Saturday, 29 December 2007

CHARLES FOR KING

So, over half the UK population want William to be king rather than Prince Charles. Oh dear, I think this would be a terrible mistake. Certainly, in time, William could be a good king, but let him have youth and experience first.
I quite like the idea of Charles the Green as king. He’d be rather good. The Queen is more ‘political’ than we think, and has proved it with her sound advice to numerous Prime Ministers. But this is due to experience rather than deep thinking.

Charles, on the other hand, IS a deep thinker.

He has never been ‘party political’, and has been ahead of his time in terms of alternative medicine, architecture, faith and green issues.
His advice could therefore be excellent, steering new Prime Ministers to sensible decisions. But Charles the Green must be king for another reason. We either have a monarchy or we don’t. If we do, we can’t pick and choose.

Of course, some would say we can say no to Charles.

After all, there are precedents. And this is quite true. A recent case was Edward VIII, deemed unfit to be king and forced to abdicate in favour of his brother.
But this was done by Parliament. What we are talking about, with Charles, is something totally different. We are talking about public opinion. Well I’m sorry, but bowing to this is accepting the validity of mob rule. It would be a terrible precedent.

© Anthony North, December 2007

From my diary - THE FUNNY SIDE OF WAR

During my service in the Royal Air Force I took part in scores of military exercises, pretending to be at war. It was a vital task, and could often be real. It was a serious business, and even dangerous at times.This said, there were many lighter moments ...
... read more ...

2 comments:

Twilight said...

I'm old enough to remember Prince Charles as a small boy, I also recall a psychic and later several astrologers predicting, so long ago, that he would never be king.

Since Princess Diana's death, at times it has looked likely that they may have been spookily correct.

I agree with you that who the public wants doesn't come into it in the case of a monarch. That's why I'm not a monarchist. :-)

anthonynorth said...

Hi Twilight,
I suppose the point is we elect politicians to use their judgement, not chase public opinion. If we don't like it, we get rid of them come election. That's what I mean by not pandering to public opinion.
As for the Royals, I'm an unashamed Monarchist, but only because they have no real power. If they had, or tried to grasp it, then that opinion would change.
I see them at the pinnacle of British tradition, and a direct link to our history. What would the British be saying of their past if they got rid of them?
This aside, I think there is something good about having a non-political head of state. It provides a unity above government that few countries can boast.