6 ms·

Small correction to the article - Alexander Karađorđević is not crown Prince of Serbia, but of Yugoslavia. I went to school with his sons, we were in the same h

Small correction to the article - Alexander Karađorđević is not crown Prince of Serbia, but of Yugoslavia. I went to school with his sons, we were in the same house, same year - they went by “Prince” rather than Karađorđević - quite a few kids had fictitious surnames to avoid attention. They were regular and likeable dudes, liked skating, cars, hip-hop, bad 80’s movies, games. Nobody cared that they were princes, or treated them differently, as it wasn’t all that unusual at the school, and typically, the higher your rank, the less airs and graces and nobbery you bothered with. Me, I’m a baronet - not that I ever use the title, or even tell anyone (these days - as a kid rubbing shoulders with outranking aristos it mattered far more to me) - I’ve grown to think the whole thing bloody stupid, as my politics careened wildly off to the left after a tumultuous start to adulthood - and as I realised I really didn’t want all the perceived responsibilities and expectations of an aristo - there are only so many balls and parties and royal enclosures you can go to before you’re sick to the eye teeth of it. I guess the main thing that I saw among those heirs who were expected to actually take a throne, or were the primogeniture of a non-ruling family, was an overwhelming sense of obligation, the anticipation of a life run on rails, the desire to live absolutely wild here and now because later is a gilded cage. It’s hard to be an isolated and aloof aristo in the modern world - nobody is raised in court any more. I can tell you that the millennial heirs of several European thrones are seriously sitting on the fence over whether they’ll take the baton - one, I know, definitely won’t - another probably will, but intends to fundamentally reshape the monarchy.

B1FF_PSUVM 5y ago
As a bona-fide commoner, I'll say that it's been at least a couple of centuries since European royalty has been more than at-will employees of the republics ruling the land. The English went first, poor Charles I was terminated with extreme prejudice when he got ideas. 'Tis a pity, us commoners could use a good monarch to keep the blood-sucking senators in line.
Biologist123 5y ago
Thanks for this post. Not standard fare for HN. May I ask - do you ever laugh at the weirdness of it all? That hundreds or even thousands of years ago, a bunch of cut throats and thugs started to give themselves cute names, and - cut to the present - all of the United Kingdom bows and scrapes in deference to their descendants who still sport those made up titles? From the inside - which more or less is your position as a baronet - does this feel more or less peculiar? Do you ever just think, WTF? How did we get to this?
- madaxe_again 5y ago
  >> do you ever laugh at the weirdness of it all? Incessantly, to the extent that I find it hard to believe in society in any meaningful fashion, as it’s all just reified concepts stacked atop one another. It isn’t such a leap from “why aristocrats?” to “why states? Why employment? Why three meals a day?”. The best answer I’ve been able to come up with is security/fear. At almost every scale from PNG tribes to federalised blocs of nations, people rally around the strong man, the protector who exacts a fee, and they follow the rules and expectations set by them. These days, aristos are generally superseded by democratic governance, but the underlying principle, the Leviathan, remains the same.
  - Biologist123 5y ago
    If anything, it gives you a close-up view of man’s ability to enchant others with stories and narrative; and for you to exit the fiction where you want to. Although nihilism is a risk as you point out, the upside might be the realisation that meaning can be constructed. One reason I don’t expect millennial princes to exit the monarchy, in the UK at least, is that they won’t be allowed to. Because their presence is a cornerstone to the entire fiction that is British social and economic culture, in which many have valuable vested interests.
    - madaxe_again 5y ago
      Very much so. I not only came to understand this through my own experiences, but also came to realise that much of what I was being taught at school was how to wrest control of any narrative, and make it mine. It was a useful skill in building a business, and it’s a useful skill in understanding the human world - practically everything is a battle of narratives, of finding the better story, the tale which speaks to the heart and ensnares rapt listeners, eager to repeat the story to others. It’s also useful in understanding markets. I don’t buy or sell based on any objective reality, rather what the dominant narrative in the minds of others is. Most are oblivious to this. They take the world at face value, and never even consider that they are principally a bit player in another’s story - and that lack of knowledge keeps them trapped in the fairytale. On the other hand, those like me who are, wittingly or not, trained in setting the scene, inevitably end up being the authors of our collective destinies. Sadly, many of the stories are very repetitive, uninventive, and cast villains as heroes.
Terry_Roll 5y ago
Whilst I view Democracy as just mob rule, and Religion as psychological warfare, Royalty was/is ultimate psychopath. Some of it can be explained by science, like aged wines (red more than white) has a higher histamine content which can increase certain types of IQ, its been used to double the IQ of people with Downs in six months, but one of its personality side effects is it makes people extremely aggressive. Other dietary and lifestyle elements also contribute to personality characteristics which will be seen in upper classes, but modern living is breaking those characteristics so unless wise to it, you could see Royalty die out in a few generations time. Look at Kate before her marriage and after, I'd say the UK Crown is wise to these dietary elements. I also think technology has caught everyone with their pants down and some jobs are no longer wanted unless they have an extremely extrovert personality. You might know this bloke! https://jamescasey.net/images/20210907_192640.jpg https://jamescasey.net/images/20210907_192640.jpg
epolanski 5y ago
I am grandson to some polish count who lost all titles and wealth when eastern poland became Ukraine post ww2. My father used to tell me our ancestor generals saved Vienna from the Ottomans. I cannot empathize as much, as I never believed my father till I started receiving letters to receive compensations from polish government.
emptyfile 5y ago
>they went by “Prince” Just reinforced my opinion that nobility in modern Europe is a bad joke. If you ever find yourself in company of these self-described nobles, leave.

B1FF_PSUVM 5y ago

As a bona-fide commoner, I'll say that it's been at least a couple of centuries since European royalty has been more than at-will employees of the republics ruling the land. The English went first, poor Charles I was terminated with extreme prejudice when he got ideas. 'Tis a pity, us commoners could use a good monarch to keep the blood-sucking senators in line.

Biologist123 5y ago

Thanks for this post. Not standard fare for HN. May I ask - do you ever laugh at the weirdness of it all? That hundreds or even thousands of years ago, a bunch of cut throats and thugs started to give themselves cute names, and - cut to the present - all of the United Kingdom bows and scrapes in deference to their descendants who still sport those made up titles? From the inside - which more or less is your position as a baronet - does this feel more or less peculiar? Do you ever just think, WTF? How did we get to this?

madaxe_again 5y ago
>> do you ever laugh at the weirdness of it all? Incessantly, to the extent that I find it hard to believe in society in any meaningful fashion, as it’s all just reified concepts stacked atop one another. It isn’t such a leap from “why aristocrats?” to “why states? Why employment? Why three meals a day?”. The best answer I’ve been able to come up with is security/fear. At almost every scale from PNG tribes to federalised blocs of nations, people rally around the strong man, the protector who exacts a fee, and they follow the rules and expectations set by them. These days, aristos are generally superseded by democratic governance, but the underlying principle, the Leviathan, remains the same.
- Biologist123 5y ago
  If anything, it gives you a close-up view of man’s ability to enchant others with stories and narrative; and for you to exit the fiction where you want to. Although nihilism is a risk as you point out, the upside might be the realisation that meaning can be constructed. One reason I don’t expect millennial princes to exit the monarchy, in the UK at least, is that they won’t be allowed to. Because their presence is a cornerstone to the entire fiction that is British social and economic culture, in which many have valuable vested interests.
  - madaxe_again 5y ago
    Very much so. I not only came to understand this through my own experiences, but also came to realise that much of what I was being taught at school was how to wrest control of any narrative, and make it mine. It was a useful skill in building a business, and it’s a useful skill in understanding the human world - practically everything is a battle of narratives, of finding the better story, the tale which speaks to the heart and ensnares rapt listeners, eager to repeat the story to others. It’s also useful in understanding markets. I don’t buy or sell based on any objective reality, rather what the dominant narrative in the minds of others is. Most are oblivious to this. They take the world at face value, and never even consider that they are principally a bit player in another’s story - and that lack of knowledge keeps them trapped in the fairytale. On the other hand, those like me who are, wittingly or not, trained in setting the scene, inevitably end up being the authors of our collective destinies. Sadly, many of the stories are very repetitive, uninventive, and cast villains as heroes.

Terry_Roll 5y ago

Whilst I view Democracy as just mob rule, and Religion as psychological warfare, Royalty was/is ultimate psychopath. Some of it can be explained by science, like aged wines (red more than white) has a higher histamine content which can increase certain types of IQ, its been used to double the IQ of people with Downs in six months, but one of its personality side effects is it makes people extremely aggressive. Other dietary and lifestyle elements also contribute to personality characteristics which will be seen in upper classes, but modern living is breaking those characteristics so unless wise to it, you could see Royalty die out in a few generations time. Look at Kate before her marriage and after, I'd say the UK Crown is wise to these dietary elements. I also think technology has caught everyone with their pants down and some jobs are no longer wanted unless they have an extremely extrovert personality. You might know this bloke! https://jamescasey.net/images/20210907_192640.jpg https://jamescasey.net/images/20210907_192640.jpg

epolanski 5y ago

I am grandson to some polish count who lost all titles and wealth when eastern poland became Ukraine post ww2. My father used to tell me our ancestor generals saved Vienna from the Ottomans. I cannot empathize as much, as I never believed my father till I started receiving letters to receive compensations from polish government.

emptyfile 5y ago

>they went by “Prince” Just reinforced my opinion that nobility in modern Europe is a bad joke. If you ever find yourself in company of these self-described nobles, leave.