Britain badly needs up and coming original commentariat minds to stop it becoming an irrelevant Theme Park ripe for globalist exploitation. The Queen's 70th year on the throne offers a tricky but important moment for them to emerge and blossom. Will the opportunity be taken?
Tomorrow sees the official start of Britain's Platinum Jubilee celebrations. Sad to record, I remember the Silver and Golden bunfights very well. My first wife and I had just bought a tumbledown Victorian house in Shakespeare Road Brixton - forty years before it became pop-up and trendy. We threw ourselves into helping with the street party celebrations (West Indians in those days were among the Queen's greatest fans) and everyone - from Indians, Jamaicans, Barbadans, Africans and even white Hard Lefties - had a wonderful day.
Just under three years later, our neighbourhood erupted into 48 hours of violent arson that left the infamous Railton Road more or less a smouldering ruin. Our first child was two months old, and we had to parley with some pretty fractious road-block cops just to get home.
It felt at the time like a classic example of woolly multiculturalism coming face to face with anthropological realism. For me, it was the start of growing up about inner-city social policy, and the end of my interest (never that strong at the best of times) in the Labour Party. Today - looking back through the misty dead ends of a thousand empty political promises - I see it more as having been among the first question marks at the end of, "What is the point of royalty?"
This is a question one cannot ask of royalty alone. But without any shadow of doubt, I would put that institution very high up the list of things that need to change. My point here is simple: Britain is unique in its ability to stick with the tools available for government. And nowhere is that more obvious than in Buckingham Palace. It seems to me it glorifies tradition on the one hand, but seems at one and the same time to display an ability for somewhat grubby constitutional deals and pathetic pc compliance.
Our politico-constitutional evaluations are rooted in history, not the present. The last time we were given fluffy, vague promises of a Constitution per se was just over 900 years ago in 1215. We're still waiting. The deal at Runnymeade was exceptionally grubby and near homoaeopathic in terms of substance.
Consider: there isn't a single element of today's grass roots anywhere to be found in the Parliamentary Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The "young" wing of politics is represented by Labour - a movement started around 142 years ago when most people worked in factories or on the land. The original 'Whig' Party of 200 years ago is now the Liberal Democratic Party - complicit in a political class that is neither liberal in its tolerance levels nor democratic in its largely abandoned quest for proportional representation. The original 18th century Tories are now Conservatives who conserve nothing of real value and aim to thrive in a blocist world where the only thing conserved is their undeserved privilege.
Viewed in that context, the House of Windsor is sickeningly obliging to unelected power, fashionable social mores, and cynical legislators bartering a new law here for a privilege there.
The Queen's most recent intervention into an issue involved her suggestion that the 1in8 aware were "selfish" because they wouldn't roll over and get vaccinated. She thus revealed herself as medically ignorant at best and the dupe of depopulators at worst. Not so her father, a man whose genuine compassion saw through his stupid brother's attachment to Hitler...and disappointed the British fascist element by rejecting Halifax in favour of Churchill.
As for Elizabeth's heir, what is the kindest thing one can say? As a young man he embraced the idea of natural crops, but in so doing showed his understanding of it to be half-digested. He makes money from overpriced and dubious produce from his own vast estates on this basis...and always ensures he is well in with the Establishment: his record on free speech - he is the only Royal ever to give his seal's endorsement to all three security services - does not sit well with his history of meddling in favour of daft ideas like wind power, and naive acceptance of the entire CO² con.
Supposing a situation arose where his son William replaced him - I can't imagine one, but humour me for the purposes of elucidation. William and Catherine simply never step out of line: never, never, never. They enthusiastically embrace the latest minority fascism and State invention, be that on the subject of Ukrainian refugees, or jabbing people with toxic nano debris. They even felt that somehow they had to apologise for having an unplanned third child.
In short, the Royal Family appeases, befriends, accepts and actively supports a depraved political class - which is itself beholden to a graphene-thin layer of evil above it.
Given our situation, the Royals have merely become yet another institution to let us down.
Posting an "anti Royal" piece on the day before Elizabeth II's Platinum Jubilee is probably not a good way to make friends. But to reprise where I started out from in this essayette, today's post is really about roots.
'Rooted in the past' is good for tourism, but responsiveness to grass roots in the present is far more important to the survival of civil rights in general and free speech in particular. To achieve such sensibility requires a no-prisoners attitude to those institutions no longer fit for purpose. There is a sort of ironic equality to listing them:
Unequal treatment before the Law
The use of privilege to pervert advancement
An unreformed Parliament
A voting system that serves the political 'Closed Shop'
An uninformed Head of State
A media set bought by the State
A misinformed media-addicted electorate
A politicised education system.
All of these unfortunate realities leave them open to gross falsification...and the British Royal Family's track record in such things since George VI is one of a desperation to survive - not to protect its People.
As I've written many times before, the challenge we face is not a tickling contest. Our Prime Sinister Boris Johnson is revelling in his chance to engage in false hero worship of the Windsors as a distraction from the 21st Century realities of extra-legislature power.
Like many others, I share the fear of an elected Presidency almost as much as I detest the idea of an elective replacement for the House of Lords. Such aspirations seem to me blind to the innate corruption of an elected Commons and the placing of a braindead stooge in the White House.
It's a question of checks and balances. Indeed, more specifically, the issue is one of high IQ, media-savvy sociopathic cynics on the one hand versus emotionally intelligent hard-earned wisdom on the other.
Such stuff cannot be explored in soundbites....and its core suggestions are antithetical to 2022 ideology.
But it would be better to face up to them at this early stage....rather than when it's too late to even contemplate them without being accused of Thought Crime.
Looking on the bright side, perhaps the froideur between the Frog and the Rosbif could be reduced by pointing out what we have in common: a silly old Queen as Head of State.
Enjoy the Bank Holiday.
No comments:
Post a Comment