29 April 2011

Royals: okay if they are a long time ago or far, far away.

I like it preppy

My future queen.
I have no damned queen, and I never will. Thank God for it.

I was never in danger of being one of those people freaking out about how exciting today’s royal wedding is. On the other hand I didn’t want to be one of those people freaking out about people freaking out about the wedding either, but dammit, this little "future queen" comment tipped me right over the edge.

I find the whole royalty thing fascinating with all the uniforms and ceremonies and protocols and such, but only in the same way I find the operation of a ballistic missile submarine fascinating. They’re both kind of neat, but they’re also both rather gruesome, and I’d vastly prefer to keep both of them far away from me at all times. My chances of leading a good life can only go down if it becomes expedient or necessary to concern myself with what is happening in either Buckingham Palace or the USS Maryland.

Like Tam said yesterday, a hereditary monarchy in the 21st century is literally retarded.  (Retarded: having failed to progress; not advanced.)  I take these clowns no more seriously than Emperor Norton I.  Unlike the Windsors, at least everybody knew that Norton's claim to rule was based on nothing more than empty, self-aggrandizing delusions, and that his continued "reign" was contingent on the people being willing to humor him, in no small part for their own amusement.
A prince can mak a belted knight,
A marquis, duke, an' a' that!
But an honest man's aboon his might --
Guid faith, he mauna fa' that!
For a' that, an' a' that,
Their dignities, an' a' that,
The pith o' sense an' pride o' worth
Are higher rank than a' that.
I'm going back to doing some Science now. I expect the next hour of my life will result in more honest work than the current crop of self-appointed English royals will produce all month.

2 comments:

  1. "My chances of leading a good life can only go down if it becomes expedient or necessary to concern myself with what is happening in either Buckingham Palace or the USS Maryland."

    Heh. So true.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Like Tam said yesterday, a hereditary monarchy in the 21st century is literally retarded.

    I am not so sure.

    Selecting a leader based on genes isn't any sillier than the faux democracy we have now, nor is it any less modern or retarded.

    You take a guy. Indoctrinate him from birth in the rights and obligations of leadership. Make sure he receives a commission in the military and learns how to lead men and what it means to be shot at. More indoctrination in leadership, organization, politics.

    I submit this guy will be a better leader, a superior executive, than the child or wife of a president, or a guy who majored in political science at a cow college and is dependent for his living on telling voters what they want to hear.

    He be better at guiding his country through time of turmoil and change, at getting projects done for the benefit of future generations.

    And if he's not, if we end up with Charles II, well then we invite another monarch over and send the failure to live in France.

    ReplyDelete