Effort to move past

Maybe royalty just isn’t all that important in the first place?

Former Prince Andrew’s Arrest Upends Royal Effort to Move Past His Scandal

King Charles III’s family, long rocked by infighting and grievous losses, is facing what could be the gravest threat to its moral authority in more than a generation.

But what moral authority?

What moral authority does the “royal family” have in the first place?

They’re just a set of people descended from a set of people descended from a set of people etc for many generations. That’s all. The big difference is that their status is inherited as opposed to worked for or chosen by a majority of the people. That’s it! That’s the purported moral authority! It’s not much, is it.

It may bring with it a sense of duty. That was apparently very much the case with Andrew’s mother, and very much not the case with the notorious Juke of Windsor. In any case a sense of duty by itself is not really a reason to have an inherited monarchy, especially such a rich and expensive one. Just saying.

For decades, Sandringham Estate has been a place for the House of Windsor to escape from it all. Three hours northeast of London, the palatial country house, its 20,000 sprawling acres and residences are where King Charles III and his family celebrate Christmas, waving to admirers as they parade to church services in their holiday best.

Well thank god they have a place to “escape from it all” eh wot?

Early Thursday morning, the idyllic estate was swarmed by unmarked police cars as officers arrested Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the king’s brother, amid allegations that he shared confidential government information with Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender. Later in the night, he would return to Sandringham, slinking low in the back seat of a black sport utility vehicle, with news cameras craning to capture his release.

The scenes of Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor, already stripped of his title and kicked out of his longtime home, could be seen as an unmistakable message about the end of an era. Not since King Charles I was arrested and tried for treason nearly four centuries ago, in January 1649, has a British royal been detained.

So, that’s kind of fun.

Mind you, that Windsor fella came pretty close. He was carefully watched all through WWII, because he was pro-Nazi and did some very sketchy things.

The arrest follows years in which the king, and before him his mother, Queen Elizabeth II, stayed silent on separate accusations that Mr. Mountbatten-Windsor forced Virginia Giuffre to have sex with him after she was trafficked by Mr. Epstein when she was 17 years old. The former prince has denied those allegations and wrongdoing related to Mr. Epstein.

“The royal family, far from dutifully serving the public in connection with this scandal that has enveloped Andrew, have not been transparent. They have not been forthcoming, secrets have persisted,” said Ed Owens, a historian and expert on Britain’s royal family. “It’s this lack of transparency that is the driving force of the moral problem at the heart of the mess for the monarchy.”

Because that’s the nature of monarchy, isn’t it. It’s arbitrary; it does what it wants. It’s a set of people who are made Special solely because of which parents they were born to. It’s a form of magic, and magic can’t afford to be transparent.

Comments

4 responses to “Effort to move past”

  1. Mike Haubrich Avatar
    Mike Haubrich

    Mind you, that Windsor fella came pretty close. He was carefully watched all through WWII, because he was pro-Nazi and did some very sketchy things.

    And I think David Windsor was more attached to his Saxe-Coburg roots than to Windsor Castle.

  2. Sackbut Avatar

    Tim Stanley (Telegraph columnist) writes in the Washington Post:

    That’s the end of British reverence for the monarchy, I’m sorry to say

    He ends the article by saying:

    If we’re not careful, if their reputation sinks any lower, we might finally join the U.S. and wipe them away in a fit of revolutionary disgust. This would be a terrible mistake.

    Is America any more democratic, or its elites any more accountable, for being a republic? The ex-prince perhaps faces jail for his connection to Epstein; U.S. presidents, intellectuals and billionaires do not. Post-Elizabethan Britain has no illusions about its rulers and, regarding its elite as a soap opera, feels zero embarrassment at arresting its aristocrats.

    It is sad to see the horror show going on in the US held up as an example of why the UK would be better off maintaining its nominal monarchy. I don’t find that argument convincing in the slightest, but I’m not British.

  3. Bjarte Foshaug Avatar
    Bjarte Foshaug

    There it is again. The false dichotomy that says if you abolish the monarchy you have to put an American-style presidency in its place. No, you don’t. The prime minister already serves all the functions that need to be served, so we don’t have to replace the monarchy with anything at all. I’m sure we can find somebody else to cut those ribbons if we absolutely have to.

  4. Ophelia Benson Avatar

    It’s soooo silly! If you don’t have a monarchy you’ll have criminal intellectuals taking over! Wahhhh!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *