Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
This post comes to you from the burning hell of a poolside in Puglia, Italy. If you want a better idea of the kind of ordeal I am currently experiencing, just check out this site. (And it doesn't do it justice, either. Seriously, I think Borgo Egnazia may be the most perfect resort hotel I've ever stayed at. If you can scrape together enough bucks make it your life mission to come here....)
But enough of my glamorous life. I wanted to talk - once more - about the Queen's Diamond Jubilee since I think it's jolly important that not every post on Ricochet today should be about the results in Wisconsin, delightfully encouraging though they are.
The Queen's Diamond Jubilee. If you're a Royalist like me, your heart will sing at this delightful tribute to the top twenty highlights of the celebrations.
Apart from the terrible weather (God, clearly, is a republican - and, to judge by Wisconsin, a Republican too) which is threatening to kill off the poor old Duke of Edinburgh (who caught a nasty chill, standing in the rain, saluting his wife for four hours), the event was a glorious triumph: an affirmation of national unity and pride in a country which has precious little reason for celebrating either right now.
If on the other hand, you're one of those curmudgeons who took such vigorous issue with my last post on this subject, let me correct a few of your more glaring misconceptions.
1. George III is no longer on the throne. What's more, a lot of us Limeys - myself anyway - are really happy for you that you won the Revolution. When I imagine the Revolutionary wars I definitely think of myself as a minuteman rather than, say, Banastre Tarleton. But hey, guess what: things have changed since 1776.
2. For example, there is nothing tyrannical or remotely oppressive about the current monarchy. The Queen may be our Head of State; it may be true that parliament governs with Her Majesty's "consent" - and theoretically she has the power to dissolve it. But that's as far as her authority goes. She is a figurehead; she is also, by strict convention, politically impartial; she is a symbol of tradition, continuation, heritage; she is a focus of national unity. BUT - and it is a big BUT - she has no executive power. This is how Constitutional Monarchy works. Hence my position as a libertarian conservative is perfectly compatible with my belief in the British Monarchy. Because it has no arbitrary power over me: capisce?
3. Your Constitution is great, admirable. Your were exceedingly blessed in your Founding Fathers. No one here is dissing your Constitution, got it?
4. In London, you will find that we no longer wear bowler hats. Nor do we have chimney sweeps who talk with Cockney accents like Dick Van Dyke's. Indeed, no one - save Dick Van Dyke - has ever talked with a Cockney accent like Dick Van Dyke's.
5. Snobbery. The notion that snobbery is the main problem holding Britain back is as ludicrously off the mark as 4. The problems Britain faces right now are much the same as the US faces right now: ever-expanding government - in league with the corporatist-banker class - doling out more and more money it cannot afford to an ever-expanding entitlement class. We conservatives should be in this fight together rather than taking cheap shots at one another. (And if there are any cheap shots in this post, well, darn it, they were provoked).
6. And while we're on the subject of our respective class systems, here's something De Tocqueville noted when he visited the US. In many ways the US class system is more offensive than the European one. Why? Because if you are born into a position of privilege you do at least feel (oftentimes, at any rate) a sense of noblesse oblige - i.e. that you owe society something in return for your accident of birth. If, on the other hand, you have come up from nowhere through the sweat of your brow (the American Way!) then you are likely less inclined to be generous to those beneath you. Why? Because if you got where you are through hard work, why shouldn't everyone else too?
Yes, I'm sure there are numerous exceptions to this. I know many rich Americans are very magnanimous.
But hey, look, I've got a pool to get back to. And this 80-degree heat may not last forever....
- Comment (32)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
James Delingpole:
6. And while we're on the subject of our respective class systems, here's something De Tocqueville noted when he visited the US. In many ways the US class system is more offensive than the European one. Why? Because if you are born into a position of privilege you do at least feel (oftentimes, at any rate) a sense of noblesse oblige - i.e. that you owe society something in return for your accident of birth. If, on the other hand, you have come up from nowhere through the sweat of your brow (the American Way!) then you are likely less inclined to be generous to those beneath you. Why? Because if you got where you are through hard work, why shouldn't everyone else too?
Yes, I'm sure there are numerous exceptions to this. I know many rich Americans are very magnanimous.
Well, more than the numerous exceptions are the overall facts. I'd be surprised if it's actually true that the British upper class is more generous than the American.
Aug '10
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
No, allow me. Here is a glaring misconception:
James Delingpole:
6. ... Because if you are born into a position of privilege you do at least feel (oftentimes, at any rate) a sense of noblesse oblige - i.e. that you owe society something in return for your accident of birth. If, on the other hand, you have come up from nowhere through the sweat of your brow (the American Way!) then you are likely less inclined to be generous to those beneath you. Why? Because if you got where you are through hard work, why shouldn't everyone else too?
Here are the facts from AEI circa 2008.
So Mr. Delingpole, would you care to revise your statement (or your misconceived perception)?
Dec '10
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
James - I'm impressed as hell that you understand that Americans don't comprehend Celsius and you therefore converted your temperature reading at the end to Fahrenheit.
Sep '11
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
Let me take issue with the notion that it is the American "upper class."
Rather to the contrary, the vast bulk of American charitable giving comes from middle- and lower-income households. According to the Voice of America, "ordinary Americans" contributed 73% of charitable contributions in 2010, more than $200 billion.
When you factor in that higher-income charitable contributions are more likely to go to institutions such as Harvard, Yale, Penn, or Stanford--which have long since stopped looking like charities, and more like investment funds with football teams--the importance of low- and middle-income families to charities in America is made even greater.
The number that really jumps out at me from the VOA article linked above is that in 2010 27% of Americans volunteered for at least one charitable organization.
More information philanthropy can be found at The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, and an excellent editorial in last December's Los Angeles Times provides more insight.
Oct '10
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
" If you want a better idea of the kind of ordeal I am currently experiencing, just check out this site. (And it doesn't do it justice, either. Seriously, I think Borgo Egnazia may be the most perfect resort hotel I've ever stayed at. If you can scrape together enough bucks make it your life mission to come here....)"
Totally random comment: I looked at their website and learned I could never afford the place, but I do appreciate that they know the difference between "comprise" and "compose."
Jun '10
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
Barkha Herman:
1 - A figure head, especially an ancient and unchanging one like the one you have, is good for national pride / unity. Americans lack that. . . .
2 - If there have to be scandals to distract the populous, I much prefer the crown prince marrying a widow than a President sticking cigars in an intern. Monarchy provides a good balance of distractions / entertainment. Better them than elected officials that SHOULD be working.
3 - Expenditure on upkeep is limited to the one family in the Monarchy as opposed to the never ending stream of elected 2-years officials. I am willing to bet that our outlay for "keeping" politicians is higher, despite the Monarchy, than in the UK. I have no proof, of course.
4 - There is something to be said about rituals. If religion is out - may as well be Monarchy.
Great points. Monarchy is out for America, but I have no problem with the British version: I like things that provide a traditional underpinning for a society. But could you get Charles to go live in France, or something? Queen Elizabeth is so dignified--Charles is the avatar for fecklessness.
Jul '10
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
Huzzah!! Three cheers for Old Blighty and James Delingpole why you are at it!
May '10
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
As I type I am looking at a statue of General Daniel Morgan, who in turn spends each day glaring 10 miles into the distance where he whipped that psychopath Tarleton at the Battle of Cowpens. Starting here, Nathaniel Greene, Morgan and the rest of the Continental Army in the South led Cornwallis by the nose through North Carolina and Virginia until joining up with Washington to push him against the sea at Yorktown. Now that, my friends, is cause for celebration! (I don't mean to rain on the classy lady's parade, though.)
Mar '11
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
We call that winter in Tucson (106 today).
I agree that James is off the mark on 6., although I think rich Democrats are less likely to be charitable than rich Republicans.
The rest of the piece is spot on. I'd just add that many English people don't understand America, either - you have to live here a while to really understand it, including the huge variations from one State to another. I'm still working on it.
To understand the British monarchy you have to go back to pagan times, when the King or Queen served the people or, more accurately, the land. This would include being sacrificed if there was a bad crop, so that blood could nourish the land.
This service to the people is why the present Queen is good. And it's what the US Constitution attempts to achieve, here.
Unfortunately, the US has fallen far from that ideal - Mr Obama is the personification of the fall - which is why we have the Tea Party.
Wisconsin is a good step towards recovery - but a long way to go, yet.
Edited on June 7, 2012 at 12:04amRe: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
Me too. But probably because the American President in that movie reminded me so much of Bill Clinton.
Dec '11
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
The Jubilee was fabulous-- Princess Diana's TRH in particular-- but I did miss that grumpy crustacean, Prince Phillip. :)
Oct '10
Re: Don't You Go Dissing Our Diamond Jubilee
John Murdoch
Let me take issue with the notion that it is the American "upper class."
Rather to the contrary, the vast bulk of American charitable giving comes from middle- and lower-income households. According to the Voice of America, "ordinary Americans" contributed 73% of charitable contributions in 2010, more than $200 billion.
That's a common fallacy. Since the middle class is so much bigger than the upper class, it doesn't take much for total middle class giving to be bigger than total upper class giving.
Regardless, we're comparing the American upper class to the upper classes in other nations, not the middle or lower classes.