Elasticity of human condition

Two weeks ago when Great Britain was ecstatic over the arrival of the royal baby and rest of the world shared that jubilation, I was thinking of rubber. It loses entropy if expanded, and a retractive force sets in to prompt recovery. That's why rubber returns to its original shape when one lets go of it after stretching. The inordinate adulation for monarchy in this age of mass democracy proved the elasticity of human condition. However far it's pulled, it snaps right back to its basic instincts.
This time the loss of entropy lasted for months in the UK. The queen's subjects waited for the royal baby with bated breath. Souvenirs flooded stores and people went on a betting spree. Everything was connected to the unborn heir to the British throne.
Once the baby was born, shops and pubs celebrated. Televisions and newspapers across the world turned out in full force to report the news. Crowds cheered, cameras clicked, bands marched, landmarks illuminated, and artillery sounded gun salutes.
Such emotions only confirmed that humans are made of flesh and bones but their minds are rubbery. These minds expand and contract, explaining why history repeatedly repeats itself. Across the border in France, the 18th century philosopher Denis Diderot had proclaimed that man would never be free until the last king was strangled with the entrails of the last priest. Two centuries later an intense fever persists on the other side of the English Channel where people are ready to choke on their admiration for the royal family.
A good part of human history was the struggle to rescue ordinary people from the tyrannies of kings, queens and princes. It goes back to the days of tribal kings, who double-hatted as priests. Soon that changed and monarchs ruled by divine right, while sacral functions went to priests. Between mortar and pestle, the common people got crushed like chilies until most countries of the world abolished monarchy in the 20th century.
It didn't happen overnight though. First the Reformation cut out the middlemen and removed the clergy wedged between man and God. Then Renaissance made man the master of his destiny. The monarchs no longer impressed their subjects with their divinity, although in some countries kings are still worshipped as living Gods.
The United Kingdom is a curious mix. The government elected by the people runs policies in the name of the queen. The monarch is the head of the state and she passes all Bills, declares wars, ennobles peers, and exercises the Royal prerogatives. In other words, the queen rules the kingdom through the same parliament, which is elected by her subjects.
In democracy, government rules in the name of people. Political scientists differentiate between a republic and a democracy. In a republic the sovereignty lies in each individual person whereas in a democracy it lies in the group. But sovereignty lies in the monarch under the British system. Where does the individual stand in this scheme of things? He passes his power to his elected representative, who actually draws his authority from the queen. The individual is a travesty between Her Majesty and his modesty!
There's a growing campaign against monarchy in the countries where it still exists. Some European nations reduced royal remunerations; others are thinking. The king of Spain recently took a cut in his emoluments to commiserate with his subjects crushed by financial hardship. The British queen also saw her own majesty diminished.
She lost much of her symbolic roles. Filmgoers no longer stand up to ask God to save her. Banquets do not drink her royal toast any more. People tried in courts by Regina (Rex means king, Regina means queen) do not bother to know who Regina is. If one watches the daily British life in progress, one would like to believe that the real centre of power is not Buckingham Palace but Number 10 Downing Street.
The recent royal baby craze has been a paradigm shift. It showed how hollow humans cannot escape their obsession with glitter and glory. The closest the United States of America ever came to monarchy was when American Indian chiefs ruled their tribes. Then the Americans invented the Kennedys and JFK's Camelot to have a virtual taste of the real thing. In other republics people propped up charismatic leaders and ascribed kingly virtues on them.
It's said that the Brits love their monarch because she's an impartial institution and a symbol of unity. Other countries seeking that delicate balance should be worried. Democracy looked disturbingly diminished in the UK when people in their revelry defied the gravity of history. They subjected themselves to the subjecthood and rejoiced over that ignominy.
Dynasties elsewhere will be whetted in their ambitions. They'll capitalise on the knowledge that ultimately people are happy to be subservient.

The writer is Editor, First News and an opinion writer for The Daily Star.
Email: [email protected]