Random Thoughts On Monarchy

[poliphilo]

 Not so very much is required of a modern royal. You don't have to be virtuous, you just have to be seen to be virtuous.  On the whole, unless word has gone out from on high that you are to be monstered ( as has happened with the Sussexes) the media will play along- and not make a fuss about your misdoings.

Edward VIII got away with being a traitor.

Louis Mountbatten got away with being a paedophile- until the IRA blew him up.

Philip Duke of Ediburgh got away with numerous affairs.

Charles III (careful now!) got away with being friendly with Jimmy Savile and various other undesireables.

And Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor got away with all sorts of awfulness until the optics became too, too shaming.

The Sandringham estate isn't Siberia, nor is it Abu Dhabi. I'm told Mountbatten-Windsor has seven dogs; well, they'll have plenty of space to run around in.

We're told a modern nation state requires a human figurehead. A monarch by preference, but failing that a President. I don't see why.

But then perhaps what I really object to is the modern nation state....

Comments

[cmcmck]

Well, as I'm a 17th century historian you know my views on monarchy!

[poliphilo]

Indeed....

[lethe1]

I can't help feeling a little sorry for Fergie. She will also be turned out of her house and apparently won't be joining Andrew in Sandringham.

[poliphilo]

She's collateral damage....

[paserbyp]

When I hear about monarchy then first thing it is Rasputin… how about compare Epstein and Rasputin?

[poliphilo]

I don't think Rasputin was a trafficker and a paedo.

[paserbyp]

Nope, instead of a paedo he was a very religion person and use Jesus to help him to fuck everyone around him, including wife of russian tsar and many other wives and other very religion women.