This is what I get for playing grumpy leftie on my phone.

Working backwards, what exactly is the distinctly unjust power structure, and how is it unjust?

I myself do not own a TV. Sometimes when I want to watch something I can catch it anyhow on the internet, maybe Youtube. That is, I go find it; I choose it. Please make clear what the disgusting saturation is. I do agree there can be saturation coverage of some events, but not disgusting. In my experience such coverage is of events that matter in some way, that arguably I may be or even should be interested in as a responsible citizen.

Near as I can tell, you're not forced to watch. And if you're deprived of an opportunity to waste your time on regularly scheduled trash, is that a bad thing?

So it sounds like all your difficulties are personal in nature. I trust you're aware - or if you're not let me inform you - that confusion over the nature of your problems is itself a problem, and you will be a better, happier person if you work on that.

Besides, if you fail to recognize that Markle's marriage into the royal family is extremely interesting for all kinds of reasons, and that the wedding itself was as well, then you lack historical perspective, and imagination, and empathy. i get it, it's not your cup of tea, but it does you no credit to criticize it in the terms you use. Better for you had you read a good book, or done almost anything else you might have enjoyed.

My thoughts on the wedding - as a media event, has to be 10/10. The architecture, setting, artefacts, vehicles, ornamentation, guests, and weather were perfect. Oh, and the minister. I liked the cellist in particular. (Who I now know is called Sheku Kanneh-Mason, won BBC Young Musician of the Year in 2016, and was personally asked by Meghan Markle to perform. I didn't watch the long sermon, I feel that kind of American religious enthusiasm is rather vulgar, to be honest.)

I'm not either royalist or republican - here in Australia, Queen is technically still head of State, but I don't have really strong feelings on the matter. But I've come to like the Royal Family because they're not useful or instrumental or economically justifiable and they haven't been rationalised out of existence yet (among other things).

There are alternatives, they're called books. — tim wood

What TV channel, and when's it on?

what exactly is the distinctly unjust power structure, and how is it unjust? — tim wood

I guess you have a wide choice here. Royalty, marriage, royal marriages, royal inheritance laws, the colonial dynamic still in place that means that me, a Francophone with a familial history of war against the English, must be subjected to this display of inequity.

Please make clear what the disgusting saturation is. I do agree there can be saturation coverage of some events, but not disgusting. — tim wood

I guess that you don't realize what the English Crown stands for to many people. To me it's the sign of our subjugation. It's the sign of the War Riots, when in 1910 the Canadian army on orders from the British opened fire on Francophone war protesters, something for which the Crown still hasn't apologized. It's the sign of the enemy of the Patriotes. It's the sign of Louis Riel's execution, of my great great grandfather's exile.

So it sounds like all your difficulties are personal in nature. — tim wood

Euh, so, what the fuck does that have to do with anything. So it's not a superstructural systematic issue, so what? Yes, it's a personal issue, which stands for a certain personal-yet-historical point-of-view. Big whoop.

that confusion over the nature of your problems is itself a problem, and you will be a better, happier person if you work on that. — tim wood

Thank you, Jordan Petersen. :vomit:

Besides, if you fail to recognize that Markle's marriage into the royal family is extremely interesting for all kinds of reasons, and that the wedding itself was as well, then you lack historical perspective, and imagination, and empathy. — tim wood

Yes, if I don't care about the most meme'd and internalized social display there is, then I'm a sociopath. How about, if you fail to recognize that Markle's marriage into the royal family is extremely otiose to everything relevant, then you lack historical perspective, imagination, and intelligence? There, fixed it for you.

There, fixed it for you. — Akanthinos

Fix accepted. Now I know - somewhat - who Louis Riel is. Not much of a barque to carry one's flag, and he appears tainted by Scott. Thank you for the history lesson. In my view every American every morning on waking should thank both God and Canadians for Canada.

As to English royalty, I don't pretend to understand it as phenomenon. Clearly what it is now is not what it was, even recently. I do not hold it against them that as a family they accept a burden of duty in the public eye and try to live up to it, sometimes warts and all. As to the wedding, did you miss that a striking young self-made woman who self-identifies as mixed race - who until not too long ago in parts of the US would have been just plain legally black - turned one of the world's most whitebread events into an all-inclusive (and only slightly in-your-face) ethnic celebration? Look at your old calendars and tell me when, before this Saturday, that would have been possible. Yes, just a wedding, but interesting.

As to familial histories, we all have them. Remind yourself just how many ancestors you have - it's an exponential function. Focusing on any one part is nothing more than a choice on your part. You weren't persecuted; you've just borrowed someone else's. And you're not alone in the world in doing it. Appreciate, memorialize, educate, and learn. Beyond that the impulse to violence (broadly conceived as anything that blocks personal growth) is to me sad and ultimately contemptible. Like just about everyone else, you likely have plenty of difficulties of your own - why borrow old anger?

Not much of a barque to carry one's flag, and he appears tainted by Scott. — tim wood

Eh. What? He executed Scott. Actually, he fell under the pressure of my great great great grandfather Ambroise-Didyme Lepine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambroise-Dydime_L%C3%A9pine) who forced Riel to agree to execute Scott. Scott had spent his trial shouting racist insults and death threats at the judge (Riel).

Louis Riel was a proper saint. He did everything to defuse the Red River situation, up until the Reds decided to start burning Metis houses, at which point he agreed they had no choice but to start to kick some asses.

If it is ok with the moderator I will move my post here to its own thread, as the questions it raises in respect of the perpetuation of the Barbey-Ken Princess-Prince myth do not appear to be relevant to this thread.

M

Quite interested in your attitude about the whole issue.

Posty

When you say 'attitude' do you also mean 'observation'? Or are you intimating that perhaps I was in a bad mood or good mood when I wrote the piece?

M

When you say 'attitude' do you also mean 'observation'? Or are you intimating that perhaps I was in a bad mood or good mood when I wrote the piece? — Marcus de Brun

One has to wonder, was it an accurate observation? I think there is much to talk about this issue.

I will transfer it to its own thread, and I look forward to your 'observations' on my 'observations'

Indeed there is much to be considered.

I am working through the interesting pieces you have posted in relation to your thread on 'Sufficient Reason' More of this anon.

:)

M