No, it has nothing to do with tolerance, but with a change of public opinion. Spain was suffering a terrible economic crisis and everything changed. It also led to a crisis of the traditional political parties, that brought new ones, which have proven to be worse than the traditional ones.
And finally the press, that had been silent for decades, then began a contest to see who got more medals chasing the Crown. There is nothing worse that the zeal of the converted.
Still nothing about your origins. Previous Message
Previous Message
No, you referred to what he did in the latter part of his reign. He did nothing different to what he did in the first years of his reign. My point is that the public perception of his acts changed, not his acts.
But you just said “What caused his downfall was the Noos scandal ( even if denied if is common opinion that the RH knew what was going on), the Botswana scandal….”
Manuel , these are misdeeds from the latter part of his reign. Did public opinion actually change with those scandals - or did the public’s tolerance merely reach a natural and predictable tipping point? Perhaps we are both mincing words since a downward change in public opinion and exhaustion of the public’s tolerance can both prove fatal.
380