While he imagined himself as a modern prince it was really not true at all. What kind of prince has no throne to ascend to? What kind of prince has no subjects? No land? No regal standing? No superior education? Then again what is even the definition of a prince?
Thou is not noble. Neither does he rule my family nor me. A prince only by his words: a prince only by his own definition.
So then who does actually rule this city? There are people that make the rules and there are people that enforce those rules. There are people that seek to change the rules and there are those that celebrate the rules. None of these people are the rulers.
People vote and the implication is that they are making a choice. The choice in not really as grand of a bargain if you look. Are we voting for rulers? Are we voting for princes? Of course not.
Then at this point it seems to abstract. Are we seeking a prince? We know what our own rules would be. Rules that protect us and rules that ensure we have at least a fair chance if not an advantage. Is that perhaps the root of all evil? The most human of instincts is also the division.
Seeking the edge, seeking the advantage for ones own benefit. Perhaps to benefit your group, your team or your family. That benefit must some at a cost. To have the advantage surely means that someone must be at a disadvantage. So there is the inequality. We then have more rules.
While we have sought rules to give us the advantage we also seek rules that provide fairness. Rules to keep things fair. Rules to make sure nobody has an advantage. Of course this is a conflict rooted in the very fabric of our structure.
Who seeks to be the prince?