Indians treat their royalty better than the Brits

The house of Windsor should not be blamed for wishing that the average Briton had somehow imbibed — even by osmosis via curry dinners — a bit of Indianness when it comes to accepting double standards. After all, it was the British who left India as a democratic republic with an almost institutionalised reverence for hierarchy and pomp. So there is nary a protest here at special rules for VIPs, whether it is reserved lanes (and free passage) at toll gates and airports or unspecified taxpayer-subsidised perks for those holding high office — or, in some cases, merely high connections.

Sadly for Britain’s current royals, their remaining subjects have proved more intransigent than their former colonial ones. Though the wedding later this week of Prince William and Kate Middleton promises to be a touristic and merchandising bonanza rivalling next year’s London Olympic Games, curmudgeonly Britons are still quibbling about the public exchequer being unnecessarily strained by the ‘lavish ceremony’ (a mere few hours long as compared to weeklong Indian extravaganzas) and security bills. They are even looking askance at the guest list, as though the noblesse are obliged to enforce proportional representation at Westminster Abbey if not in Westminster.

Britons should actually cringe at the idea of their future monarch , Prince Charles, being forced to barter an invitation to his son’s ceremony. And all, reportedly, for free rides on the Gulfstream jet of a Texan billionaire so that British taxpayers will not carp about his US travel bills next month. We do not mind when our VIPs divert public transport — state-run airlines, choppers, trains or cars — for their own use, let alone private ones. May we extend to the British royals an invitation to immigrate?