Philosophy Now Forum

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 12:38 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 12:26 pm I agree. The Queen had an extraordinary mystique about her, almost superhuman. Carefully cultivated of course. She was very canny. The magic has definitely gone. Charles and Camilla have no charisma at all.

William and Kate will do just fine.

I don't doubt they will always occupy the highest level of celebrity, but I think the spell has been broken as far as the specialness of the monarchy is concerned.

Harbal wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 12:51 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 12:38 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 12:26 pm I agree. The Queen had an extraordinary mystique about her, almost superhuman. Carefully cultivated of course. She was very canny. The magic has definitely gone. Charles and Camilla have no charisma at all.

William and Kate will do just fine.

I don't doubt they will always occupy the highest level of celebrity, but I think the spell has been broken as far as the specialness of the monarchy is concerned.

I think that's the point that's being missed, that the spell IS the history and historical figures. Who knows what the future may bring.

Wizzz, when you're finished binge watching Game of Thrones, read this and then write a short essay about how u threw all your books on ancient Rome away and finally grew up.

http://marxiststudent.com/the-marxist-v ... -monarchy/

Harbal wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 12:24 pm I remember a time when our monarchy seemed to be a source of national pride. The Queen might have been an absolutely horrible person for all I know, but she didn't come across that way in public, and she was highly respected; even sort of loved by many. These days, it seems impossible for anyone with celebrity status to keep their private life private, and the Royal Family have been greatly damaged by that. It's hard to be a paragon of nobility and honour once people learn you have all the human weaknesses and failings that they, themselves, have.

I think the whole Diana/Charles------>car crash and then all the stories around life with the Royals pretty much undermined the whole thing. And yes Elizabeth was 'good' at her 'job' or role in many ways.

It's also a strange thing to just accept: we need these people to pretend to be something their not that fits with a different kind of form of government and a nostalgia for something we don't really want (or do we?). It's like if Santa Claus was an official part of the government.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 3:34 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 12:24 pm I remember a time when our monarchy seemed to be a source of national pride. The Queen might have been an absolutely horrible person for all I know, but she didn't come across that way in public, and she was highly respected; even sort of loved by many. These days, it seems impossible for anyone with celebrity status to keep their private life private, and the Royal Family have been greatly damaged by that. It's hard to be a paragon of nobility and honour once people learn you have all the human weaknesses and failings that they, themselves, have.

I think the whole Diana/Charles------>car crash and then all the stories around life with the Royals pretty much undermined the whole thing. And yes Elizabeth was 'good' at her 'job' or role in many ways.

It's also a strange thing to just accept: we need these people to pretend to be something their not that fits with a different kind of form of government and a nostalgia for something we don't really want (or do we?). It's like if Santa Claus was an official part of the government.

Perhaps humans need a little bit of mystique/magic/escapism in their lives. It's ironic that the people who seem to be the most obsessed with Briish roayls are Americans.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:24 pm Perhaps humans need a little bit of mystique/magic/escapism in their lives. It's ironic that the people who seem to be the most obsessed with Briish roayls are Americans.

I remember finding out that many young women, a half generation younger than me were fascinated by Diana (and Charles). I thought they were joking or being ironic about the whole thing. But no. Perhaps young men, then, were interested also, but they sure kept quiet about it. I never heard much interest in Elizabeth though. Diana's kids, however...the fascination persists, especially since one married an American 'star'. Ah, well. Maybe it's kept a few people away from drug addiction.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:02 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 8:36 am I'd consider their 'work' tedious and unpleasant, sort on the order of phone sales or skyscraper window cleaning.

But the royals don't produce anything, there's no service but distraction. I suppose I wouldn't begrudge them a salary that matched the window cleaner's salary.

As long as no one mentioned them in the news. The moment there was an article about a Royal, I'd send that one to the unemployment line.

I think window cleaning would be a nice job. Relaxing and satisfying if you don't mind heights. And it's work. I've just never been able to accept the 'hard working royals' guff. I don't see what they do as 'work'. They have to be seen to be doing SOMETHING or the pommies would get their granny knickers in a knot and might have another civil war. The only reason the royals have traditionally loved to stomp around their estates in green gumboots slaughtering the wildlife is because they had nothing else to do. it's not as if they have to paint the roof or pay the bills. They don't HAVE to do anything.
I wouldn't like to see them disappear though (although they are getting precariously close to doing just that). They are a nice bit of fluff to read about in waiting rooms, and they keep those magnificent estates from crumbling.

How, exactly, do "the royals", "themselves", keep those estates from so-called 'crumbling'?

Others are paid to manage and organize, even further others to do the actual 'work' to stop 'the crumbling',

"The royals" do not even do any actual 'work' to get the actual money, which was and is continually needed to 'pay' 'the workers' to stop the crumbling of those outrageously over-sized and rarely used estates. Let alone the so-called "royals" doing absolutely any work at all on the not needed estates.

The "royals", "themselves", do absolutely nothing to keep those estates from crumbling, other than maybe open their mouths now and then ordering others to organize what they 'want' and 'desire'.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:02 am They just don't WORK, that's all, and they should stop pretending that they do. Heck. Charlie boy won't even pick up a pen if he drops it on the floor. He calls for a servant to do it for him!

'They' do not 'work' just like "billionaires" and "millionaires" do not 'work' either.

Once one has 'enough money' to live, then they are not 'working' from then on.

'They' are just doing what they 'want to do', in order to just 'get more, unneeded and unnecessary, money'.

And, if someone is just doing what they 'want to do', then is that really classed as 'work'?

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:37 am

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:30 amWho said anything about 'perfect'? You are the one who mentioned 'discipline' and 'self sacrifice'.

Focusing on an obese royal is a diversion from the main point though—royalty must defend their throne and crown under threat of death.

Why, supposedly, 'must' they?

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 9:37 am Their position in society is the most consequential one. No other person needs to worry, as much, about being attacked just for being born.

And, why do you think this is?