Posted on 01/14/2017 7:04:39 PM PST by SeekAndFind
As a Briton born after 1953, I have yet to witness a royal coronation at Westminster Abbey. However, every four years our American cousins treat us to a spectacular, regal, and full-blown monarchical affair as the president of the United States takes his inauguration oath. With parades, concerts, and lavish luncheons, the inauguration has become an event fit for a king, not the president of a republic.
But ironically, the celebrity-cum-president Donald Trump is likely to have an inauguration with a very modest celebrity influence. America’s famous names aren’t fans of Trump, with a multitude of reality-TV stars, Hollywood favorites, and Broadway actors expressing their dislike for the president-elect and his administration. Several music artists have rejected offers to perform at the event. In November, a spokesman for Elton John said that he would not perform. The tenor Andrea Bocelli also announced that he would not be involved. Zara Larsson said “I would never do it.” John Legend explained his choice not to perform by arguing that “creative people tend to reject bigotry and hate.”
At the time of writing, the only solo artist confirmed to be performing at the event is 16-year-old “America’s Got Talent” singer Jackie Evancho. The Mormon Tabernacle Choir and Radio City’s Rockettes are also listed as performing.
Let’s hope it stays that way, because Trump is accidentally doing something conservative. As conservatives, we prefer the executive to govern in a restrained and grounded manner, not rule under the impression of regality. In order to maintain this kind of governance, reducing the grandeur and cost of state events is necessary. Inaugural traditions should remain limited so that we, and the new president, can focus on the crucial value they represent: the smooth continuation of leadership of a republic. Rampant celebration of a new leader threatens to dilute this value and allow new presidents to consider themselves as something more than servants of the people.
Almost all aspects of the Inauguration Day events have undergone a transition over the decades from limited, sensible processes to celebrations of pomp and extravagance. The first inaugural parade to take place in Washington was Thomas Jefferson’s in 1801. Jefferson walked from his boardinghouse to the Capitol, joined by a company of riflemen from Alexandria, Va., and “fellow citizens.” In 1953, the year of Eisenhower’s inauguration, the parade had ballooned to an absurd affair involving 73 bands, 59 floats, elephants, horses, and civilian and military vehicles.
Inauguration Day is far from the only presidential event that has become financially excessive and eulogizing. Trips abroad for the president and those associated with his office are eye-wateringly expensive. Ferried around like a king, George W. Bush during his time as president billed the taxpayer $2 billion for transportation. Michelle Obama’s two-day trip to Ireland in 2013 cost close to $8 million.
Even the State of the Union speech has been transformed into a narcissistic address. In 1801, Thomas Jefferson delivered the State of the Union via a written report, and this remained the standard practice until Woodrow Wilson switched to reading his address in person. Nowadays it resembles a king’s speech, full of standing ovations and relentless clapping. I am unconvinced that Donald Trump will return it to its reserved, Jeffersonian form.
With every inauguration oath that is taken, presidents are treated more like royalty and less like the servants of the people that the founding fathers envisaged. But not all the early patriots agreed on this point. John Adams, America’s first vice president, argued that George Washington should have been given titles like “His High Mightiness” and “His Mighty Benign Highness.” I am immensely grateful to Adams’s unpretentious peers for preventing a scenario where Donald Trump would be known as “His Majesty the President.” Most Americans would rightly be appalled by such a title, yet still they support the celebritization of the presidency.
Celebrities are ephemeral symbols of fame and fortune. The values of the presidency could not be more dissimilar. Let’s hope that Trump’s celebrity-free inauguration is the start of a new, conservative trend for state events.
— Charlie Peters is a writer and student from Surrey, England. He studies philosophy at the University of Edinburgh.
I like the idea of returning to a State of the Union letter to Congress minus all the panoply. For maximum effect, Trump could also read it to the people as a Fireside Chat, embellishing it along the way to make his case like he did during the campaign.
I am glad that the celebrities are staying away.
They are all idiots who should shut up and sing or play pretend.
None of them have a clue about real life.
Well that article was a meandering hunk of hogwash...
Can you elaborate? It was not a very long article.
I will never see another movie or concert at a theater/venue, if this is what it takes, from these pukes.
My money $pend$, too.
Hitler was an Artist. John Wilkes Booth was an Actor. Pol Pot was a College Professor. Hermann Goering was an Environmentalist.
It will be a while before it dawns on the libtard celebrity “community” that by snubbing Trump now they have burned their bridge to the power center of the country.
How long will it be before they realize that they have placed themselves on the outside looking in?
Trump holds all the high cards.
Over the next four years they will still throw themselves parties and fundraisers and rub el;bows with powerless nobodies like the Clintons and Obamas.
But they will no longer be part of the inner sanctum or have access to the real movers and shakers.
How much love will still they have for Hillary, Bill, Moochie and Barack when they see the world rushing by and no one who counts gives a damn who they are or what they think?
And they are doing it all to themselves.
Absolutely awesome!
It seemed the author was being sarcastic in pointing out how few celebrities are interested in being part of Trump’s inauguration. He seemed to start out by saying American celebrities turned down offers but only named non-American ones who declined. Then he veered toward Jefferson’s sending a written statement when he was inaugurated, which doesn’t make sense nowadays.
So what was his central point?
I think it would be very refreshing to see some regular folk and some military marching bands at this most historic presidential inauguration. I love military bands.☺
I hope he gets sworn in during a private ceremony @ 830a so he can be on-the-job at 900a sharp.
Leave the parties to Friday night and the weekend.
Trump is on the job. Time to get to work!
Speaking of celebrities I saw that movie Patriots day tonight, the one starring Mark Wahlberg about the Boston marathon bombing. It was pretty good, they stuck to the facts pretty well, but what really ticked me off was at the end when they were pushing this “Boston comes together and fights” stuff. Oh really? Then why did Boston vote overwhelmingly for Hillary 81% over Trumps 14% ? Does “fighting terror” entail “getting rid of US borders”? Does fighting terror entail importing hundreds of thousands of Muslims from terror producing countries, oh yes, and financing their attacks with $100,000 in welfare benefits? Same with New York city, oh so what if the World trade center was obliterated and 3,000 people died, we must overwhelmingly vote for the wacko who will all but ensure we get a 911 every single day because “New York comes together and fights!”
and .....
Charles Mason, a musician & songwriter; John Wayne Gacy, a painter. =)
I'm hoping he Tweets it.
That would be great.
He said Republic! Twice! Finally, someone gets it right, and from a Brit, to boot!
I thought his central point was pretty clear. Repeatedly using the correct term “Republic”, and pointing out that an every four year inauguration of an elected executive has become a sort of coronation, and a simple annual report by said executive to his colleagues in the legislature a version of the annual King’s or a Queen’s Speech that opens Parliament, he restated some very sound principles of genuine American conservatism. The writer is a Brit but he said it better than most so called Conservative spokesmen. Funny, but another foreigner named Steyn has that same uncanny gift. Maybe seeing us from the outside gives them a clearer picture of what we are and what we are supposed to strive to be.
It would be interesting to know what the breakdown is of people posting on FR.....
Just to piss the Progs off Trump should order up a Kremlin-esque military style parade.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.