Text 8291, 67 rader
Skriven 2010-06-07 13:27:21 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Ross Cassell (1:123/456)
Ärende: What's in a name?
=========================
Hello Ross,

On Sunday June 06 2010 10:02, you wrote to me:

 MV>> You do not really believe doctors in The Netherlands are any less
 MV>> competent than doctors in the US, just because the former have the
 MV>> word "Royal" in the name of their association and the latter the word
 MV>> "federal".  Oh c'mon, you know better than that.

 RC> I wasnt implying that,

It may not have been your intention, but by jumping on Roy's bandwagon, you
certainly conveyed the impression that you agreed with him on this.

 RC> but do remember that as you criticize the way things are over here,
 RC> that you have things worth criticising such as the clinging onto those
 RC> things Royal. We discarded that baggage more than 2 centuries ago, all
 RC> of it.

We also discarded it. Well over two hundred years ago we kicked out Napoleon
and declared a republic. We then re-adopted Royalty and subsequently discarded
almost all of it again. We kept the folklore.

You didn't actually discard Royalty, you just never adopted it. The British
King never really was in charge of the USA. He was the ruler of the USA in name
only. You never adopted the baggage of royalty, but you adopted other baggage
instead. We celebrate the Queen's birthday on april 30th. Her real birthday is
on Jan. 31st. April 30th is the birthday of the previous queen. So it is a
misnomer. But who cares as long as the weather is nice and we can have a good
party? You celebrate independence day on the 4th of July. The US is no longer
independent. If a wall would be build around it, the economy would collapse
within a couple of month. You need the oil and other stuff from other
countries. The independent USA from 200 years ago no longer exists. Yet you
still cling on to "independence day". It is archaic. But who cares as long as
the weather is nice and you can have a good party?

I really don't understand why you keep harping on this. As I have tried to
explain many times to you, the days of royalty worshipping are long gone. The
queen has no real power, she is just an overpaid first stone layer and bridge
opener. It is all folklore. Every country has folklore and traditions that are
leftovers from a past the no longer exist, that are meaningless in themselves,
but make an excuse to have a party. What's the big deal?

Besides: you are barking up the wrong tree. I have repeatedly stated that if it
were up to me, we would dump Royalty tomorrow. It is medieval and there is no
place for it in the 21st century. Day after tomorrow we have elections for
parliament. If there were a party that advocated doing away with royalty, that
would be a strong incentive to vote for them. So why pick on me?

I am no fan of royalty. OTOH, it is pretty harmless.  They are overpaid, but
that goes for so many others, like bankers and CEO's of large corporations and
those are far less harmless. So I am in favour of dumping royalty, but it is
not on top of my list. And I am certainly not going to start a crusade for
striking the word "royal" from the name of every organistation in The
Netherlands. Heck, it is just a name. Life is too short to get excited over a
name. There are more important things in life.

Such as the archaic custom of mutulating male babies by removing their
foreskin. A custom that Dutch doctors advise against for medical reasons.

What do you say to that?


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)