It's Good to Be the King ... or Is It?

Back in the good old days, when Richard Nixon was president, commentators often fretted about the rise of the "imperial presidency." Indeed, all the way back to the founding of the Republic, concern over the rise of a king or queen in America - after we'd just fought a war to get rid of one - was widespread, at least among the political classes. Even George Washington was accused of wanting to be a king, although he tried (and succeeded, I would say) to disprove that accusation.

Today, in the seat once occupied by Washington, Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt, we have Donald Trump - a man with no experience in government and ill-suited by education, experience, background, or temperament to be president*. Indeed, Mr Trump's background as a businessman and CEO probably works against him, as he is used to being able to snap his fingers and make things happen ... as the chief executive of the country, he has to deal with a lot of people and institutions who, when he snaps his fingers, ignore him. He may believe himself to have kingly powers, but that nasty thing called the Constitution keeps getting in his way, much to his frustration.

Is it really good to be the king, as Mel Brooks once alleged in his film, History of the World, Part 1?

In some ways, it probably isn't, at least after a reading of this interesting article by Ruby Buddemeyer from Marie Claire: 50 Strict Rules the Royal Family Has to Follow. I won't bore you with all 50 of the occasionally onerous rules, but these few seem particularly interesting, and I sort them into two general categories - good and bad - in the view of the attitudes and behavior of the present resident of the White House. First, on the bad side:

Members of the royal family are not allowed to express political views. I don't think this is all bad, though ... I just can't see the Queen calling someone a loser.

Members of the royal family are not permitted to play Monopoly. Mr Trump likes to play it with real hotels. I wonder if they can play Risk or Scrabble?

Members of the royal family are not allowed to run for office. This limits career opportunities for lesser members of the family, but when you're already related to the King or Queen, I guess you can live with it.

Members of the royal family are expected to learn multiple languages. Well, that would pretty much disqualify most Americans, who tend to believe everyone should speak English.

And,

Members of the royal family may not use nicknames. I don't know how Mr Trump would be able to talk to people if he couldn't call them crooked, little, lyin', or whatever.

On the plus side, though:

When the Queen stands, everybody stands. I'm sure this would appeal to Mr Trump's sense of pride and dignity.

Men must bow and women curtsey to the King or Queen. It might keep you from being called an idiot or a loser, but I wouldn't count on it.

No public displays of affection, especially while traveling. This would prevent those embarrassing moments when Melania swats away Donald's attempts to hold hands.

And finally,

There's a strict dress code. Members of the royal family are always expected to look well-dressed and dignified, and never wear casual dress in public. This would certainly appeal to Mr Trump, who invariably wears a suit** and his wife, who has a beautiful wardrobe.

So, is it good to be the king? I suppose that's a question each king must answer for himself ... although on balance, I guess it would be nice most of the time***.

Have a good day. More royal thoughts tomorrow.

Bilbo

* You may recall one-time Supreme Court justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr's, description of Franklin Roosevelt as a man with "a second-class intellect but a first-class temperament." One wonders how he would describe Mr Trump.

** Although there would probably have to be a rule requiring the bottom end of neckties to reach no lower than the knees.

*** Especially if you could send your political opponents to the rack when they crossed you.