History separates our president from his crown. I speak not of the power of office to slash and burn its citizenry. Instead it is the crown which represents the adornment of precious metals by leaders of the ancient world. Once, jewelry was the ornamental expression of power. Ancient Egyptians were experts at gold production and jewelry design often expressing some tenant of their belief system. Along the way the powers that be have traded in their crowns for suits and thrones for bullet proof limousines. Jewelry has been regulated to personal expression of style and not necessarily a symbol of power. Crowns can be seen at a school play or museum when they once required anyone close enough to sink to his/her knees and kiss the hand of the ever loving master.
Fear of losing ones position of power has diminished the showing of excess. The first politician to show up in a crown and robe will surely be tossed from office after a duly extended period of ridicule. The expectation today is the more politically powerful one is the less flamboyant one should be.
There is a difference between the substance of true power and the power of wealth. Those with real power make law and authorize wars. Purely wealthy people, like those in the entertainment field, are culturally influential and can be seen sporting the latest in Cartier watches fitted with obscenely expensive diamonds without fear of repercussion.
Yet, why are the policymakers not allowed to be stylishly expressive. If his work is superior does it matter that Mr. Senator is wearing the latest in diamond stud earrings. What about a crown? Why should the president be chastised for wearing one?