The Death of A Monarch is the Ideal Opportunity To Be Rid of the Monarchy – No one is Born to Rule Over Us
The Monarchy is, by definition, a reactionary institution
based on the hereditary principle not merit. It is there to bind the poor to
their fate, to give us the illusion that however rich or poor we are that we
have something in common. In the inestimable words
of Percy Shelley the Monarchy is “the
String that Tied the Robber’s Bundle” (Shelley)
The Monarchy is the human face of the British Establishment
in all its horrors. An Establishment
which, at this very moment, is forcing millions to choose between eating and
heating as the energy companies are awash with money.
The idea that we have anything in common with the parasites
who rule us, who steal the few assets that we had to hand over to their City
friends, is cockamamie. Patriotism is,
in the words
of Samuel Johnson, ‘the last refuge of
the scoundrel’ and our rulers, as Boris Johnson amply demonstrated,
complete scoundrels.
We are told that Liz ‘never
put a foot wrong’ and it is true.
She did a wonderful job for those whose job it is to exploit the working
class and poor. Although even that is
not strictly true. During the period immediately following Diana’s death,
Elizabeth and her coterie were in
danger of being seen to rejoice in the death of this uncontrollable former
member of the ‘firm’.
Despite never having met Virginia Giuffre Andrew handed her over £10m
Not once, ever, did she express any sentiments in favour of
those who are homeless, poor, destitute and without means but you can bet your
bottom dollar that she and the other royal parasites expressed their contempt,
behind closed doors of course, for those whom she reigned over.
The Queen was of course herself a very rich woman so it is
natural that she should sympathise with fellow aristocrats. A tax dodger to the
last, where she led others followed. She was happy to lobby
the government to replace the Royal Yacht even whilst her subjects were
sleeping on the streets. The idea of using her own wealth to purchase it
probably never even occurred to her.
The Royal Family as they like to be known are a bunch of
misfits, dysfunctional to the root. Not only the Prince of Paedophillia, Andrew
but the racist Princess Pushy Michael of Kent who
sparked
fury when she arrived at the Queen’s Christmas lunch in 2017 wearing a
Blackamoor brooch on the day Meghan Markle was formally introduced to the Royal
Family by Prince Harry. Blackamore brooches usually depict an African male as a
servant, and are widely considered racist.
But it’s not about the Royals as individuals but what they
represent. The icing on the very ugly
cake that is the British Establishment. In Ireland the Crown represented
Unionism and the subjugation of the Catholics. In the Empire the Crown
represented the super exploitation of India, Africa and Malaya. Not once did
the Queen or her predecessors give voice to any criticism of the atrocities in
India, Kenya and the West Indies.
Prince William IV defended the slave trade in the House of Lords and was known for his relations with African slaves
With the 200th centenary of the abolition of the
slave trade the Queen failed
to apologise either for the slave trade or the Monarchy’s role in opposing
abolition. In her paper, Uncovering
Royal Perspectives on Slavery, Empire, and the Rights of Colonial Subjects,
Dr Brooke Newman wrote:
Prince William, now the Duke of Clarence, emerged as
a vocal defender of colonial slavery and a leading ally of the West India
Committee in London. In 1799, in a reprinted and widely circulated pro-slavery
speech delivered in the House of Lords, he referenced the long history of
European involvement in the African slave trade and drew on his eyewitness
knowledge of conditions in the Caribbean islands. According to the Duke of
Clarence, the abolitionists had misjudged the effects of the slave trade on
Africa and Africans and grossly misrepresented the treatment of enslaved men
and women in the British sugar colonies. The abolitionist campaign to end the
slave trade, he argued, was not only radical and misguided, like the actions of
the fanatical French revolutionaries, but also deeply damaging to Britain’s
national interests.
The Duke of Clarence later became King William IV. In her tributes
to the abolitionist William Wilberforce, Elizabeth Windsor passed over her own
family’s role in delaying the abolition of slavery.
We are told that the Elizabeth kept her opinions to herself.
Perhaps but there is no doubt on which side of the class divide she stood. She personally invited
her blood-stained relation, the King of Bahrain to attend the Royal Windsor
Horse Show. When his largely Shi’ite subjects rose up against his bloody rule
in the Arab Spring, King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa not only set the military on
them but he had the doctors and nurses who tended the wounded tortured.
Yet Elizabeth Windsor had no problem entertaining King Hamad.
Gough Whitlam, Australian Labour Prime Minister, was ousted by the Queen's man in Canberra
When Australia elected a radical Labour Prime Minister Gough
Whitlam it was the Queen’s Governor-General Sir John Kerr who used Royal
Prerogative to overthrow
him in a constitutional coup d’etat and put in the conservative Malcolm Fraser.
When the House of Representatives passed a motion of no confidence in Fraser,
Kerr simply refused
to see the Speaker of the House.
So we can see that when there is a constitutional crisis the
role of the Monarchy can become extremely powerful as it nearly did when the
Queen prorogued
parliament, on advice from Boris Johnson, during the Brexit crisis. In that case the Supreme Court overturned
her order.
The Monarchy is anything but apolitical. It is intensely
political and that is why BBC and ITV are currently boring us to death with
interminal programmes about the death of Elizabeth Windsor. Fortunately this is
likely to have the same effect as occurred with the death of Philip Windsor
when there were a record
number of complaints about the saturation coverage which was carried on
every TV channel.
The close identification between the monarchy and the military
is itself a threat to democracy. In times of crisis, as was signalled
during Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party, the Generals could declare
their loyalty, not to Parliament or the people but the Monarch. After all their oath of loyalty is not to the
people but the Crown.
However lest this blog be considered unduly critical even the
most hard hearted would have sympathised with Elizabeth sitting alone in
Westminster Abbey after the death of her husband Philip while Boris Johnson was
throwing
parties in Downing Street. But that
incident in itself demonstrates that our present rulers lack any gravitas or
substance. They are as cheap as the alcohol that they packed into that suitcase
smuggled into a Downing Street Party.
It says a lot about the times we live in that Boris Johnson
has been succeeded by ‘thick Lizzy’ whose meeting
with Elizabeth seems to have given the coup de grace to Elizabeth.
As King Charles III ascends the throne we should perhaps
remember what happened to the first King Charles! A Republic is in sight.
Tony Greenstein
