Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by AnimalMuppet 2727 days ago
Giving the people freedom of the press was good for the people? Probably. Having a kid with the queen was good for the people? Probably not.

So, was the criticism for giving them freedom of the press? Or for having the kid with the queen? Or was it for using his position as a doctor to put himself in political power in the first place?
1 comments
oh_sigh 2727 days ago
Having a kid with the queen seems neutral, especially if the alternative is for a severely mentally ill man to be the father.
link
AnimalMuppet 2727 days ago
The queen having kids that didn't come from the king is capable of setting off a civil war once the king dies and someone has to succeed him. That's not neutral for the people.
link
oh_sigh 2727 days ago
What was important at that time was that the child be a recognized heir to the king and queen. Actual birth father is mostly irrelevant.
link
vict00ms 2727 days ago
> Soon, not only had the doctor risen to become the King’s most trusted advisor in the Danish court, he had also become Queen Caroline Matilda’s lover – which fast became common knowledge.

Perhaps if it had not become common knowledge it would have remained irrelevant. I think your argument has fallen flat and you should reconsider your opinion before further entrenching yourself.

link
oh_sigh 2727 days ago
No, it has not fallen flat. Something being common knowledge, and yet still held to be irrelevant was exactly my point. You are free to peruse information about Louis Auguste if you'd like

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Louise_Auguste_of_Den...

> Though officially regarded as the daughter of King Christian VII, it is widely accepted that her biological father was Johann Friedrich Struensee, the king’s royal physician and de facto regent of the country at the time of her birth.[1] She was referred to sometimes as "la petite Struensee"; this did not, however, have any effect on her position.[2]

link