I have a friend who has very unusual opinions about a lot of things, and who you might be interested in getting to know through these pages. I have to emphasize that the ideas expressed in this imaginary dialogue are his and not mine. I disagree with some of what's expressed here, but I like the spirit behind it. It's all so thought-provoking that I thought it deserved to see the light of day. See if you agree.
Oh, and this is not a rewrite of the somber piece that I said I wrote last night. That's on a different subject. Okay, here's the dialogue:
Eddie: "So Paul, let me get this straight. You're a monarchist?"
Paul: "Yeah...well, a constitutional monarchist. It's Biblical."
Eddie: "Ah, so you have a religious reason."
Paul: "Not entirely. Monarchy also makes sense because that's the only way to grow an aristocracy. We need aristocracy so that society can be guided by philosopher kings. We need them so we can have culture again."
Eddie: "But there have been so many evil aristocrats and crazy kings."
Paul: "Fewer than you might think. A lot of what we know about aristocrats was written by ideologues who hated them."
Eddie "What about the rights of man? Are you saying that a Pharaoh is entitled to own me?"
Paul: "Good Grief, no! Just the opposite! The monarch is one of the guarantees that you won't be owned and that your rights will be respected. The king has to answer to God for the stewardship of his people. The other guarantee is the Christian religion and the Judao-Christian tradition. Religion is a more trustworthy defender of your rights than politics."
Eddie: "But democracy allows us to get rid of people in power who abuse their office. It assures a degree of stability because at least 51% of the people get to be happy with the way things are."
Paul: "I think you're naive. The people in power try to set things up so they can't be voted out."
Eddie: "Aaaargh! There's not enough time to thrash this out, so let's move on. What kind of literature do you like?"
Paul: "Oh, Mallory's book on King Arthur, the one that the movie "Excalibur" was based on...some of Shakespeare. Those and 'Old Yeller.' "
Eddie: " 'Old Yeller!!!????' You mean the DOG story that Disney based a film on?"
Paul: "Yeah, that's it. It's a story about duty and the need to accept it with unshakable determination. It's also indirectly about honor."
Eddie: "Honor? Then you must like movies like the old black and white version of "The Four Feathers."
Paul: "Definitely, and the book is even better. The book makes a distinction between different kinds of honor, and reserves special praise for the man who realizes the downside of honor but pursues it anyway. The film's not half bad, though. There's a wonderful scene in it where the girl explains the necessity of honor, but it's not in the book."
Eddie: "Well, I guess you like "The Three Musketeers." That's all about honor."
Paul: "Mmmm...sort of, but it also ridicules it. At the end of the story the musketeers have nothing except their honor. D'Artagnon doesn't get the girl and they're all poor. Their only satisfaction is that they lived a life of honor and are respected by other men."
Eddie: "How about "Don Quixote?" I had to put it down about a third of the way through because the plot was so simplistic, and I hated the anti-heroic message."
Paul: "You should have persevered. The first half is anti heroic, anti-chivalry, but the second half says Don Quixote was right."
Eddie: "Wait a minute! That's not what I heard!...but...Aaaargh! We've gotta close this! See you later folks!"
Paul: "Bye, bye!"
