“Camelot Ends”

By: Jim Mollison

 Camelot beckons reflections of an idyllic and fictional time that emerged from the dark ages of barbarism, superstition and hopelessness.  It beckons us to a time of hope and optimism, and provides lessons to learn about the acceptance of an aristocracy – elected or appointed. 

With the passing of the so called “Last  Lion of Democracy”, we now witness an end to an era of a family idolatry elevated to the romantic vision of Arthurian fiction, as represented by the famed castel on the hill – Camelot.  However, just as in the legend, imperfect man       betrays the utopian age of light and allows the darkness of envy, greed, jealousy and entitlement to infect and ultimately destroy Camelot’s impossible dream. 

As John Kennedy represented hope in a time when the world faced the darkness of a mushroom cloud of nuclear war and the threat of rapidly spreading communism, Ted represented the ultimate end to a dream that never was.  Though, John was not a perfect man by any means, his passing created the fiction of Camelot.   But, it was only a façade to cajole the people with hope and create an aura of nobility and romance as depicted by the use of the term Camelot.   It was a childlike vision of enlightened aristocracy selflessly serving the people and reminiscent of the throngs of followers lining the streets of England as the Royals pass by. Of course, this image of nobility was nurtured and reinforce by the Democratic Party, for obvious reasons.

Not being a native of Massachusetts, I have often wondered how the people could revert to elevating a family to nobility status as if, attempting to find a substitute to the royal family, lost upon their immigration to the United States.  Is the concept of royalty and being subjects, so instilled that people must live their unfulfilled lives through the envy and worship of a made-up aristocracy?  

For Ted, Camelot’s fiction was his ticket to fulfillment.  The people’s vote was only a formality, as it was a given that his brother’s Senate seat belong to him.   Despite his seriously flawed character, his coronation to the Senate was assured through the blind and adoring eyes of his subjects in Massachusetts. 

Was he a man of the people or was he just another knight of the roundtable who undeservedly inherited his title?  Having never held a real job outside of government and having lived a life of entitlement as a child, he continued that existence throughout his entire adult life.  Elected nine times to the Senate, he has spent a lifetime elevated by his subjects to the level of elected aristocracy.  Just as Camelot’s flaws are exposed to the light of reality and the imperfections of man, so we see the same imperfections with Ted.

Many believe that Ted did wonderful things for the common man.  Just the statement “the common man” — which, is routinely invoke by those that supposedly attempt to improve his lot in life, demonstrates an elitist attitude.  How is separating people into classes and groups and pitting one against the other, different from the concept of commoner and royalty?  I can find little that Ted has done or tried to do, that does not emphasize differences or pits one group against another — a common tactic for those that cater to special interest groups. Basically, Ted has spent his life, peddling influence, writs and gifts using other people’s money.  He was no closer to the common man than Marie Antoinette was to her subjects.  Through his generosity with other people’s money and his invocation of the often distorted purpose of the General Welfare clause in the Constitution, he destroyed or damaged many of the liberties we once freely enjoyed.  Ted was a willing participant in the generational theft and servitude of the people he supposedly served.  He basked in the adoration of the ignorant while flinging leftover cake crumbs to his adoring subjects.

The lessons of Camelot will be learned over and over.  What did the romantic story of Camelot really tell?  It tells that man is imperfect and to bestow unchecked power to an elite few that supposedly govern with selfless and altruistic motivations is a recipe for disaster.  The end result will be the darkness of perpetual servitude.  We see it today in the condescending attitude and words of our elected aristocracy with “shut up! — we know what’s best for you”.  How dare we question our elected elite! 

Have we devolved from the concept of a servant government to the age of Camelot and the “Divine Right of Kings”?  Are they no longer accountable to the people?

James Mollison is a retired Air Force Officer, Town Meeting Representative and President of the Billerica Taxpayer’s Association