governments. The former, liberal government and the current Social Democrat government.

 

[Elektra]

My apologies if it had been answered before, but isn't Prince Joachim in a similar situation than Princess Benedikte ? And did she or does she still receive an apanage or not ?
She also lived outside Denmark for quite some time, so was her situation very different to Prince Joachim's current one ?

 

[Muhler]

My apologies if it had been answered before, but isn't Prince Joachim in a similar situation than Princess Benedikte ? And did she or does she still receive an apanage or not ?
She also lived outside Denmark for quite some time, so was her situation very different to Prince Joachim's current one ?

Well, her address is still Schloss Berleburg, but she does spend a lot of time in DK though. Perhaps even most of the time now that she's a widow.
But she would certainly have spend less time in DK beforehand.
However when she is in DK, she is undeniably very active in her work for the DRF!

I'm not sure off hand, but I believe she receives her apanage via QMII. I.e. a certain percentage of QMII's apanage is earmarked for Benedikte. Just as a certain percentage was earmarked for PH when he lived.
And indeed Mary gets 10% of the apanage Frederik gets. That is earmarked for her personally.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

So he should have asked his mother to ask the Parliament for permission to receive his apanage while in France?
Just in case QMII and her advisors couldn't figure out what to do themselves I presume?
I think she can.

Why is it obvious he would get heat for getting his apanage while studying in France?
Frederik studied at Harvard and he continued to receive his apanage. In fact the discussion back then was not about his apanage but the costs of having two PET officers there with him, in an additional apartment.

So there are different rules for Peter and Paul? Or rather Joachim and Frederik?

Well, it seems fairly obvious to me that [they] couldn't. Because then they would've had the foresight to know that it was gonna look bad in the press. (I'm fairly certain it would go through the court and not QMII herself but I don't know enough about the process to say that for sure, hence the "they".)

Well, first of all there are different rules for everyone Like Joachim, I have a state-funded income (sadly, my student grant amounts to just a tiny fragment of what Joachim receives annually though ) but I wouldn't just be allowed to take mine abroad without going through tiresome applications processes where the state would carefully asses whether the courses I'd be taking abroad are relevant to my education and whether I'd tally enough ECTS points during my stay abroad. Much more difficult than what the court would've had to go through regarding Joachim, but enough about glaring double standards.

As for the comparison to Frederik: First, I didn't write that Joachim was gonna "get heat for getting his apanage while studying in France", I wrote that he was gonna get heat for not asking for permission. Secondly, I think the examples are incomparable. Frederik was 24 and studied abroad for a year in extension of his university studies (something I'd argue was expected of him). Joachim is 50 and brings his wife (a working royal like himself) and two children. So yes, different rules – not for Frederik and Joachim, but for Frederik and Joachim's respective life situations at the time they moved their apanage abroad.

Regarding:

And as for the governments, both of them, if they thought it was a really bad idea for Joachim to continue receiving his apanage while in France, why didn't they let it be known to QMII?

I don't know why you insist on making it sound like I'm arguing he shouldn't receive apanage while in France. Again, that has never been my point. I absolutely think not seeking approval was the first communicative mistake they made regarding the move because from an onlookers perspective it reeks of presumptuousness when you refuse to follow procedure, but of course he should be allowed to bring it.

With that said, I believe you've already answered your own question:

The Parliament has avoided micromanaging the DRF. - As I understand it, in order to maintain the integrity and independence of the Monarch. (Say the Monarch can't be "influenced" by whatever government is in power, by the government withholding or granting funds and permissions to the DRF.).

Add to that that governments on varying sides of the political spectrum have been known to be notoriously afraid to touch on the DRF. Frederik not facing any repercussions for voting against the government's stands in IOC matters is a perfect example of this.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I don't think Joachim's opportunity to study in France-military & diplomatic related studies--can be dismissed as something he just wanted to do. He was basically recruited and the Danish government agreed he should go. This opportunity would not be open to a young man, it requires considerable background and experience of at least a middle aged man. It is a huge honor. So really just an extension of his duties as a member of the DRF.

It would be ridiculous for Marie and the children to remain in Denmark during the year. similar to when a government employee or military member is posted somewhere there is not danger/combat and his family moves too.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I don't disagree. But if we're talking reasons why he got heat for taking his apanage abroad when Frederik didn't, I'm just saying that it's easier to sell apanage during a school stay abroad to the general public if you're actually taking it in extension of your higher education studies. It was expected for Frederik to take parts of his higher education abroad, it wasn't expected for Joachim to take this course which is what makes it incomparable to me. That's not to diminish Joachim's course, just to say that combined with the court's catastrophic communication on the subject (they've basically run a "no comments" policy on every aspect of it), going back to school at 50 was always gonna be harder (although not impossible) to sell.

I'm also not arguing that Marie should've stayed behind, just that another thing that's considerably different about the two stays abroad is that Joachim's affects more than just his own abilities to function as a working royal which again makes it more prone to criticism.

 

[Muhler]

Come on, you are fighting a rearguard action to use the military jargon.

There really isn't much left of your arguments by now.

Please, don't get upset, but you have a little tendency to take everything personal. You may not have argued that it was in your opinion wrong for Joachim to take his apanage with him to France. However, in the public debate, that is one of the cardinal point the critics of Joachim raise.

As for your comparison with yourself and Joachim, sorry, can't use it.
As far as I understand it you are currently in process of getting an education. You have not served your country for 30 adult years, nor are you a member of the DRF, nor do you serve in the military.
You are at best comparable to Frederik when he studied at Harvard. Which is hardly a school-course.
But if we are to use you for comparison, I imagine you will attend courses in your field all through your career. Just like Joachim and most other military officers.
As for selling it. Good grief! The politicians and opinion makers are howling their heads off for people to educate themselves throughout their lives. Exactly what Joachim is doing. So the problem is...?

In the military, junior officers like lieutenants and captains have a basic staff training, in order to serve at a general staff.
However, when you reach the rank of major, you go back to school to get a higher staff education.
Once you reach the rank of full colonel you become a staff officer in your own right. I.e. that is the most junior level where you have your own staff.
Joachim is a full colonel.

The course Joachim attends is even higher. This is for future senior and specialized staff officers serving at the staff of a corps general (lieutenant-general) and up or at Defense Command level or as senior advisor at Ministry of Defense level.

Once he finish this course, some have speculated that he will return to active service, in which case he is likely to be promoted to major-general. And serve either in DK for a while as senior advisor or analyst or serve at a NATO HQ or IMO more likely, serve as a direct liaison between the defense commands in DK and France and as most likely be stationed in France.
(To use an example we all can relate to: After this course Joachim is the officer who is called in to personally brief the US President and/or the Joint Chief of Staffs regarding the security, military and political situation in a particular area. Say Iraq.
Or during Desert Storm, Joachim is one the officers who would council and brief General Colin Powell, prior to sending in and turning General Schwarzkopf and his army loose.
It's at that relative level.)

As for your suggestion that the politicians are afraid to interfere with the decisions of the DRF, that is IMO pure speculation.
It's the job of the sitting PM to advise the DRF and protect them from making mistakes. We simply do not know to what extent the PM put his/her foot down in regards to the DRF.
The politicians certainly did in regards to Frederik and IOC. He was actually issued an "advisor" to tell him what to vote and say. So your argument doesn't hold water there either.

 

[Somebody]

I don't fully understand why you keep arguing something (that he is taking a relevant course) that nobody (at TRF) is disputing... For me as an interested reader and somewhat participant of the discussion, it makes it a bit hard to follow and have a conversation.

From my perspective, the only argument (and a valid one imo) that has been made is that Joachim and Marie (and the DRF) are not handling all of this well. And blaming 'others' is making things worse.

As I said previously, it would go a long way if they showed some acknowledgement that others might have valid concerns (and that of course a year abroad will impact their royal engagements this year - completely valid imo; so don't pretend otherwise); even though they personally think that their actions are completely justifiable. That's about being able to place yourself in another's position; a very important trait for a member of the royal family if they truly want to serve their people.

Having said that, I hope this year provides them a great experience and hopefully by the end of the year they and the DRF have a clearer vision of their future roles and will be able to communicate that accurately.

 

[Muhler]

I'm merely trying to illustrate why it isn't just "some course."

I apologize if I over-explain things but what is obvious to me or you, may not be obvious to everybody else.

 

[Somebody]

I'm merely trying to illustrate why it isn't just "some course."

I apologize if I over-explain things but what is obvious to me or you, may not be obvious to everybody else.

Hope my little note helped to put things in perspective ? You may perceive it differently but from an outsider's perspective it is very clear that nobody was disputing it. Archduchess Zelia explained several times that the relevance is clear to her and another recent poster, O-H Anglophile, is also clearly in agreement

That's it for my 'intervention'; let's get back to the family's general news, such as the documentary. Is the main purpose indeed 'educational'; either in a broad sense (an informative documentary for the whole population - just like any other documentary that might be shown on tv) or in the sense of it being targeted at schools?!

 

[gerry]

Hope my little note helped to put things in perspective ? You may perceive it differently but from an outsider's perspective it is very clear that nobody was disputing it. Archduchess Zelia explained several times that the relevance is clear to her and another recent poster, O-H Anglophile, is also clearly in agreement

That's it for my 'intervention'; let's get back to the family's general news, such as the documentary. Is the main purpose indeed 'educational'; either in a broad sense (an informative documentary for the whole population - just like any other documentary that might be shown on tv) or in the sense of it being targeted at schools?!

and now for something really interesting...where can we see this famous documentary online

 

[O-H Anglophile]

I'm sorry but I agree more with Muhler about this situation. I don't understand the criticism of Joachim and Marie over any of this in the least.

The way I've read some of the posts, there is a disparagement of the course Joachim is taking to justify criticism of his continuing to have his apanage while attending this course. And that criticism makes no sense to me under the circumstances.

I do not think education should end when you are in your 20s or is less important when you are 50. If you can advance your career or change your career by going to school at 50 (especially when your employer-in this case the Danish government--is supportive) that is fabulous and should be applauded.

And I also have an outsider's view.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

There really isn't much left of your arguments by now.

? Sure. You're the one who feels the urge to take my comments out of context, practice selective reading of everything I write and attribute comments to me that I have never uttered, but I'm the one running out of arguments. Whatever helps you sleep at night

Please, don't get upset, but you have a little tendency to take everything personal. You may not have argued that it was in your opinion wrong for Joachim to take his apanage with him to France. However, in the public debate, that is one of the cardinal point the critics of Joachim raise.

Based on the rhetoric you're turned to, are you sure you're in a position to tell me not to get upset? The reason I'm "taking it personal" is that I think it's unnecessary for you to twist my words to get your point across. When I talk about Joachim/the court failing to seek permission to take the apanage abroad, you turn it into a discussion of whether he should be allowed to bring the apanage at all ("if they thought it was a really bad idea for Joachim to continue receiving his apanage while in France, why didn't they let it be known to QMII?") When I write that it was obvious Joachim was gonna get heat in the press for not asking for permission to take his apanage abroad, you ask me why it's "obvious he would get heat for getting his apanage while studying in France?" I just think that's a curious thing to do.

I also disagree that the apanage itself has been a major point of criticism. EB specifically asked Joachim whether he thought the apanage should remain unchanged despite the fact that he undertakes considerably less engagements than he did before the move. So the way I see it, the real issue is the court's lack of transparency in regard to how the stay would affect their engagement count and not the apanage itself.

As for your comparison with yourself and Joachim, sorry, can't use it (...)

Wasn't comparing myself to Joachim. Merely pointing out that there are different rules for different people. As I specifically mentioned in the first sentence of that same paragraph.

As for your suggestion that the politicians are afraid to interfere with the decisions of the DRF, that is IMO pure speculation.
It's the job of the sitting PM to advise the DRF and protect them from making mistakes. We simply do not know to what extent the PM put his/her foot down in regards to the DRF.
The politicians certainly did in regards to Frederik and IOC. He was actually issued an "advisor" to tell him what to vote and say. So your argument doesn't hold water there either.

History disagrees with you. But that's a whole other discussion.

It's funny because I actually know quite a lot about Frederik's IOC endeavours for reasons entirely irrelevant to this discussion. Therefore I'm fairly confident in what I'm arguing here. Not to start a new discussion about Frederik's shortcomings in the middle of one about J&M's but: He was indeed issued not just an advisor but an entire coordination group when he joined the IOC to secure that he'd retain his neutrality. As a matter of fact, it was the only reason he was allowed to join the IOC.

In 2016, however, he still managed to vote against an exclusion of Russia from the 2016 Summer Olympics. An exclusion that Bertel Haarder, the then Minister for Culture, had been very clear about supporting (something he has since maintained). Now, we know the ministry contacted the court several times in the days leading up to the IOC vote but we don't know what the inquiries ware about because the ministry has denied the press access to them. But perhaps even more interesting (for this discussion at least), at the time of the vote in August 2016, the coordination group hadn't been gathered for two and a half years which sort of defies its purpose.

This is an interesting subject I've spent an ungodly amount of time on so I could go on for days but I'll refrain because it isn't the right thread. I will, however, refute your claim that my argument "doesn't hold" because I think this is a pretty ace example of Danish politicians and their (for lack of a better English word) berøringsangst when it comes to the DRF. Frederik didn't face repercussions for voting against the wishes of the relevant ministry – rather, he was given the government's full support to serve another period with the IOC.

I'm merely trying to illustrate why it isn't just "some course."

Please point me in the general direction of me saying it is "just some course". In the literal last post I've written in this thread, I specifically noted that I'm not trying to diminish the prestige or the relevance of the course. As @Somebody noted, no one's disputed the legitimacy of the course Joachim's taking. I just don't agree that it is comparable to Frederik's stay at Harvard.

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

I'm sorry but I agree more with Muhler about this situation. I don't understand the criticism of Joachim and Marie over any of this in the least.

The way I've read some of the posts, there is a disparagement of the course Joachim is taking to justify criticism of his continuing to have his apanage while attending this course. And that criticism makes no sense to me under the circumstances.

Now I'm curious, where have you read that?

I do not think education should end when you are in your 20s or is less important when you are 50. If you can advance your career or change your career by going to school at 50 (especially when your employer-in this case the Danish government--is supportive) that is fabulous and should be applauded.

My argument was not that Joachim's course is more or less important than Frederik's courses at Harvard nor that he's too old to educate himself. My argument was that his situation can't be compared to Frederik's because the circumstances are different.

 

[Muhler]

Okay, let me try and sum up:

We agree:
It's okay for Joachim to study abroad.
It's okay for our Marie and the children to go with him.
It's okay for Joachim to continue receiving his apanage while there.
It's understandable they can only perform few official duties while there.
(Even though you admittedly expressed some scorn IMO that they had only performed two official duties during their first two months.)
That the court could have handled this better and explained it better to the public.
The course is both relevant, of value for Joachim and DK and prestigious.

- I believe this is what I have repeated over and over again all along.

Where we don't agree, or rather don't share the same view, is that you seemingly find it crucial that QMII on her own initiative should have formally asked the Parliament for permission.
Where I say: Why? The governments were fully informed, if they wanted a formal request surely they would have let it be known?
Apart from that: Who asks for permission to do something, if they feel they don't have to?

But we do agree that Joachim is not the person responsible for asking permission or not, right?

So that's pretty much it, right?

As for the apanage in France: The words I have been hearing on the street and reading the comments by the certifiable nutcases who comment on Ekstra Bladet: Is that the issue is more that he is getting an apanage at all while in France. (Because he is not doing any work etc.) Rather than the more academic issue of formally asking the Parliament. That is my clear perception.
I do seem to recall though you suggesting that he could live of his officer's wage. (Which he doesn't get. He is living of his apanage while attending his duties as an officer of the reserves.)

Finally, my explanation as to why I elaborate on Joachim's course was in response to Somebody, not you!

--------------------

As for the documentary, you can find it here: https://www.dr.dk/tv/se/prins-joach...eller-2/prins-joachim-fortaeller-om-vores-tro
?
The nun Joachim was talking to was a real treasure BTW. What a lovely personality.
Having a discussion on sex and celibacy with a pretty intoxicated young man on a bus, and flooring him. That's style!

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

By "expressed scorn", do you mean me noting that it'll never be unreasonable for the press to question their engagement count while in France so long as the court maintain their statement that J&M's patronages would be unaffected by the move?

As for the course, I think it holds considerably value for Joachim in the long run than it ever will for Denmark, but sure. I definitely agree that him being enrolled on the course is legitimised by the position he holds with the Danish military and therefore it's also defendable for him to receive his apanage while in France.

Nah, I don't find asking for permission particularly crucial in the context of EB's criticism. I think it would've made life easier for them if the court had bothered to follow procedure and personally, I think it's conceited to think they're above asking for permission, but that's really beyond the point I'm making. I also think the suggestion that either the royals themselves or the abundance of people they have hired somehow don't have the foresight to imagine that the press would dig into this is laughable. I strongly believe Joachim is able to think for himself, so of course him included (especially since he's always very adamant that the press treats him unfairly – why feed them a reason to write negatively about him?)

It's not about what the government wants. They seem to be fine with the DRF failing to ask for permission (and that's criticisable all on its own but also tied in closely with their fear of touching on DRF issues). It's about how failing to abide by the constitution looks which is why the court IMO should've felt like insisting on following procedure With all due respect, I like to think the government has better things to do than to make sure the DRF don't end up in media frenzies.

On my part, the discussion has never been about what you hear on the street or read in comments sections, but about the questions EB asked Joachim that Marie called "unreasonable" and why they're not. As for your recollection, no and yes. My argument was never that he shouldn't receive apanage while he was undertaking the course, I did however say that should he opt for a career abroad following the course, they should not remain funded by the state. I don't think that's unreasonable.

In reply to one of your replies to me, Somebody asked why you keep problematising something no one's been disputing. To that, you respond that you're elaborating to illustrate "why it isn't just some course". So I don't think it's a reach to assume you were referring to me. And again, I've never said it was "just some course".

 

[ricarda]

Frederik studied at Harvard and he continued to receive his apanage. In fact the discussion back then was not about his apanage but the costs of having two PET officers there with him, in an additional apartment.

So there are different rules for Peter and Paul? Or rather Joachim and Frederik?

And Joachim continued to receive his apanage during his 1 year-stay in Australia and also during his stay in Hongkong although these working experiences primarily served himself and not Denmark.
So no, there were not different rules for Joachim and Frederik.

But just continue to omit everything that doesn't fit into your narrative of "unfairly treated Joachim". I noticed very well that it wasn't you who mentioned the controversy about Joachim's apanage in the first place. I guess it was too unimportant. But every time Frederik puts his hands into his pockets you find it worth mentioning. Different rules ???

Btw I totally agree with Archduchess Zelia regarding your annoying tactics and regarding Joachim I am actually far more critical than she.

Joachim was only in the army because he failed in everything else. And his job was so important. he wasn't even replaced. So, let's not talk whether he deserves the apanage. The real question is: Was there nobody in the Danish army more deserving to attend this important course. Or was Joachim personally invited? In any case many people have the feeling that once more something was thrown at him because he is the Queen's son and not because he is deserving (although the announcement presented him as the most suitable man).

It was also interesting to see that there was a business promotion tour to Paris, the place were they are currently living. And except for a dinner neither Joachim who you always claim is so good at this (I always disagreed)
nor Marie who is a native French speaker were in any way involved. Joachim had his course in the morning but in the afternoon he was able to visit an exhibition. And Marie has pretty much nothing to do after bringing her children to school. So no wonder a lot of people ask themselves what they are receiving an apanage for.