The New Statesman is carrying an article which talks about the image of the royal family that has been put up on the Thames and points out that it is far bigger than the image of Chairman Mao in Tiananmen Square.
The writer also points out in brackets that…
(I know this reference is unfair in implication but I use it simply to make the comparison with other giant, two-dimensional images in public spaces. Thank you.)
I think she means to refer one unelected leader to another is unfair and in this she is probably right.
However, her article aside, I think the generally positive coverage of this, which is sure to be one of the first things in a tidal wave of sycophancy in preparation for the jubilee, shows a certain level of hypocrisy.
Just think of how other places (past and present) are portrayed when enormous photos of leaders are plastered up everywhere in say somewhere like Iraq.
Has anyone got a spare shoe and a ladder?