Charles:
Hhmm. He didn't raise much of a discusion in this thread. At any rate, I myself do not have anything to add to what I argued in the first post: Charles, I think, is underrated and doesn't comply to the prevailing caricature of him.

Then again - such is the tragedy of the dehumanizing institute of monarchy - for a sixty-odd year old to be considered not devoid of talent solely by virtue of a few keen insights into architecture, heritage and conservation is simply tragic.
People his age are retiring. What has Charles got to show for his talents? Nothing of noteworthiness. A man with little future ahead of him and no past behind him.
Dehumanising.


Monarchy / Republicanism:
See above. I struggle to take monarchy seriously. How grown-ups want to be subjects is utterly beyond me. I'll never understand.


~~-~~-~~<<oOo>>~~-~~-~~


Quote Originally Posted by Cute Wolf
BAH! It wasn't that...!!!

I just mean the Bible says honour your leader, no matter who they are...
Which is why I wouldn't even use the bible for erm...you know, when a man has done what a man sometimes does.

My point was, and this is what all tangents in this thread have in common for me (Republicanism, Indonesia, Puritanism, Cromwell, Scotland): never take your leaders for granted. Yes, respect the democratic, at least: non-tyrannical, institutes of your society, but never pay unduly honour to the persons wielding power. Authority must be laughed in its face. Revolution must always loom, so that you don't need it.

Inonesia lacks more of the spirit it showed in 1945-1949. As it stands, one foreign set of self-interested rulers were replaced by another set of self-interested rulers, this time domestic.

(Also, without it being relevant, I presumed you were Muslim).


~~-~~-~~<<oOo>>~~-~~-~~

Quote Originally Posted by Adrian II View Post
The power of persuasion, eh?

Be quiet, Adrian, the adults are talking.