Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Kings and Queens, no Cabbages this time

There's definitely a late Roman sensibility to the coming election. What Spengler would call "Caesarism" is ascendent. The Hillary thing is indeed mind-boggling. It seems to have nothing to do with anything except sex and personality. Her own hammering away at the notion that electing a female president would be some kind of great accomplishment in itself is symbolic of the mentality of her supporters, who behave more like fanboys and fangirls than adherents of a political position. Really, suppose, say, it was Joe Biden running, and he based his campaign on the fact that it's about time we had a President from Delaware?  That would be idiotic if he took it further than a joke. The female thing is idiotic also, no matter how you look at it. However, the press has decided to treat that nonsense seriously, and avoid pointing out that it's idiotic. After all, we've had women running countries for quite a long time, since Hatshepsut, at least. But she goes beyond silliness to a downright cultish thing. Here candidacy does resemble celebrity adulation more than it does a political movement. Her supporters have the same air about them than fans of Cher and Judy Garland have, make what you will of that.

And Trump is definitely king material, but it's more accurate to compare him directly to Caesar than to invoke Caesarism. He's coming along at a time very similar to Caesar's time, when the Republic has lost its legitimacy and the support of the lower and middle classes. Like Caesar, he's not of them but he's for them, and Americans who don't belong to the elite have a gut knowledge of that. They know that Trump is their bast chance to overthrow the elite. That said, sure, as Bob Wallace says, Trump wants to be king. And considering the Presidents we've had lately, a king just might be an improvement.

Or an emperor. This is from Bob's site [link]:

The Emperor Trump

Mythologically a king can be good or bad, a prince can be good or bad, a princess is always good, and a queen is always evil - unless she's kept under control by the king. And, not surprisingly, the queen sometimes tries to kill the king so she can rule - cruelly and sadistically, of course.

Think of the political mess in "Game of Thrones."

I sometimes think of chess - the purpose is to kill the king. And what is the second most powerful piece? The queen.

Trump clearly has the attitude he should be King. And clearly Hillary has the attitude of an Evil Queen who should rule all her peons, and their purpose is to serve her, including, if necessary, with their lives.

The coming election is the most bizarre I have ever seen. A man who thinks he should be King, and an utterly corrupt drunken lesbian who thinks she should be Queen.

Look at the way people went crazy over Princess Diana - even Americans! I remember I was in college and all the girls in the house watched her wedding. I didn't bother to tell them there's no such thing as royalty - because it wouldn't have dented their adulation of her.

There is something in people that wants a King and Queen. I was a little kid, but I remember how John and Jackie Kennedy were portrayed as American royalty - Camelot.

Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn has argued the best political arraignment is a constitutional monarchy. I have been inclined for years to think he's right.

That means a King first - not a Queen.
----------

No comments:

Post a Comment