First of all, it’s not really a Diamond Jubilee Year. That would be 75 years, but as Victoria wasn’t expected to live that long (she didn’t) they brought her Diamond Jubilee forward from 75 to 60 years on the Throne. It has remained 60 years for people and 75 years for other events.
Now as a Marxist Socialist you naturally would expect me to be a staunch republican, which of course I am. I don’t approve of the hereditary ruler principle whether it be in a Constitutional Monarchy like the UK, an absolute monarchy or a nepotist so-called ‘Socialist’ state like the DPRK (North Korea).
The main reason I don’t approve is you get a Head of State by default, not by popular choice. Once they inherit the position, it is very difficult to get rid of them. Abdication or death being basically the only two ways. So with the hereditary principle you may wind up with a mentally impaired person, or one who is completely lacking in morals.
The present incumbent in Britain is said to do her job well, which basically means she acts as a loyal glove puppet to the Establishment who control her. From her point of view, therefore, it is a great pity she is surrounded by such a dysfunctional family. Three of her children have gone through divorces, including the heir to the Throne, and the fourth has a marriage which, according to the rumors, is mainly for appearances. No children of the Monarch are, apparently, allowed to openly have a gay sexual orientation. It is also royal tradition, apparently, for straight men in the family to have mistresses, and the royal wives are supposed to quietly tolerate this.
With Charles the love of his life was clearly Camilla Parker-Bowles who was thought unsuitable, so Diana was found for him after much searching. However he was not, it seems, expected to give up Camilla, and Diana was mainly for show, to be a glamorous Queen and provide heirs to the Throne. Diana, of course, was made of sterner stuff and was having none of it. She was not about to ‘sit in her palace playing tiddlywinks’ while her husband was gallovating with his mistress.
Diana was indeed a ‘loose cannon’ as far as the Royal Family and Establishment were concerned, not only taking lovers, but revealing all in her Panorama interview. She then embarked on humanitarian causes such as her work for sufferers from leprosy and AIDS, putting many other members of the Royal Family in the shade.
When she embarked on her anti-landmines campaign she started receiving life threatening phone calls, and within months she had been assassinated in a carefully arranged car ‘accident’ which she actually predicted. This shows the amazing courage of this woman.
This cannot be said of the Queen herself. When has she ever spoken out about landmines or other horrors of modern warfare and the military? Indeed she has launched completely illegal submarines armed with nuclear weapons of mass destruction aimed at innocent civilians, capable of killing millions including generations yet unborn. This makes QEII an accessory to planning and preparing for heinous war crimes. Were she to have been made Kaiserin of Germany (she had many German relations and a German surname) and been Head of that State when the Nazis were in power, would she have happily launched the gas chambers in the concentration camps? Presumably, as a loyal puppet, she would have. I see little difference to launching Polaris and Trident nuclear-armed submarines than launching the gas chambers of the Final Solution.
‘Ah, but she is just a Constitutional Monarch, she cannot become political,’ is the excuse of the monarchists. But she IS political. Everything she does is political. She is a puppet of the political ruling Establishment, and her ostentatious display of obscene wealth with her many palaces and expensive jewelry identify her with the very rich and the Conservative Party, even when a Labour government is in power.
As to her not having any options, of course she does. King Edward VIII chose to abdicate rather than give up Wallis Simpson. QEII could have refused to launch nuclear-armed submarines, and said she would abdicate if they tried to force her to do so.
The above are not the only complaints I have about QEII. She apparently muttered something to Paul Burrell, the late Diana’s butler, about ‘dark forces of which we know little’. Of course she knows a good deal more than she’s letting on, including probably that Diana was assassinated. She knows her husband, the Duke of Kent and many other male royals are in the high echelons of Freemasonry planning all sorts of dark deeds, that her husband has or had mistresses, but chooses to keep quiet about all of this. She is indeed a loyal glove puppet.
All Hell will break loose when she dies or abdicates. Charles will not be considered suitable to be King, which makes a mockery of the whole Monarchial system. It is supposed to be hereditary, but if you start to pick and choose by jumping a generation or forcing people to abdicate (like Edward VIII), then you might as well have an elected President, or even an elected Monarch with a set term.
William would be next in line for the Throne, but would he want the responsibility and restrictions of being a mere puppet of the Establishment which murdered his mother? Surely he must realize that was no mere car accident in Paris? No one is indispensible, so up to now he and his brother, Harry, have kept quiet about any suspicions they have. Clearly the message is keep shtum, do what you’re told or we’ll get rid of you just as we got rid of your mother.
The Establishment is ruthless, and the Monarchy has always been ruthless too. Look at the history of this gang of schemers and murderers. Henry VIII set up his own church so he could divorce the wives he didn’t execute, yet even the Church of England he set up officially disapproves of divorce, yet divorced Charles now married to divorced Camilla is expected to be Head of this Church – what a farce!
Why should the Church of England have the Head of State as its head anyway? The Church of England should be disestablished. All states should be secular with people free to follow any religion or none. Most people in the UK are NOT members of the Anglican church anyway, so why should its bishops sit in the House of Lords? Another anachronism which should be done away with and replaced with a fully elected Senate.
The big hope is that the European Union will eventually develop into a fully-fledged federal union, the United States of Europe, that it will be a republic and that the remaining monarchs of this continent, including the British one, will be finally swept away as the anachronism they are.
However since they are apparently, like Donald Duck and Mickey Mouse in Disneyland, good for the tourists, they could be allowed to keep a postage-stamp kingdom like Monaco. The area around Windsor Castle would be a good place for the one in Britain, conveniently close to London. There the former monarchs of England and their family could happily wave to the tourists, dress up in silly constumes, parade around in their gaudy golden colored coaches, and do all the royal ceremonies and celebrations they like without turning the whole country into a farcical Disneyland.
High time for the Monarchy to go. Let’s have an elected President, and I’m happy for Elizabeth Windsor or any of her descendants to stand for this office and be elected for a fixed term if they defeat the rival candidates. However I would expect any Head of State to insist on a conscience clause allowing them to opt out of any ceremonies or endorsement of things they disagree with, such as setting their seal of approval to totally illegal weapons of mass destruction.
I certainly won’t be celebrating the false Diamond Jubilee year or waving Union Flags. Patriotism has caused too many wars on our Continent already in the last century alone. The only political/geographical flags I’m prepared to wave are the blue-and-gold EU flag, the pale blue UN flag and the Red Flag of Socialism!