I think we should all refer with some regularity to the President of the United States as "the Orange Dynast."
The Orange Dynasty, in British history, is of course a colorful incident (pun intended, however lame) in the monarchical history of the mother country. This was the family that benefited by the second and permanent overthrow of the Stuarts. The founding fathers of the United States generally shared a view of the world in which the Orange dynasty were the "good guys." They were superior to the Stuarts, because the Stuarts claimed absolute monarchical authority whereas the Orange monarchs, William and Mary first, Anne later, acknowledged that they could reign only because Parliament ruled. Recall that Patrick Henry compared himself to two regicides ... Brutus and Cromwell. The Orange were also seen by our founders as superior to the Hanoverians, who replaced them, because after all the Hanoverians were imported Germans, not Brits or even harmless Dutch, and because the Hanoverians (in the person of George III) were the dynasts against whom our founding rebellion was aimed.
So, issues of complexion and hair dye to the contrary notwithstanding, Trump might be flattered by being called the Orange Dynast. Why would I use such a term for him?
The thing is ... there was no real Orange Dynasty. We think of William and Mary as two monarchs not as one simply because Mary was the one of them with a colorable claim to the throne. William would have refused to participate in a deal in which she was Queen and he was merely Consort (like the 20th and 21st century Prince Philip). So he was acknowledged as King by a grudging parliament, in a dubious concession that gave some ammo to pro-Stuart bitter-enders. The third and final monarch of this line, Queen Anne, was Mary's sister so there was no inheritance from one generation to the next as the term "dynasty" implies. No passing along of the Queen Anne Chair, ummm, Throne.
Anne died without heirs, and Parliament had to cast about again, this time bringing in those Germans above mentioned.
In other words: the original Orange dynasts very much wanted, but failed to, secure a dynasty. This I think may well be true for our present Orange Dynast on this side of the Atlantic. He seems to be grooming 'Jarvanka' as a successor. Neither of the halves of that composite personality have what it takes to survive in any prominent capacity outside of Daddy or Daddy-in-law's shadow. The wild ride of the Trump presidency will be sui generis, and the rest of the family will fade into deserved obscurity.
Who or what shall come after them, I have no idea. But I do think (and, I regret to say, the hair dye issue does help make this compelling) that the "Orange Dynast" is what we have, and that resistance in not merely sensible. It is imperative.
There is also a "Duck Dynasty," I hear, on television. Maybe there will someday be a duck l'orange dynasty, in a sort of Hegelian synthesis.
Comments
Post a Comment