Audio Version
 |
| Zero fucks given. |
Since Prince Philip passed away a day or two ago, there has been a tsunami of response and comment in the UK media, much of it echoed around the World. Most of it reveals the degraded state of modern British society, while almost all of it totally fails to explain the Prince's appeal and popularity with the British public.
Typical narratives about the Prince stress his "hard life" (his mum was put in the nuthouse while his father farmed him out to relatives and boarding schools), his "life of service" (he was in the navy during WWII, etc.), and his "humanity" (Princess Anne: "He was somebody you could talk to").
Typical narratives about the Prince stress his "hard life" (his mum was put in the nuthouse while his father farmed him out to relatives and boarding schools), his "life of service" (he was in the navy during WWII, etc.), and his "humanity" (Princess Anne: "He was somebody you could talk to").
One documentary I saw even said that he was a "refugee" (his family was kicked out of Greece in the revolutionary aftermath of Greece's defeat against Turkey) and managed to imply that, since the UK let Prince Philip in, it should let in all other refugees as well.
The subtext to all of these talking points is that royals have to justify their existence by suffering, serving, and being "human," compassionate, humble, etc., and that—luckily for him—Prince Philip just managed to pull this off, despite saying some very un-woke and un-PC things along the way.
Phrased in this way, you can immediately see what is wrong with the mainstream postmortem narrative on Prince Philip. Namely, it sets a high bar that few royals are able to reach, while the ones that would, are not going to look very "royal."
In fact, once you've established the principal that there are certain "standards" to be met and certain hoops to jump through in order to be considered a functioning royal, then it won't be too hard to find flaws with practically all members of the royal family, up to and including Prince Philip. He, of course, is only being judged generously at the moment because he is in an upholstered box awaiting burial.
The result of all this would be to totally discredit and destroy the entire royal system. But, before that, imposing such criteria would simply generate apologetic nonentities that have none of the royal charisma that Philip had in spades.
In fact, we are some way down this road already. Prince Charles is a dithering fool who seems constantly mired in self-deprecation, while William and Kate are royal try-hards facing crowds with brittle smiles that beg the masses to like them. Indeed, most of the royals now look like they are guilty and apologetic simply for being there, and for leading lives of astounding privilege.
The subtext to all of these talking points is that royals have to justify their existence by suffering, serving, and being "human," compassionate, humble, etc., and that—luckily for him—Prince Philip just managed to pull this off, despite saying some very un-woke and un-PC things along the way.
Phrased in this way, you can immediately see what is wrong with the mainstream postmortem narrative on Prince Philip. Namely, it sets a high bar that few royals are able to reach, while the ones that would, are not going to look very "royal."
In fact, once you've established the principal that there are certain "standards" to be met and certain hoops to jump through in order to be considered a functioning royal, then it won't be too hard to find flaws with practically all members of the royal family, up to and including Prince Philip. He, of course, is only being judged generously at the moment because he is in an upholstered box awaiting burial.
The result of all this would be to totally discredit and destroy the entire royal system. But, before that, imposing such criteria would simply generate apologetic nonentities that have none of the royal charisma that Philip had in spades.
In fact, we are some way down this road already. Prince Charles is a dithering fool who seems constantly mired in self-deprecation, while William and Kate are royal try-hards facing crowds with brittle smiles that beg the masses to like them. Indeed, most of the royals now look like they are guilty and apologetic simply for being there, and for leading lives of astounding privilege.
Kate and Wills desperately trying to get a Black person to like them.
The trick that Prince Philip managed to pull off was that he never looked sorry for being a royal. He was also happy to speak his mind, and never afraid to open his mouth, even if he occasionally put his foot in it.
Sure his service in WWII and as an effective consort for the Queen were appreciated, but this was not a major factor in his popularity. While the idea that he somehow "suffered" is absurd. He had a pampered and enviable life, and it certainly sounds like he had a wonderful time, staying at plush palaces and country houses, while mingling with the good and the great. As for his mad mother, surely into each life a little rain must fall.
The real reason Philip was such a successful royal was because he played the part to the full, loved the role, and was never ever apologetic about it. If you are going to go to all the trouble to have royals, that is exactly how they should be.
Meanwhile the younger generation—Harry obviously, but also William and Kate—always strike me as being on the brink of tears and begging for forgiveness for the "unforgivable crime" of their privilege and royalty.
The real reason Philip was such a successful royal was because he played the part to the full, loved the role, and was never ever apologetic about it. If you are going to go to all the trouble to have royals, that is exactly how they should be.
Meanwhile the younger generation—Harry obviously, but also William and Kate—always strike me as being on the brink of tears and begging for forgiveness for the "unforgivable crime" of their privilege and royalty.
___________________________________
Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Affirmative Right and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here.
Nothing against him in particular, although I hope he doesn't get his wish to come back as a virus and kill me or anyone else I know off.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that people instinctively know that royals should be something that is more than them, almost more than human, the peak of their people at least and surrounded by the myth and airs that come with that. Now though they pander to being "one of the people". They've sunk so low they look they they were scraped from some reality TV show and won their position of royalty via an online or text message poll.
They're just some other group of celebrities begging for money and attention when required. They've gone out of their way to be as irrelevant as possible and smooth brained donkeys bray on TV and online about how good the current reign has been because...they've done almost nothing of note for generations. The younger notables open their mouths and just pander to whatever the mainstream media push is, so wokeism.
If you can replace your monarchy with a pot plant and get the same results then it's probably not very good.
To monarchy or not to monarchy..
ReplyDeleteI would say most of these here royals across Europe do a rather good job of being officeholders in an office that has lost most of its meaning through historical development (lets call it progress).
And so they are left with not much to do, other than being "liked", in one non-controversial way or the other.
Is it a waste of time and taxpayer money? Perhaps and perhaps not.
The remaining monarchies will no doubt last as long as the populace wants them to. And I see no republican urge in the near future.