>Why not just go back to feudalism?

>Prince Charles is at it again. He’s been banging on about architectural monstrosities and carbuncles, which I meant to blog about a few weeks back when I saw this or something like it, but didn’t find the time.

The Prince has written to the Prime Minister of Qatar appealing for him to scrap plans for a modern steel and glass luxury flats scheme, designed by Lord Rogers, at Chelsea barracks. He has proposed instead an alternative, more traditional scheme by one of his favourite architects.
The intervention has put the future King on collision course all over again with the architect Lord Rogers, whose proposed extension of London’s National Gallery 25 years ago he memorably described as a “monstrous carbuncle”.
Ken Livingstone, the former Mayor of London, however has accused the Prince of trying to circumvent the lawful planning process.

Ow. Ohhh fuck AHHHHH fuckfuckfuckfuck FUCK this hurts. I’m agreeing with that repulsive newt loving wealth thief Ken Livingstone, and it fucking hurts. But painful as it is, and not in any way diminishing what a detestable little prick I think Red Ken is, he’s absolutely right.

Ken Livingstone, the former Mayor of London, accused the Prince of exploiting his privileged position to try to change the design. “If world class architects think they or their designs are going to be the subject of pressure by the heir to the British throne there is a danger that we will lose the ability to attract them at all – which would be a recipe for excessive caution and mediocrity.”

Oh, Jesus, this is like having cock surgery without anaesthesia. Actually sounds a bit free market… is it the same Ken Livingstone? [Checks – yep, it said former Mayor, so it’s him alright]. He’s not alone either.

Among the critics, Nick Raynsford, the former Labour planning minister, claimed that the Prince had set a “very dangerous precedent” and accusing him of behaving in an “almost feudal” way.

Yep, that crossed my mind too. What the fuck does Charlie thinks it has to do with him anyway? Will someone please shove a fucking calendar in his face and remind him what fucking year it is. But since His Royal Wingnutishness was echoing the thoughts of local people I’ll spell it out as clearly as possible:

What the fuck has it got to do with ANYONE what someone else does with their property providing that whatever it is doesn’t affect anyone else?

Seriously, I can’t understand this thing people have with wanting to tell other people how to develop land they’ve bought and paid for, I really can’t. A neighbour is redeveloping and intends to create a sundeck at the back of his house that overlooks our garden, and I’m not really that thrilled about it. But here’s the thing – it’s not going to affect me and it’s not my property. If he was building an incinerator that might affect my health, or a tannery that would cause such a stink that our garden would be unusable, or something that actually overhung the boundary, or discharged something nasty onto our block, etc. etc. then I’d be protesting about it. If he knocked his place down and built a fourteen storey cock shaped tower I’d also object since it would probably knock a fair bit off the value of our place. But a sundeck? Can I complain about that? Well, some people certainly would, just as plenty of people other than His Royal Headcase objected to the Chelsea Barracks development, but here’s the thing – if it doesn’t actually hurt, whether physically or financially, then what right does anyone have to object to what people do with their property? Now one point of view would be that this sundeck prevents Mrs Exile and I walking around in the garden naked, but this is nonsense. If I want my dick to get a suntan all it will take is me not minding the neighbours seeing it, and if that happens a far more likely scenario is the neighbours objecting that my dick prevents them using the sundeck.* So while I have the right to moan about the sundeck they have the right to say fuck off, it’s our place and it’s not hurting you, but if it’s a big deal make us a fair offer for the place and it’ll be yours to do what you want with. In the same way I’d been hoping that someone would have the balls to say it to the Prince of Whines and that they were still going to go ahead and build this:

I mean, is it so bad? Personally I find it a bit uninteresting. Looks kind of like a new university or a shopping centre to me, but whatever it looks like is irrelevant. Their place, they ought to be able to build anything they like. And really Charlie ought to understand this perfectly well because it turns out that he’s planning to put in a new car park on Duchy of Cornwall land despite objections.

Jo Heydon [a local resident, said]: “I wrote to Clarence House to inform them that there was a huge degree of public disquiet over the fact that the Duchy supported the planning application despite the environmental damage.
“I got a letter from Sir Michael Peat [Charles’s principal private secretary], not addressing any of the concerns raised, but merely stating that he had passed my letter to the Duchy’s land agents. They, of course, wrote to me saying that they thought car parking was needed in Rock.”

Hypocritical twat.

* No, I’m not referring to the shadow it casts.

Advertisements

Posted on June 15, 2009, in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Comments Off on >Why not just go back to feudalism?.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: