Tag Archives: royalty

Royalty and Rethinking the Importance of Blood

crowns, royalty, monarchy, mudblood, British royal family, Queen Elizabeth, Kate

Royalty isn’t in the blood; it’s in the deeds. Creative Commons: AllVectors

I was at a party on the weekend and of course the conversation came around to the Australian radio announcers who badly imitated the Queen and Prince Charles, to ask about Kate’s health, and the news of the death of the nurse who had answered the phone. Talk ranged from it being pretty weird to kill oneself for answering the phone, was she reprimanded, the announcers weren’t even convincing, etc. And then someone said something like, “well, mudblood Kate is diluting the family line.” I bit my tongue and said nothing even though the comment angered me. With a couple of Brits in the room and a lot of people I didn’t know, I didn’t think it would have been right to start a discussion (argument) over this sentiment.

And what sentiment is that? Well, it’s obvious here. I don’t even know if Kate is a “mudblood” or a “commoner” but both the terms used on an actual human being rankle me a lot. The British royal family, or any royalty for that fact are nothing more than human beings. Dissect one, sample their blood and hair, and you will not be able to tell a “common person” from a “royal person.” Royalty are not descended from gods though in some past cultures this was considered a fact. They are not imbued with blood that is blue, laced with gold, or any wise purer than yours or mine. Another reason why the continuing and devolving Star Wars saga rankled when it turned out Jedi knights didn’t attain their status through hard work and meditation but through some special gene. Still, that’s something royalty doesn’t have; a special gene.

Are they royal or are they common? Only money can tell. Jonas Ekstromer / SCANPIX/ FILE

Are they royal or are they common? Only money can tell. Jonas Ekstromer / SCANPIX/ FILE

Any one, any where who can claim they’re related to or are royalty can do so because in the past someone’s army, or conniving skills, or political savvy, or massive riches, or poison penknife was better than someone else’s. Kings and queens have come and gone and royal lines have died out because the opposing force got one over on them. There was no special blood, no divine ray of light, no mighty god-given powers that made one royal, just good old human skill and knowledge and charisma.

So why do we have this fascination with royalty? If you or I were born with a gold spoon in some part of our anatomy, we would suddenly be more special. Is Paris Hilton and Stephen Harper (kak!) two of our modern royals? Well, one has money and one has power but their reputations and compassion are questionable. In fact, in many cases what denotes someone as royal is a wealth of worldly riches, sometimes built up over generations and centuries and often on the backs and tithes of the common people. Once, way back in feudal times, the point was that the leader/land owner was supposed to protect the community from outside forces (invaders, pillagers, etc.) but it became a way of prestige and power over. I doubt Britain’s queen (or any other country’s) does much to protect the people from the ravening hordes.

magic, mudblood, royal family, roryal prank, Duchess of Cambridge, British royal family

Hermione was a mudblood because her parents had no magic talent. In that case, there was something in the blood (genes) but offspring could still become wizards.

Monarchies are outdated in today’s world and as an egalitarian I cannot support any royalty based on blood and riches. Every person has the right to be treated well, and respect is earned. Give me the wealth of the royal family and I will look as elegant and do as much good (or ill). Why put someone on a pedestal for being “royal” because they were born into a state of privilege? In that case, worship Donald Trump, or Warren Buffet or Idi Amin or Richard Branson or J.K. Rowling, because they at least seized their power in different ways.

So, let’s wind this back around to mudbloods and a woman alleged to have killed herself over passing on a phone call. The fallout is the woman is dead and that is tragic. The fallout is that the radio announcers’ program has been suspended. The fallout is that other radio stations (one in Vancouver for example) have announced they will no longer do pranks, as if pranks are evil in their own right. Overreacting and doing the overly politically correct thing is what we do these days. But it is so much overreaction that it’s created more questions than why do people fawn over royalty? Why would someone kill themselves for such a thing? Was she killed? If so, that speaks of an even more corrupt and broken society than even suicide does.

I suggest everyone get out of the fairy tale world, don’t imagine themselves with a prince or princess, don’t wait for a knight in shining armor, but go and live a life of worth. Do wonderful things, be a compassionate person, make your deeds and words count. And in that way, it matters not what blood courses through your veins, nor how much money is in your bank account, but what you do with the life you have. Then you too will be noble and that’s all that really counts.

 

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under Culture, history, news, people

Why We Need Gods, Queens and Rock Stars

rock stars, gods, fame, idols, movie stars, queens, kings, royalty, adoration

creative commons: by crymz http://crymz.deviantart.com/

Not everyone wants to be famous but of those who would like to be few become famous. Some people, like the tyrants and murderers of the world, become infamous, famed not for the adoration of the masses but reviled. Not everyone wants to lead and not all those who lead want fame and glory but it often comes with the territory.

Many people want their independence, to work well within their expertise and live comfortably but they may not have the knowledge, vision, verve, ability, charisma, want or other traits that it takes to be a leader. We are often content to walk in our grooves, do what we do and hope that a few people (friends, family) might consider us great, or at least special. It is the way of human nature.

Likewise it is the way of humans to follow leaders, as history can attest to again and again. Once, it was not just enough to lead and know your fellow humans cemented you firmly on a pedestal as one worthy. It was even better to marry oneself to a god through belief or in actual ritualized marriages. After all, if you were god blessed or ruled by divine authority, what man or woman could nay-say you? Thus it’s been since human beings started congregating into groups and villages until they created cities, fiefdoms, kingdoms and empires.

As the religious fervor has waned over time (in some countries because we see a resurgence time and again) we have needed other beings to admire, adore, raise up on pedestals and idolize. Why? Because they epitomize the best and give us hopes and dreams that we too can be great. Greek mythology is a prime example of this. You had your gods but they tended to have sex with humans from time to time and make demigods. Sometimes a hero, like Herakles, started out as human but then achieved some divine status. Look, you too can become godlike!

So, what is godlike in terms of our modern world: beauty, riches, talent. Oddly we don’t tend to raise up the rocket scientists and neurosurgeons the same way that we do the rock stars and movie stars. They get to play act instead of saving the world and yet they shine brighter in our esteem. Because we all want to be beautiful, talented, rich. Oh and what’s next to god, above even those rock and movie stars? Royalty.

Perhaps this renewed idolizing of Prince William and Kate has captured the mundane population’s heart and sense of romance. But consider this. Any of you can become a surgeon, a politician, a leader, a musician, an actor (whether you’re beautiful or not) with the right training and perseverance. You can gain riches and some fame. But very few if any of you will ever be royalty. You can’t train for it, you can’t be elected to it, you can work your way into the position. Royalty is inherited. You’re born to the right parents or you’re not. You great granddaddy was the grand poobah so you get to be (but only if you’re the eldest and only if you’re a boy first; girls still come second). You don’t have to be beautiful, smart, talented or a good leader. You just have to have the right blood, which is just like anyone else’s. It’s one thing to be born to a millionaire and inherit the business; it’s another thing altogether to inherit a country and riches paid to the coffers from the pockets of the common person without having to prove your worth.

So consider this the next time you idolize the shallow trappings of beauty and money. There is often far more worth in your neighbor than someone born to a privilege fabricated from beliefs of their blood being better than yours. The other thing about placing people on pedestals; sooner or later someone wants to pull them down, especially if their flaws show. And guess what; we’re all flawed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture, family, history, people, religion

Prince Chuck Turns 60

It was in the news today. England’s Prince Charles turned 60, the oldest Prince of Wales ever. The media hyped it as “he’s been waiting his whole life to be king.” Well, la de dah. I’ve been waiting forever to be queen or a goddess and it’s not happening either.

But besides sour grapes I think the monarchy is a thing of the past. Over the millennia of culture growing and changing (and it seems, sometimes devolving) we’ve gone from loose-knit tribes through feudal states and monarchies to the current trend of dictatorships, distorted democracies and fanatical regimes. Hmmm, maybe we haven’t evolved or changed as much as we thought.

The media talked about Prince Chuck throwing himself into environmental and humanitarian affairs. That’s great. Really. And I doubt he or much of the royal family would survive long if they just sat around on their royal duffs. But you know, I too could do great works and wonders if I had the wagon loads of cash these guys have. And I would get to wear expensive jewels, attend gala affairs and be called ruler of my country when in fact I was nothing but a figurehead.

Yep, there are no teeth to the British royal family. Should they exert their might they would find it circumvented very quickly. After 1600 and Cromwell’s reign royalty roles changed. Unlike France, where they lost their heads, or Russia where the royalty went to a mass grave, the Brits managed to stay in some semblance of power.

What I’ve never been able to understand is the kowtowing that my country, Canada does to Britain. Once upon a time we were a colony. But we gained independence, didn’t we? Yet our coins are festooned with the head of Queen Elizabeth II and our constitution has her listed as the top honcho. The Governor General, a role appointed by the Prime Minister, is the Queen’s representative in Canada. Again it’s mostly a figurehead role though the Governor General is head of the Canadian armed forces. Could we see a day where the Governor General raised up in a coup, representing the queen (or king), and fought parliament for the right of sovereign soil?

I doubt it but weirder things have happened. Still, the role of Governor General, or monarch of Britain for that matter is that of cheerleader and publicist. A very rich publicist but when it comes to politics we (Britain, Canada, probably a few other countries that still have monarchs) let our elected politicians make decisions. It’s not that much better or different. We don’t pay tithes to the king or queen anymore but we pay enough in taxes that it equals a king’s ransom. But look at the countries with no figureheads; it’s not a lot different. Still, I prefer at least the belief that I chose who is ruling my country than someone who gets born to the position.

And should anyone wish to make me queen or goddess, I promise to do as much as the British royal family.

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture, entertainment, family, history, life, news, people, politics

Sex and Politics

As long as there have been people, there has been sex, obviously. But as long as there have been more than two people having to get along in a group, there have been politics. And I’m betting that as long as there have been politics, sex has often been involved.

Sex has been exchanged for power for millennia. Look at the Egyptians. They married brothers and sisters to keep the bloodline pure and royal. All in the family. And throughout the middle ages brides of nobles and royalty were locked into marriage contracts with other rulers so that borders could be expanded, loyalty could be guaranteed and tithes could be exchanged. For the little people, the peasants, they got to arrange their own marriages in most cases.

I’m sure there were illicit affairs happening in the 19th century. After all, the Italian Renaissance of several centuries before was known for the nobles being married to one woman and having several mistresses along the way. Even the Borgia popes had mistresses. Sexually transmitted diseases, gonorrhea, syphilis, etc. were widely known and spread. In fact, I believe it was syphilis that was called the Neapolitan disease because it was rumored that Italian sailors went to foreign ports, brought back the disease and spread it through the known world in seven years.

Along came the 20th century, North America. JFK was purported to have had an affair with Marilyn Monroe and also with other women. He wasn’t the first, nor the last. Then came the famous Cinton-Lewinsky affair. Or maybe it was just a blowjob. I don’t know if she inhaled or not. Millions of dollars was wasted of the taxpayers’ money to find out if Clinton had sex with Monica. (And what kind of freak keeps a semen crusty dress anyways? That is particularly disgusting.) Polls showed that really, the public didn’t care.

Truth is, human nature/culture often includes affairs outside of marriages, whether known about or not. People joked that the Europeans wondered what was wrong with US presidents if they didn’t have a mistress. (I’m not sure if women were allowed equal on-the-side benefits or not, but I doubt it.) That Europe rolled their eyes at all the “scandal” of presidential love affairs. The Italians would know; they’ve been doing it for centuries.

When it comes down to it, what does it matter who a person sleeps with, as far as politics are concerned? Affairs should be between the politician, their spouse and any other directly related parties. It should not include the public or the media. The nation should keep its nose out of the politicians’ bedrooms. The only exception would be if state secrets were being divulged to any lovers. Maxine Bernier, Canada’s “past” foreign affairs minister had a girlfriend where he left his important papers laying about. Whether she stole them or he was just careless, in either case he was dealing with important state papers.

But over the years, at various levels, political officials have lost their jobs because they were with prostitutes or had affairs. And really, I don’t care what they do on the side as long as they do their jobs well. Not one person could stand up to scrutiny that dug into all corners of their lives. And then it comes down to, who judges and on what grounds? Sex and power. Sometimes sex is used to gain information. And sometimes it’s used to be with the powerful and famous. But I’m all for seeing how all our politicians do in politics and n leaving their bedroom antics alone.

1 Comment

Filed under Culture, family, history, life, people, politics, sex