There is no doubt that a Thakrian works hard for his or her city. There is no doubt that a Thakrian will aid another Thakrian. There is no doubt that a Thakrian is loyal to his or her city. These things are all true, but they do not mean freedom.
I am willing to assume for the moment that when Criamulus was appointed Prince by the Barony, it was a reflection of the popular will. Not because the Barons were told to appoint Criamulus by a diety. Not because a few high ranking Thakrians decided C
riamulus was the man for the job. This is an example of freedom, the people exercising their will in order to govern themselves.
Criamulus was appointed because the free people of Thakria wanted him as their Prince. As I say, I assume this is true.
Why then is Panaideos Prince of Thakria today?
Which of the Barons chose Panaideos? None. Which of the people chose Panaideos? None. Criamulus gambled his princehood like a cheap bauble, making a mockery of the responsibility he owed to the Barons and citizens and disregarding the freedom and wil
l of the people that appointed him.
You may tell me that you are happy to have Panaideos as prince and I do not doubt it. He is fearsome, able and a fine representative of what Thakria stands for. But do not lie about freedom and choice. There is none.