Thursday, February 17, 2005
Yeah right
I just caught a headline in the NZ Herald "Callous king's luxury life amid poverty" and I thought, hmm, I wonder what king that might be, given that - by definition - monarchs live lives of unearned luxury at the expense of their subjects.
It turns out they were talking about King Mswati II of Swaziland, "the most fecklessly self-indulgent ruler in the world."
Well he hardly has a monopoly on feckless self-indulgence among monarchs, or even political leaders more generally, as the Onion pointed out a while back, in an article that decried the Governor of North Dakota for living in a mansion and having expensive cars while the workers of his State toiled for next to nothing.
Of course, the Onion was being satirical, and at least in theory the people of North Dakota (being sovereign and all) could un-elect a Governor they considered to lead an overly lavish lifestyle. Monarchs, by contrast, have no popular mandate and no job performance requirements, and can generally only be removed by means upon which the law frowns, like regicide and seditious conspiracies.
In the end, it doesn't matter whether you think Betty Windsor is a feckless inbred layabout, or a tirelessly hard-working English pensioner who does wonders with her patronage of the arts and the voluntary sector, the fact is she is the United Kingdom's Head of State (and thus ours) by virtue of being the oldest daughter in a family with no sons, whose father happened to become King when his brother decided to marry an American. Oh yes, and she didn't become a Catholic, nor marry one. Quite the qualification.
The only time her sovereign power has been exercised in anything other than a perfunctory manner was by her "official representative" in Australia, when he dismissed a government under quite disgraceful circumstances.
Meanwhile, on to the "eagerly awaited" 20/20 game tonight ... no fucking way is that travesty going to be reported on here, except perhaps in the most negative of terms. I know that batsmen can hit the ball a long way from time to time, and thus have no need to watch a slog-fest made - as best I can figure - for the benefit of those suffering attention deficit disorder. I'll just take my Ritalin, thanks, and wait for a real version of the great game that is cricket.
It turns out they were talking about King Mswati II of Swaziland, "the most fecklessly self-indulgent ruler in the world."
Well he hardly has a monopoly on feckless self-indulgence among monarchs, or even political leaders more generally, as the Onion pointed out a while back, in an article that decried the Governor of North Dakota for living in a mansion and having expensive cars while the workers of his State toiled for next to nothing.
Of course, the Onion was being satirical, and at least in theory the people of North Dakota (being sovereign and all) could un-elect a Governor they considered to lead an overly lavish lifestyle. Monarchs, by contrast, have no popular mandate and no job performance requirements, and can generally only be removed by means upon which the law frowns, like regicide and seditious conspiracies.
In the end, it doesn't matter whether you think Betty Windsor is a feckless inbred layabout, or a tirelessly hard-working English pensioner who does wonders with her patronage of the arts and the voluntary sector, the fact is she is the United Kingdom's Head of State (and thus ours) by virtue of being the oldest daughter in a family with no sons, whose father happened to become King when his brother decided to marry an American. Oh yes, and she didn't become a Catholic, nor marry one. Quite the qualification.
The only time her sovereign power has been exercised in anything other than a perfunctory manner was by her "official representative" in Australia, when he dismissed a government under quite disgraceful circumstances.
Meanwhile, on to the "eagerly awaited" 20/20 game tonight ... no fucking way is that travesty going to be reported on here, except perhaps in the most negative of terms. I know that batsmen can hit the ball a long way from time to time, and thus have no need to watch a slog-fest made - as best I can figure - for the benefit of those suffering attention deficit disorder. I'll just take my Ritalin, thanks, and wait for a real version of the great game that is cricket.
Comments:
Post a Comment