The madness of King Charles

0

In the not too distant future, the face of this country will change. Decades have been spent speculating on what King Charles III (if that is the name he chooses) will do with his power, whether the monarchy can survive the demise of Elizabeth Windsor, and how he will “reshape” it. crown in his image. During all this time, there has never been a consensus that any of us really want man to replace his mother. Can we really imagine him giving that Christmas speech with the bland authority we’ve become so used to? Would he be able to balance the tightrope of royal chatter, able to say enough to fill the time but never enough to say something new? The reason the death of the current incumbent president will be greeted with such inevitable hysteria and the preparations are given with such gravity is because we know that these old principles will not survive, that the image of the monarchy, and indeed the country, is entirely linked with the awe-inspiring and indescribable nature of its most famous resident. And we know the next one can never live up to it all.

The recent revelations about Charles’ public and private life are particularly noteworthy for the very lack of real interest with which they have been received. The heir to the throne uses his family connections and position to secure regular wads of money for the Conservative Party. So what? We all knew he was a conservative anyway. His valet resigns again in controversy, this time for using Charles’ charitable trust to secure an honor for one of his favorite clients? Man has never been able to surround himself with good people. The prince on the verge of becoming head of the Church of England, the armed forces and, at least in theory, the British people, is also in awe of

richness



, privilege and


pseudo-science




? Who knew?


The Prince of Wales should worry us now for the bravery with which he continues to make his way with the arms dealers, bullies and eccentrics. After seven decades of rehearsing for his biggest role, he still seems to have learned nothing of his mother’s skills to keep his mouth shut. When the “Black Spider Memos” first appeared, the obscure nature of their subject matter rocked most of us to conclude that his ramblings to ministers about his pet hobbies were little more than ‘eccentric, perhaps admirable dedication. None of them has ever been overwhelming; complaints about the deprivation of the right to vote of rural people, what about


Politics
ly correct culture, and a series of screeds on the awe of modern architecture across the country. Now most of us are turning a blind eye to his relationship with Mohamed Amersi and the cousin of his second wife, Ben Elliot, who happens to be the president of the Conservative Party, as well as the owner of a company based on the pleasure of every oligarch. Needs. The various links in high society are opaque enough to avoid popular protests.


After all, he at least does not broadcast his views on current affairs to the nation in television monologues (as some so-called impartial presenters are inclined to do) or express his every reaction to his subscribers on the. social networks. Just a little old-fashioned lobbying behind the scenes. Nothing the prince intervened with has made many wonder if the famous and fragile ‘unwritten’ Britons


Constitution
”Will be able to survive two decades of such an aberration of the polite silence to which we have all become accustomed. “Access to Capitalism” has Charles as its best representative, where the glamor of privilege, the lure of hard cash and shameless realms of secrecy continue to protect those who have received all the favors and generous donations.


Yet when his time comes, these little scandals will not weigh heavily on the hearts of people in this country or the next, as they contemplate the glitz and glamor of his rise and the flower of British pageantry unfurled. to remind the world that we can still do kingship like we once did. Then he will be like the newly released son into the world, with his past misdeeds set aside to avoid family shame. Maybe I’m too cynical; but it seems blatantly obvious that the monarchy leaves a remarkable blind spot in the otherwise reasonable and democratic national mindset. What if we don’t have a say in the next name at the top of the national banner? Either way, they have no power, and we love the old queen on top of that. Well, the most powerful question Republicans can ask themselves is if anyone really loves their son very much. What if his crimes will show any sign of slowing down once his powers are finally granted.


Her Majesty had four children. Two of them (Anne and Edward) have opted for a secondary role in the management of the family business. The others (Andrew and Charles) became, in the former case, ostracized for his potentially criminal behavior and penchant for public ignominy of himself and the whole show, or in the case of the elder, backed by a whole royal apparatus against the follies of his attempts to “be himself”, as his supporters can see. The most embarrassing truth about Prince Charles is that he still doesn’t fit the mold his ancestors left him and still threatens to deliver that throne culture shock that has been so close for so long. And the greatest absurdity of the British monarchy is that it always expects people to fit into that mold, that they become something for which aptitude or taste is irrelevant, and that ‘they keep the sails of the system moving,


no matter
what is the force of the social wind which defines all those who are inferior to it.


Charles, then, is temperamentally unfit for a role he should never have to play. Do his subjects have compassion for his plight? Or does the majority rather expect him to follow Admiral Nelson’s orders and still do his duty? I fear the latter, because, without wanting to echo too much the Duchess of Sussex or the late Diana Spencer, compassion has never been at the center of our royal system. At the end of the day, the system has to survive, so someone has to bear the burden. Only a revolution of some sort could remove it after all. And that would be way too different from us.


A message from the article


We are the only publication that is committed to covering all angles. We have an important contribution to make, which is needed more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please donate.


Source link

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.