I'm on my soapbox, so if it becomes rambling at times, sorry. Opinions are encouraged, but I won't be involved in the comments because I'm going to give my view here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight - The Wiki page on Knight.
David Beckham, for his own reasons, wants a knighthood. There is nothing wrong with that. If I were offered a knighthood, I'd accept it. It would stroke my ego and make me feel good and that's fine.
Beckham has done good things in order to be rewarded in the way he wants. Example; He gave his wages from PSG to a Paris children's charity, so that he'd get a knighthood. The children won't care re.the knighthood bit, they get Beckham money. The charity won't care, they'll WANT him to be rewarded however he wants to be. It will encourage other rich people to donate to be rewarded in the way they want to be too. Doing good for reward is still doing good. It only means good wasn't done purely from the milk of human kindness. That's a good thing, this way everyone gains.
There are a couple of ways to view a knighthood beyond that fact it is an outdated notion, which is inarguable.
- One is the myth of the knighthood, it's reserved for those noble few cream of the crop Britons who are cut from a moral cloth far better than the average person. To be a knight means your a truly great person. A knighthood (and therefore a knight) is not something (someone) to be taken lightly. Respect is demanded from all.
This mentality provides nothing at all to the real world. Worthless notion that further segregates classes of people in the country.
Damn British though.
- The other is that it's a title with little meaning at all anymore except that it strokes egos and lets you call yourself Sir. Great for flights to the USA.
This mentality is reality. A knighthood means nothing truly. Sir Alex got his for winning a lot of footy matches with United in a season. Ace. Loads of real world benefit there.
Beckham is willing to give a lot to get his knighthood. That means it has worth to those who want it. More than that, rich people will go out and do good things to get them. Not all, but some.
Why not let David Beckham do a £50m charity drive/whatever idea brand Beckham come up with to openly get it? That would literally mean that the knighthood is worth £50m to the have nots of the world so David can be Sir Beckham.
Because it would upset a few people who want the outdated idea of the knighthood to be sacred? Well then you pony up the money rich man X is willing to put towards global poverty, human rights/responsibility action, deserved national welfare or any other good cause instead of them. Until then, let the knighthood be the rich ego's badge of honour. It will mean more and do more good that it ever has in it's entire history that way.
David Beckham's Knighthood
posted on 7/2/17
Yeah I agree. The action itself is more important than the motive. If someone does good for charity for 'bad' reasons it's no different to people doing good for charity for 'good' reasons. Good for charity is still done and people still get helped regardless.
posted on 7/2/17
comment by Cesc + Costa - The Spanish Duo (U21341)
posted 15 minutes ago
Yeah I agree. The action itself is more important than the motive. If someone does good for charity for 'bad' reasons it's no different to people doing good for charity for 'good' reasons. Good for charity is still done and people still get helped regardless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Plenty of people work far harder for charity and invest far more with no or little thanks or recognition. It's wrong for him to then receive recognition for 'his charity work' because he's a famous face and he's pushing as many buttons as possible behind the scenes to try and achieve it.
posted on 7/2/17
I'm not saying he should receive recognition, I'm saying people shoildnt give him shiiit because he's doing charity work because he wants recognition. He's still doing charity work and he's still helping people at the end of the day.
posted on 7/2/17
comment by Cesc + Costa - The Spanish Duo (U21341)
posted 21 seconds ago
I'm not saying he should receive recognition, I'm saying people shoildnt give him shiiit because he's doing charity work because he wants recognition. He's still doing charity work and he's still helping people at the end of the day.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yep, fair enough. Would be good to know exactly what his 'charity work' entails (and that of other 'celebs' that front various campaigns).
posted on 7/2/17
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/2/17
It's a bit like giving a homeless dude a twenny note, posting a video of it to your Facebook wall, then whispering in his ear "by the way I couldn't give less of a 5hit about you pal" as you walk off.
posted on 7/2/17
you still gave him a twenty though. That hasn't changed.
posted on 7/2/17
comment by Cornelius Oofterom (U15867)
posted 2 hours, 16 minutes ago
Beckham has done good things in order to be rewarded in the way he wants. Example; He gave his wages from PSG to a Paris children's charity, so that he'd get a knighthood.
------------------------------------------
He 'donated' his wages to charity (in actual fact PSG 'donated' a sum of money, probably relative to his wage demands for a few months, with Beckham receiving no 'salary' from PSG). However he took the proceeds from PSG merchandise with his name on for the duration of his stay at PSG. This had a tax rate of about 22%, in comparison to his salary, which would have been taxed somewhere between 40-50% in France. So he more than likely benefited financially, even if the income from merchandising was significantly less than his proposed salary, which I don't think it was.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Such a staged and self-serving gesture knowing full well the tax benefits of it anyway. Why not just shut up and take home a minimal salary if you want to do something good instead of asking for exorbitant wages only for them to be paid elsewhere?
posted on 7/2/17
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/2/17
I think SAF was nominated by Bliar for a knighthood as he was a big donor to the Labour Party and not really football related although that would have been given as the 'official' reason.
In Becks case , I suspect the pushing is being done by a Lady wannabee