The Monarchy is the String that Ties the Robber’s Bundle – We Have to Make Sure That There is No Charles III
Platinum Jubilee - The Great British distraction
I imagine that like me you are sick to the backteeth of the servile,
sycophantic, fawning tone of BBC broadcasters and news readers as they compete
with each other to find the most obsequious and servile adjectives to describe
a seriously dysfunctional family.
Their purpose being to convince us that the idea of a hereditary head of state is somehow compatible with democracy. Even the bourgeois kind. One wonders whether there are any other professions - teaching, mathematics, history, which use the hereditary principle as well? Perhaps they operate it at the BBC too, which might account for quite a lot!
For the past 2 weeks, whether we like or not, we have been
bombarded with messages about how grateful we should be that Elizabeth Windsor
has agreed to live a life of unparalleled luxury at our expense, aided by a
subsidies of over £100m annually.
Even the right-wing Tax
Payer’s Alliance isn’t happy with the amount of money spent on the Royal
Family. They wrote:
However, there are also clauses in the Sovereign
Grant Act 2011 which are completely unfair on British taxpayers.
The Act includes a provision that prevents a fall in
the value of the Sovereign Grant. It was put into force this year when the
Crown Estate portfolio fell by more than £500 million in value, after land and
property investments went sour during the pandemic. Instead of taking it on the
chin like every other business owner who has seen their assets hit due to
covid-19, the
taxpayer has bailed the royals out – ensuring that the Sovereign Grant will
not fall in value for the next financial year....
The bailout by HM Treasury means that money that
would have been spent on public services has now been diverted to the royals.
This is expected to give the monarch a grant of £86.3 million for the year
2020-2021. Despite the Act guaranteeing the royals will never make a loss, the
Sovereign Grant has ballooned in size, giving them year on year increases for
the past decade above levels of inflation. In 2016-17 the grant was worth £42.8
million, which steeply jumped to £76.1
million in 2017-18 and continued to rise handsomely until this year. The
royal family have a rising income under this system...
Today’s royals have hardly been as thrifty, showing
little regard for value for money. The Sovereign Grant financial report
uncovered that Prince
Andrew squandered £16k on a private jet travelling to Londonderry from
Belfast in his capacity as Patron of the Open Championship at Royal Portrush
Golf Club in July. As eighth in line to the throne, ‘Air Miles Andy’ could have
set an example by going on an affordable airline instead of a private
jet.
Forbes magazine estimated
the Queen's net worth at around £325 million) in 2011, while an analysis by the
Bloomberg Billionaires Index put it at
about £275 million) in 2015. In 2012 the Sunday Times estimated the
Queen's wealth as being £310 million and that year the Queen received a Guinness World Record as Wealthiest Queen.
The Sunday Times Rich List 2015
estimated her wealth at £340 million. She was number one on the list when it
began in 1989, with a reported wealth of £5.2 billion, which included state
assets that were not hers personally, (approximately £13.2 billion in today's
value). (Wikipedia)
The Queen hobnobbing with the Bahrain King whose Security Forces Tortured Doctors and Nurses who Tended the Wounded who had been Fired on by the King's
If this was any other family they would have child
psychologists and social workers crawling all over them, to say nothing of the
long arm of the law.
It is common knowledge that Andrew Windsor raped and molested
girls half his age and more who were being trafficked by a convicted paedophile
Jeffrey Epstein
and his madam Ghislaine
Maxwell. After all no one gives more than £10m to someone they’ve never met,
as happened with Virginia
Giuffre.
After all Andrew had a cast
iron alibi since at the time he was supposed to be with Virginia. He was
entertaining his daughters at a pizza parlour as well as suffering from an
inability to sweat!
Percy Shelley - radical poet
The Real Purpose of the Monarchy was Spelt Out Over 200 Years
by the radical poet, Percy Shelley when he wrote
that the Monarchy was the ‘string that
ties the robbers’ bundle.’
The Monarchy above all have a political function, not in a
party political sense but as the symbol of an ugly, undemocratic British state
in which a tiny handful of people own the vast majority of wealth whilst
millions of people are living in or near the poverty line.
Three in a marriage was a crowd!
The top 1% in society own 25% of total wealth and despite
exhortations for us to be ‘patriotic’ they have no hesitation in stashing it in
offshore islands beyond the reach of the tax authorities.
It is no accident that the Conservative Party, which is
dedicated to a programme of transferring wealth from the poor to the rich, is
the most overtly pro-Monarchist party. Boris Johnson is happy to take £20 per
week from universal credit claimants whilst at the same time he is falling
over himself to spend £250 million on a new Royal Yacht.
Those who demonise ‘benefit scroungers’ are more than happy to hand over hundreds of millions of pounds to an already vastly rich family.
As Seamus Milne wrote
the purpose of the Monarchy, above all, is a political one. In times of
constitutional crisis they have potentially enormous power because the organs
of the state, the army and police owe their duty to them not the people.
This is called the Royal Prerogative and it was demonstrated
when Johnson prorogued
i.e. cancelled the ability of parliament to sit. The Queen was happy to go
along with Boris but the Supreme Court decided
otherwise.
Sir John Kerr - author of an Australian coup d'etat
In 1975 this was demonstrated when the Labour Prime Minister of
Australia was removed
by the Queen’s representative, Governor-General Sir John Kerr. As John Pilger
has shown,
this was done in co-ordination with MI6 and the CIA. The CIA were apoplectic
that an American base in Pine Springs might be closed down. Australia has
historically been the US’s closest ally in the Pacific, as we can see today
with the Aukus Pact aimed at China.
The BBC claimed that the
Queen didn’t know of Gough Whitlam’s removal. She didn’t have to know. She appointed the Governor-General who used
the reserve powers of the crown to overthrow an elected government. What the
Crown did in Australia they can do here.
When people
drool over and fantasise about the Royals and what they get up to, with the
encouragement of the tabloids, they are being shown the ‘human’ side of an ugly
family and an undemocratic institution.
It's not just Andrew who has a fascination for paedophiles - Charles befriended Peter Ball, Bishop of Lewes, who was later gaoled for offences against children - offering him a house on his estate
The
Monarchy is not about the tantrums of Price Harry or the peccadilloes of Andrew
or the tree hugging of Charles. Nor is
it about how Princess Diana was treated 20 years ago when she and Charles separated.
It is about
the British state being represented in human form as a family that British people
can identify with, for good or bad. The Royal Family stand above all for the
idea that however rich or poor you are you can identify with them as a symbol of
national unity.
But Britain today is not what it was 70 years ago. More than one in four (27%) British people now support abolishing the monarchy. As Republic note, support for retaining the monarchy stands at just 60%, well below the 70-75% previously reported.
A YouGov
poll carried out for anti-monarchy group Republic found that 41% of 18-24 year
olds want the monarchy abolished whilst only 31% want to keep them. Across all
age ranges that figure stands at 27%.
Ben Wallace & the Slaughter of Black Bears
Labour voters are evenly split,
with 44% wanting to keep the monarchy compared with 43% favouring abolition. Graham
Smith of Republic was quoted as saying that:
"When
looked at alongside other polls in recent years, it appears support for the
monarchy is on a slow puncture."
"Just ten
years ago monarchists were consistently boasting that three quarters of the
population supported the royals, now support stands at just 60%."
Of course a republic in itself is no panacea. The United States and France are hardly more
democratic or egalitarian than Britain despite being republics. A democratic
state also has to be a socialist state where wealth and wealth production is in
the hands of the people and where the economic levers of power are not in the
hands of a tiny minority. But there is no doubt that the removal of this rich,
privileged and selfish family will be a step in the right direction.
Nor is there any need for an elected head of state, a kind of elected dictator. The problem we have is an unaccountable Prime Minister and Parliament as Boris Johnson is demonstrating with a raft of Bills to increase Police powers and clamp down on demonstrations and trade unions’ right to strike.
Why would Starmer think he needs to "urge" us to celebrate the Jubilee, those that want to will, and those that don't won't, what I see here is just more grandstanding from a very wooden and ineffective Labour party leader desperately trying to gain from showing he's not Corbyn.
ReplyDeletePrince Charles is not much of a tree hugger since the latest news is that he totally refuses any discussion of rewilding "his" massive estates (let alone selling up to small farmers or sth like that).
ReplyDeleteAlso I know there is not enough space for everything but it is now known that the Family refused to allow any black people to work in prominent positions for decades.
The way the Queen keeps trying to rehabilitate Andrew is appalling.
But tell us, how could the Royal Family which just grows larger year by year be got rid of, seriously. I cannot see it ever happening. Would like a discussion on this.
All power to the countries of the commonwealth /impoverished by UK through slavery who are throwing off the shackles.
The Queen is the head of the British class system and a beneficiary of the most exclusive job creation scheme in the UK. How does she feel to be the leader of a family of scroungers? She should have been charged with treason for allowing Blair to go ahead with his illegal invasion of Iraq.
ReplyDeleteQuick note: Derry, not Londonderry. We English added the London. The Irish were less than impressed. It's still sort of used by some, but to show solidarity with the Irish struggle to overthrow the yoke of Invaders, people use Derry.
ReplyDelete