… we Americans have followed the modern history of the British monarchy with confusion (why does it still exist?) and amazement (did King George really let the Romanovs be shot to bits?).
While we’re vaguely aware that the current Norwegian royal family is just as stuffed with morons and degenerates as the British, we’re less interested because, I mean, history… But the fact is, we remain baffled by the behavior and also the continued existence of The Crown.
*****************
The Guardian has a nice insider’s take on it all, from which maybe we can learn. Let’s see…
The royal family’s defenders claim that they were once the country’s moral anchor. That was rarely, if ever, true. But the Epstein files reveal where entitlement without restraint, and privilege without responsibility, can lead.
Yeah but if it was never true… And if – call it regal evolution – descends ultimately to Andrew (and hey it can always descend lower!), then why…
Public anger is brewing against the monarchy – a keystone of a political order in urgent need of radical reconstruction, along with the electoral system and the upper house. It would seem absurd for the prime minister to ask Mr Mountbatten-Windsor to give evidence to US lawmakers, but not to MPs. The monarchy is not accountable to parliament. Commons rules bar “reflections” on the royals, rendering meaningful debate taboo. In 2011 David Cameron relinquished MPs’ oldest check on royal power: control of the purse. His government replaced annual scrutiny of palace finances with an automatic transfer of crown estate revenues.
Um. Seems to be going in the wrong direction, what?