PHV. Perhaps your professor also stated that an argument over whether a nation should feel let down, angry, disappointed and resentful when its head of state, who lives a life of the most fabulous privilege as payment for fulfilling certain duties, fails to carry out those duties because of his intention to commit an act seen widely at the time as unacceptable, can also delve into the realms of the ridiculous by comparing it to which actor happens to be best in a certain role. Fo the record, I am actually a Timothy Dalton fan.
Maybe the people I met are in the minority?
I would hardly think they are in either sufficient numbers, or of a wide enough background to be fully representative, no. Has anyone got anything to add to this discussion other than to try to lecture me on the rights and wrongs of the answer I gave as to the reason why it is not surprising Prince Charles does not wear a Windsor tie? Regardless of your experience with British people, your relatives heritage, your education or comments of your friends and acquaintances, it remains the answer to the question. If this forum is so adverse to adopting the style peccadilloes of others as standard, simply because they feel the reasons are inadequate, then why does there seem to be so much support for things like working cuff buttons, or leaving buttons undone on certain garments, all of which have origins in the personal preferences of individuals, for reasons that were Â individually specific and have little or no practical use or relevance today?
I'm sorry, but someone ruffling the feathers of the status quo cannot be equated to the genocide of millions.
I did not make any such comparison, and I do not agree that all David Windsor did was "ruffling the feathers of the status quo" To dismiss the seriousness of his actions in British society at that time shows little undertsanding of the political system that we enjoyed and still enjoy, and feel, in comparison with what others have contrived, is far superior. He placed that system in jeopardy.
I must add that I mean no disrespect to you or your opinions. Perhaps by the reckless persuassions of my youth I am drawn to issues which my heart compells me to question (to again borrow a page from Churchill's book). I'd be interested in hearing through an e-mail or perhaps a private message how historically it did more than temporarily undermine the integrity of the monarchial institution in Britain. Because to my understanding, it was/is part of modern growing pains. The realization of the inevitability of the degradation of the monarchy. I would not mind being proven wrong, or at least guided to a more informed answer.