Nice!
Some dude dressing up as a Nazi for Halloween is not a thing worth getting upset about.
This being the season for costume parties, I'm seeing some news items lately that show various people in what the media (or someone) label as "offensive" or "insensitive".
Where do you drawn the line for good taste in a Halloween costume? What if you went to a Halloween costume party. What would you consider a bad taste costume?
One article showed a white celebrity costumed and apparently made up to look like a black character on a TV show. Her make up was labeled "black face", but her face wasn't black, it was more like a light tan. As I don't know the celebrity, (nor the character she was portraying), before reading the article, I didn't know the color wasn't normal for her, or how accurate it was to the character. Should people stick to their own race for a character costume?
A couple years ago, one of the British princes dressed in a Nazi uniform for a costume party. There was a lot of uproar about it. The problem struck me as odd. He could have dressed as the devil, an axe murderer, a zombie, a medieval executioner, and no one would have had a problem. But somehow Nazi is over the line?
He is a mortal man, yes, and thus, not my nor anyone else's inherent superior. Puts his pants on one leg at a time, bleeds, etc. Stipulated and not even argued.
But "Pinnacle of society" in terms of personal wealth, opportunities available just because of who he is as opposed to his merits, connections, etc.- yes, he is a 1%er. With the good comes the bad- he has restrictions on his life none of us will likely face. Despite apparently earning his way up the ranks, he was still withdrawn from deployment, seemingly much to the disappointment of himself and his fellow squad mates.
Life at that level is simply different. Like the saying goes, "The difference between rich and wealthy is that the rich make lots of money...and the wealthy sign their paychecks." My family is rich. But we still have all the concerns of my less fortunate relatives down the road, including balancing the monthly budget. The Monarchy doesn't really have that concern.
Don't pretend you don't understand that reality. Is it fair? Arguable, but I lean towards no. But this is the world we live in, not the normative one.
Socio-politically, no, he's not "just a man". He is a prince - that's a very specific position within his society. It comes with responsibilities.
If he abdicates his right to the throne, he's "just a man". If he wants to stay in that office, he takes with it all the burdens of that office.
Sorry, just because you say it shouldn't apply does not mean that it does not apply.
It's something that has applied to humans for thousands of years. Public figures - be they politicians, kings, queens, emperors, or other celebrities - have different standards than the general public. If the Pharaoh of ancient Egypt tripped & fell down the steps of the pyramid and broke his neck, it's an event that affects the entire kingdom and most likely it would be news throughout the kingdom. If one of the slaves who built the pyramid tripped & fell and broke his neck, nobody but his immediate family would care.