IF CHARLES WINDSOR really does believe that Vladimir Putin is acting in a similar way to Hitler in the 1930s, it reveals how deficient his expensive private education was.

His alleged comments betray a mental laziness in reaching for a glib historical comparison with the German nazi leader that has been used by dodgy politicians and journalists over recent decades to indicate simply that a contemporary political leader is not a nice person.

Moscow’s annexation of Crimea is not part of a Russian expansionist programme to swallow up its neighbours as nazi Germany did.

It was a foreseeable consequence of the overthrow of Ukraine’s elected government, spearheaded by nazi stormtroopers and encouraged by European Union and US politicians.

Imperialist determination to push the influence of the Nato cold war military pact and the EU ever eastwards lies at the heart of the instability in and around Ukraine.

Not only is the anti-semitic far-right ensconced in the current Ukrainian government but it plans to declare the Communist Party illegal, as Hitler did.

Windsor’s inability to grasp international events clearly would not really matter if he was a simple citizen without influence.

He would be no more nor less relevant than the average saloon bar bore intent on letting everyone know of his peculiar views on the world.

Unfortunately, this pampered princeling has made no secret of his determination to poke his nose into the business of democratically elected governments.

His propensity for sending “black spider memos” to ministers offering his thoughts on government policy is already legend.

And he has made clear that he has no intention of ending his practice of lobbying the government of the day if and when he succeeds his mother as monarch.

This would be bad enough for any hereditary constitutional ruler but for someone with such bizarre, mystical reactionary views the opportunities for embarrassment and potential conflict are legion.

He terms himself a “philosophical traditionalist,” seeing himself as a protector of faith, an advocate of homeopathy and of collaboration with the Saudi medieval dictatorship.

The prince has stated that, as king, he would like to use his “convening power” to raise issues about which he feels strongly.

It is widely known that he has lobbied successive governments over various bees in his bonnet, but the Tory government has refused to come clean over his “black spider memos,” which are being challenged in the courts.

The previous Labour government went so far as to exempt the royal family from the Freedom of Information Act.

This makes it difficult for investigators to ferret out the extent of his interference in the democratic process or even to discover the truth about his business activities.

However, it is known that his personal financial drip feed, known as the Duchy of Cornwall, benefits from payments from government and the EU common agricultural policy.

The duchy owns about 10,000 houses across the world, together with a similar number of shops and offices, enabling the house of Windsor to enrich itself.

In one sense the prime problem is not Prince Charles. It is the monarchic system itself.

Windsor’s belief that he has an inalienable right to speak out whenever he chooses on whatever he wishes ought to encourage wider demands to end the monarchy.

An unelected hereditary head of state makes a mockery of a supposed modern democracy. The sooner it’s put out to grass the better.