If anyone needs proof of human stupidity, merely consider wax museums. I have no interest in meeting a live celebrity, so why would I want to spend money, and often stand in line, to gawk at an unreasonable facsimile of said “celebrity”. This is three levels of proof: desire to see something worthless, spending in money, and wasting time.
I might have mentioned this before, but the subject insinuated itself into my life in the form of a headline announcing the addition of a member of England’s dimmest family. Of course, one might have difficulty telling the difference between the real person and the wax one, if one had the chance to attempt a conversation…which any intelligent person would not want to attempt, either meeting the real one or visiting a museum to see a wax one.
The mess that Bush created continues to rage in the Middle East. Citizens of the former Soviet Union continue to shoot at one another, despite a cease fire. People continue to die in Africa, because drug companies are not willing to invest in discovering medications that do not turn a profit. The Dutch continue to ignore the truth about who killed hundreds of their citizens with a surface-to-air missile, despite having the evidence in their hands. Scotland continues to hope of freedom from their English overlords, despite having lived peacefully with them for centuries. The United States Government continues to not function, despite the ability to talk ceaselessly. Humans continue to lose every battle with Nature, despite copious evidence proving that they should not try.
But, hallelujah, there is a bright spot in news. An untalented young woman, who married a privilege, untalented young man, who will inherited a huge plundered fortune, has been forced to stop working. In this case, "work" entails dressing up, smiling foolishly, and shaking one or two hands. But, hordes are rejoicing over the reason of her sloth: she is pregnant with a child, who will also be born with immense privileges and will someday inherit a large, unearned fortune. Along the way, he or she will, like his nearest relatives, become a tourist attraction and be drooled over by countless girls or boys, who all want to marry into that life of privilege. For anyone living in the Commonwealth, no other news is of any significance....
If you want to lose some money, London bookmakers will take bets on the child's sex and it's name.
If you think that I am the only one to point out the ridiculousness of the British/English “royal” family, read this piece from one of the leading English newspapers. Of course, one will have to use a dictionary to understand some words, such as tuppence.
Take particular note of the photo: How ridiculous is that in this day and age? But, like at Disney World, the characters must dress to appeal to the crowd foolish enough to pay buy tickets.
Are the British the dumbest folk on this planet? (There are many competitors, and the jury is still out.) I noticed a news crawler announcing that the “royal” family costs taxpayers 36 million pounds. On top of that, they pay little or no taxes, making them some of the richest people in the country. How’s that for a good deal? Of course, their supporters claim that all tourist income is a direct result of this circus act. Have they not noticed that there are better reasons for visiting that country? Many countries have equal or greater tourist numbers without having a bunch of clowns ripping off tax-payers.
Although few would admit to such an opinion in public, most know that the first born son of the old lady living in Buckingham Palace in London is not the sharpest pike in the throne room. This guy has been known to open his mouth and reveal what little is computing upstairs.
He and his father are known for speaking before thinking...or just speaking.
Republicans (those are British folks that want to end the monarchy) are raging over the latest gaff by the leading freeloader. Not having learned much in history lessons, he has compare President Putin of Russia to Adolph Hitler. If he meant that both were elected by a majority of each country’s citizens, then he would be correct. But, he was not. He was confusing events in Crimea.
This is from a guy whose ancestors sent armies and navies around the world to plant their flag and plunder whatever country in which they set foot. He should know a thing or two about taking over a territory, but nothing about the will of the people. I wonder if, should Scotland decided to leave “Great” Britain, he will try to raise an army and march north...as his ancestors did.
I scan a few British newspapers each day, not because I am a big fan of Britain or the British. Each has the distinct advantage of being printed in English, albeit a bastardized form. The news of England does not interest me, because I do not live there, but these media often have good articles on a wide range of subjects. Many writers are excellent.
Unfortunately, I cannot avoid the salivating over the “royal” family. I do not understand why anyone is interested in the private life of a bunch of spoiled and privileged morons. Of course, a great deal of this is driven by the “firm”, as they call themselves, which uses the latest PR techniques to drum up interest and fervor.
P.T. Barnum is supposed to have said something about fools being born each minute. The birthrate of people interested in this foolishness is high.
Because, when scanning British media, I cannot avoid scenes of obscenely rich members of the “royal” family meeting or pretending to comfort/sympathize with the less well-off of that society, especially the military, who do dumb and dangerous jobs for low pay and then are tossed aside, I cringe at the hypocrisy.
Occasionally, I think about how I would act and the the film Little Lord Fauntleroy comes to mind. I would not give away all my wealth, but I would share it with the less fortunate and would fight to improve the lot of the poor. That is not socialism or communism, that is compassion and charity...all the things hypocritical christians preach, but few practice, especially if one is posh and enjoys unearned wealth and privileges and thinks they are better because they were lucky to be born into a certain family.
I wrote yesterday about the inanity of the media focussing on a photo of a baby and its parents (obscenely and excessively privileged ones posing as middle-class).
Now, some are writing about and criticizing the quality of the photo, allegedly snapped,, by the grandfather of the baby (a nouveau riche bloke, whose house is now protected by more police than the prime minister's).
I am certain that this uproar is caused by “professional” photographers and paparazzi, who dislike being unable to sell photos of this popular baby/couple. I do not recall any criticism of grainy photos of the mother, who was caught sunning herself topless in South France. Some complained about violation of her privacy, not photo quality.
I wonder if this is a case of double standards...
You can tell something about a society, when the main news is the photo of a baby and how the photo was taken. This is more important than violation of press freedom, abuse of human rights, breaking international law, violation of property and civil rights, banking scandal, wars, revolutions, etc.