Top 5 BBC Royal Grovels

September 26, 2018March 27, 2019 / Revolting Subject / 3 Comments

Barely a day goes by, with out some bum-clenching toadying nonsense about the royal family broadcast on the BBC. It’s relentless and it’s brain rot for the vulnerable.

Lets see what the BBC thinks we really need to know…

Woman Closes Door – The BBC reported that a Woman closed a car door. Alert the Pulitzer committee.

Boring Posh Couple Get on Tube – The BBC fawned at the very idea that Chaz n Dazed stepped out of their Bentley and deigned to slum it..

BBC Presenter Gleefully excuses Queen’s racism – here, the BBC suddenly have an interesting royal story so…they quickly sweep it under the carpet. A grovelling guest recounts the time where the Queen met a foreign ambassador and declares ‘I thought I was talking to a gorilla’. BBC Presenter, gives nervous hoot and describes such blatent xenophobia as ‘cheeky’. Will I Am doesn’t look too impressed.

If a working class person had said speaking to a foreign ambassador was like ‘talking to a gorilla’ on BBC1, can you imagine the outrage?

The Queen Lobbied The Home Secretary to Have A Man She Didn’t Like Deported – Wow – an actual news story. – not many Abu Hanza fans about – but still the queen shouldn’t be interfering in justice like some Daily Mail gammon should she ?

WAIT….the BBC reached for it’s forelock & quickly APOLOGISED to the queen for daring to report an interesting insight. Scoops 0 Sycophancy 1

Child Grows Up – Prince George is 1. Prince George Is 2. Prince George is 3. Prince George is 4. Prince George is 5. – don’t bother clicking the links – I can assure you it’s a dull read. And, y’know, it’s sort of creepy – this child presented to us as if it’s the new Blue Peter dog. Child Deprived of Normal Upbringing to Serve As Cute Mascot for Feudalism is a not a story I can find anywhere on the BBC.

The point is….it’s RELENTLESS.

And psychologically, it seeps in – the point is Everything That Posh Rich People Do is Very Important.

It’s not.

They’re not.

And this world of royal fetishists is right wing Jacob Rees Mogg culture, drip fed to the masses.

What can you do ? Share this article on Facebook & Twitter and print it off and slide it under the cubicle if you see Nicholas Witchell going for a royal poo.

masticating for the royals

( update: I am going to add a list of unbelievably trivial royal stories as the bbc continue to publish them)

23rd October – Prince harry drank something People seemed pleased.

22nd October – a few people with red hair like Prince Harry. THANK YOU PUBLIC SERVICE BROADCASTERS MY LICENSE FEE HAS BEEN WELL INVESTED

18th October – Royal tour Non-Events. They saw some things, she looked pretty. Lap it up proles.

17th October – In this truely moronic and dire report, some oul’ Aussie who won’t even go to see the royals, mouths some banal platitudes about the royals. This is utterly utterly dire. Why even publish this?

17th October – Boy rubs beard. 4th headline

14th November Prince CHarles likes posh food

Christmas Day – dull family go to church as usual

16th January – posh woman says some shit about pizzas

26 January – Queen plays game.

27th February – woman speaks a bit differently

The Royal Family – above the law…

July 30, 2018May 12, 2019 / Revolting Subject / 4 Comments

Some otherwise reasonable and savvy people, are are Mushy Monarchists.

They talk the talk politically, but reserve the right to flop on the couch and wallow in a a tedious documentary about the Queen’s best pals all being horses.

The Mushy Monarchists justification runs thus…’oh come on it’s harmless pageantry and flags & good ol’ British tradition’. Such nonsense lets the upper classes sentimentalise inequality & repackage unpleasant snobbishness as charming character traits.

But this whimsical narrative is shattered when members of the royal family are revealed to be above the law, meddling and arrogant.

I’ll be the Judge

The laws don’t apply to the Windsors. Under UK law, the Sovereign cann ot be prosecute d. Or even questioned apparently.

Prince Charles has long hung out with some dubious characters. Despite some desperate spinning by royal PR, Prince Charles’s long friendship with Jimmy Savile is undeniable, his life guru Laurens Van Der Post impregnated a 14 year old girl ( lets not forget that Van Der Post is Prince William’s godfather ). Recently, Charles sympathised with abusive bishop Peter Bell, lamenting the ‘monstrous wrongs that have been done to you’. He gave the Abusive Bishop money, and then a house “not too far from here so you can come over more easily”. Aww. That’s nice.

Of course none of this association implies Prince Charles himself is guilty of anything so sinister – I am politically opposed to The Windsors, but no-one should be accused of anything so toxic unless there’s compelling evidence. So to be clear, I am not amongst the wilder fringes of the net insinuating against Charles.

But clearly, the legal process does not hold them to account.

Here we have a man who no-one can question, but he readily admits he was deceived. A man who’s always ready to lecture us on ‘duty’, but REFUSED to give a legal statement to the Independent Inquiry on Child Sexual Abuse.

Think about that for a second. An inquiry who’s stated aim is to ensure that children get ‘the care and protection from sexual abuse they need and deserve, now and in the future.’

Charles and legal staff REFUSE. A statement implies swearing an oath – and Charles lawyers shrugged, and said the court couldn’t compel him to release a statement. Why are they so concerned ?

Instead, they send a long letter, full of equivocation and ‘can’t remembers’ which was read out to everyones dissatisfaction.

One of the many things Charles couldn’t remember was who he was referring to in his letters when he told the Bishop he would ‘see off this horrid man if he tries anything again’. How convenient.

After Savile, wasn’t there a collective moment when a shocked UK resolved that in the future, no stone would be left unturned, no matter who it upset ? Apparently not.

Before I bang the cyber gavel, , here’s a list of royal incidents where the current crop got away with it…

Prince Andrew rams gates to avoid 1 mile detour ( completely fine ).

Prince Harry out shooting, rare birds of prey shot in area…( nothing to see)

Prince Andrew goes to small house in London to meet with 17 year old girl who was trafficked across the Atlantic by a convicted paedophile ( seems legit )

In fact the only court case where a member of Royal Family was held to account was when Princess Anne’s dog attacked a 7 year old and 12 year old, biting them on the collarbone and leg. Penalties for this crime could be a £5000 fine, 6 months in jail, and having the dog put down. Anne was told to pay £250 to each of the traumatised kids ( there’s no mention of an apology anywhere). The child biting bull terrier went home to eat steak. But a ended up eating one of the Queen’s corgis.

If you’re wanna be in the cool gang with the cool kids, please share this post on the Information Super Highway.

Royal Wedding Disruption Tool kit.

May 17, 2018May 17, 2018 / Revolting Subject / 1 Comment

On Saturday, two wealthy people I’ve never met get married. I hope they’re happy with one another and enjoy their Swan Cake. Hope a fight breaks out and Uncle Andrew doesn’t paw any vulnerable teenagers who’ve flown over on private jets.

It’s hard being a UK republican and fighting against feudalism when all it’s bling is blazing. We’re cast as th Ancient Mariner, cornering the wedding guests – And till my ghastly tale is told / this heart within me burns

However, the entire circus will be used to ram monarchy down our throats, cementing the idea that we all love the upper classes, that we are all in awe of gold tiaras, that we all adore gazing up at the gammon and tugging our forelock…

It’s blatantly political, and should be resisted.

So here’s some online ammo

HASHTAGS: I can’t figure out a catchy one yet – #meh, #feudalnotfairytale, #breadnotcircuses #notwatching and of course #Republicnow. Tweet me more suggestions. Using the nauseating #royalwedding hashtag is encouraged to get out of our bubbles.

Here’s a link to the £32m COST

( also worth pointing this out when the inevitable retort comes that these events pay from themselves that…they don’t )

The homeless moved of the streets. I can’t think of a more apt and embarassing metaphor. Get out of the way Real Poor. We’re going to shove you and your unsightly poverty out of the way and replace you with Useful Idiots who’ll cheer for the very system that oppresses. It’s like something from Oscar Wilde’s The Happy Prince.

BBC coverage – here’s some embarrassing BBC coverage from previous royal events where the presenter hoots with laughter at the queens racism. Imagine David Jason had told that story about a darts player or someone. There would have been stony silence.

The tourist nonsense – easily rebutted on the excellent Republic Win the Argument site.

The Yougov poll that found 66% of us were not interested in Royal Wedding

Please tweet and Facebook. The BBC and media are determined to only feature obsequeious. By ignoring a very valid political objection, they are insulting us. I’ll be off watching Celtic.

And every time they say ‘The Nation has royal fever’ or ‘everyone is excited’ etc – they count us ALL as dribbling monarchists. Be insulted. Be noisy. Be Funny. Be daft. Be smart

6 total cringers the Royal Family hope Meghan won’t find out about…

November 28, 2017May 7, 2018 / Revolting Subject / Leave a comment

Hi Meghan, glad you found the site.

Congrats on getting engaged to that bloke. In my opinion, he’s punching above his weight, but hey, I hope you’re happy.

But there’s one or two things you might need to know…

Historically, the royals were always pretty keen on fascism…the historical record shows it was only due to the last American Divorcee (OMG!) to marry a prince that the UK avoided being ruled by a Nazi sympathising King. The Queen mum was also fond of Cecil Rhodes and various other white supremacists, and yes, the queen did throw a Sieg Heil as a child. And god knows what else they’ve hidden. However if you were to propose a documentary to the BBC to scrutinise the Windsor’s toxic political opinions…they’ll suggest some sycophantic drivel with Claire Balding and horse frottage.
Prince Charles thinks spraying coffee up the bum will cure cancer – Ok, this is a somewhat provocative interpretation, but Charles ( 2 A levels) did lecture medical professionals and recommend coffee enemas. Your Fathe- in-law to be is a proud ‘enemy of the enlightenment’ ( if you want to be amazed by his gullibility look up his intellectual guru – and indeed Prince William’s god father – Laurens Van Der Post )
They are awash with dodgy money – us serfs pay for the royals, but guess what – we’re not allowed to know ANYTHING about what they do with the dough. Even when the Queen was recently caught out trying to hide money from…er…Her majesty’s tax inspectors.
You Are Not Allowed To Know
. Prince Andrew and Fergie raked in £15 million for their minging house ( £3m above the asking price ), and the new owners – the son in law of a horrific Kazakhstan dictator – were so delighted with their property, they ignored it for 8 years then knocked it down! Prince Andrew then personally pressurised the head of Coutts bank to take on the dictator as a client. Fancy that !
Prince Harry cheated at his exams. An art teacher at Eton was expected to do some of Harry’s written work for his art exams and other teachers created the paintings he submitted. Poor Miss Forsyth was sacked from the posh school on the most dubious grounds – that she was not cut out for teaching older boys “in the Eton context”. Perhaps she had the temerity to question the integrity of this. Turned out the teacher had a tape of Prince Harry talking to her about her doing the project ( where he admitted he wrote “about a sentence”) , and an employment tribunal ruled entirely in her favour – Prince Harry had cheated, Eton has dubious integrity and she was awarded £45k in costs.
Whilst the Corgis are fed steak from a silver platter, they may suggest you eat horses….When it emerged in 2013 that Tesco burgers ( y’know, the type of thing poor taxpayers buy? ) had horsemeat in them, Princess Anne showed her sensitive side by proclaiming that, actually more subjects should eat horse. And by the way those corgis are served their fine steak in order of seniority. I shit you not – even the corgi’s are subject to hierarchy. The queen lives on a diet of pure swan foam. FACT.
You Meghan… are a feminist ( hurrah, at last, someone with an opinion other than I like the army ). Maybe you could have a conversation with Harry’s uncle – Prince Andrew was involved in the trafficking a vulnerable 17 year old , sent to London, by a paedophile, for the express purpose of spending time with him. The girl in question said she was exploited by royalty. There’s no funny punchline. We pay for him, is the punchline, but that’s just a dismal and pathetic illustration of how little power we have….

All of the above is well known, but rarely spoken about.

But it’s worth reminding the world.

So please share on Facebook & Twitter or print out and pin up in the local Royal Legion.

Welcome to the Firm Meghan.

Reasons to be cheerful

June 29, 2017June 29, 2017 / Revolting Subject / Leave a comment

Making the case against the Monarchy often feels like pissing into royal wind. Because, to my astonishment, most people have an (unexamined) sentimental attachment to this feudal circus.

royal-fans-camped-outside-royal-baby-hospital

Not weirdos

Even obvious royal disasters like the queen interfering in the Scottish referendum or when the Windsors could barely manage to squeeze out a tear between them when poor oul Princess-Of-Hearts-England’s Rose In the Wind died…these awkward historical facts are hastily glossed over. Or sympathetically re-imagined featuring Helen Mirren.

Forlocks are tugged. Grovelling returns.

So for the rebel alliance, it often feels like things will never change – and indeed that is the point of the whole charade – for us plebs gaze at the palaces with half wit wonder and understand that They are immovable – THE ROCK OF MONARCHY on which the glorious UK caste system is constructed.

But then, things never change until they do.

So here’s a couple of republican reasons to be cheerful…

They try to pretend that Queeny is a near deity like in her existence, but she’s human. And she’s going to the Great Royal Enclosure in the sky soon enought (and please, be prepared for an orgy of orchestrated sad face ). And whilst I won’t cheer the death of another person, nor will I feel any sense of loss.Nor should you. You don’t know her either.

Which brings us to the First republican reason to be cheerful – that Charles is next in line, and he is clearly a pitiful ol’ toff with a head full of broken biscuits.

Please feel free to exercise your Republican Anti-Charles muscles here. He’s an unsympathetic character, he’s clumsy, he’s dull.

The second reason is that Harry Windsor’s said something genuinely intriguing – that not one of the Unremarkable Windsor Family actually wants to wear the crown, and that he nearly ran away from the circus.

: Amazing. A FREE MAGIC DINOSAUR EGG!

This is not as satisfying a finale as you and I doing wheelies round the palace corridors whilst raiding the wine cellars, but we would accept their surrender.

Monarchy is a form of child abuse – not as some of the rumour-mongers would have it – but as in, being a royal kid is being brought up as a freak, with no options, no real freedom to grow, and surrounded by flunkeys. 12 year old Harry was forced to stiff upper lip behind his mother’s coffin. C’mon, that’s pretty traumatising. (Interesting that Chazza never even got a ‘thanks Dad’ in same interview)

And thirdly, the role of the right wing media is declining. For years the monarchy has received relentlessly fawning coverage in the newspapers. But who, under the age of 30, buys a newspaper? Social media is doesn’t do pull out souvenir specials.

And there’s only so many hammy Ant’n’Dec specials the royals can do.

So make your voice heard – tweet, facebook, declare yourself a republican. The only other option is to behave as if we already are a republic. When no-one watches royal specials, when no-one turns up at visits, then they’re already gone….

And finally….a self declared, proud republican very nearly became PM. Fancy that !

And to continue our rebellion …you could….y’know….share a link to this blog on Facebook or Tweeter ?

Ready for the revolution compadres.

A republican watches The Crown

June 1, 2017December 8, 2017 / Revolting Subject / 3 Comments

One of the things that Monarchists take pride in, is the pageantry of Monarchy.

The jewels, the palaces, the robes, the titles, the kneeling, curtseying, the portraits, the gold, the wedding, the wealth, the glistening tears trickling down Diana’s soft cheeks…*sniff*

Even I will concede that a few idealistic republicans (UK) frothing around in donkey jackets brandishing witty placards can’t hope compete with that kind of upper class spectacle..

It’s all deliberately theatrical, completely childish, invented tradition and of course, gruesomely compelling

So it’s no wonder dramatists lap up the torrid tale of The Windsor family.

And on holiday – forgive me Rebel Alliance – I watched The Crown.

your critic

It’s brilliantly made, expensive and reeks of fags and bitterness. The cinematographer makes the palaces look damp and depressing, perhaps even like prisons ( the characters are often silhouetted against windows). At £100m for a series, it’s expensive – though of course, at £334m per year, yer real life less exciting monarchy costs us all more ( and entertains us less).

And to my surprise – there is just a hint of skepticism in The Crown.

Amidst all the palace porn & landrovers, there’s the argument that the Monarchy is actually more damaging to the Windsor Family than anyone else. These people are locked in a never ending feudal freak show – they can’t marry who they want, they have to spend a life idiotically waving at plebs and being bovine (which, admittedly, the real Windsors do very well.)

The writer Peter Morgan said in an interview with Radio Times – “That’s the imprisonment of the institution. And the suffering of the family ripples out from the crown, inflicting profound abuse on people upon whom it’s assumed it only projects luxury. It’s a hideous thing for them,” he says, “but as a drama it’s got everything.”

This isn’t the most potent argument against the Monarchy, but The Crown milks the ‘Trapped-in-a-Golden-Cage’ trope for all it’s worth.

On a daily basis, the lumpen masses are encouraged to venerate the demi-gods of the royal family, but this drama tries to humanise them. That’s what counts for royal subversion on TV these days.

Of course, subjects can’t hope for too much. The drama is entirely in sympathetic with the Windsor family and falls into the category of “It’s Hard Living A Life Of Extraordinary Privilege” that will appeal to the Downton viewers in Ohio. It’s said the royals like it. I’m sure they do. Peter Morgan, already has a CBE for services to drama. So he’s already shown he’s happy to be in the Establishment Petting Zoo.

Screen Shot 2017-06-01 at 12.58.17 And yet en route The Crown exposes the stiff, starched idiocy of Monarchy – that Princess Margaret can’t marry some dull bloke, it hints at Phil the Greek being a shagger, and gradually reveals that – who knew – being walled up in a palace for your whole life damages those within.

This is a useful trope for republicans to remember when Big Geoff in the office mutters ‘oh leave them alone’.

The people who make the royal family’s life a misery are… monarchists.

These dullards wet their pants when someone takes a photograph of a royal kiddy, then buy the newspapers and announce their disapproval.

They are the people who always want more, more, more – fawning and clapping dumbly at every royal burp and fart.

If you really want to make Prince George and you want him to lead as ‘normal a life as possible’ then leave them alone.

Let the Windsor family go off and be boring toffs and hunt foxes without us having to pay for them.

Sympathy for the Windsors ? Become a Republican.

My message to you today….

December 12, 2016April 2, 2017 / Revolting Subject / 1 Comment

one-amused-guide-queen-many-faces Even amongst those Who Should Know Better, the received wisdom is that The Queen Never Puts a Foot Wrong.

Maybe its Lizzie’s shoes. ( this article explains that some poor fat peasant actually breaks in the queen’s shoes and – I shit you not – ‘The Queen does not perspire’ )

Or maybe….just maybe…this is She’s OUR PERFECT QUEEN all part of the utterly risible establishment guff ? Part of the way the forelock tuggers constantly & relentlessly usher away an inconvenient pattern of royal contempt for ordinary folk.

Say what you like about royal reporters, Nicholas Witchell is a BLOODY GEM

Lets look at oul’ Betty Windsor and her “faultless” Queening.

She Doesn’t Interfere In Politics : She’s completely neutral. In a Lives In a huge mansion / surrounded by sycophants / loves hunting / staggering wealth given to her for nothing / embodies rigid hierarchy and sentimentalises class inequality- kind of way. “Our” neutral national figurehead is a green welly-ed range rover driving hunting shooting fishing type married to a xenophobic bully and daughter of ‘Alf Garnet in a Tiara‘ who is paraded about in diamonds and a golden carriage.

OK you can argue that’s just cultural politics. One doesn’t actually interfere in the political process does One ? I mean….apart from the BBC’s revelation (followed by snivelling apologetic retraction) about her lobbying the Home Secretary to arrest Abu Hanza ? And apart from the Scottish referendum ? And the sacking of the Australian prime minister ?

These are just the instances we know about. What does she moan about to bowing & curtsying Prime Ministers in her weekly audience ? ( think about that for a minute) Do you think that you’d make small talk about the corgis ? Lets face it. She can, and has, and will interfere in politics in ways we’ll never know about.

She’s Brilliant at Being Queen: Well, compared to who? If your job is to wave and smile

Never puts a foot – or arm -wrong.

for 40 minutes twice a week…she seems a bit….sulky looking to me. Cold. Distant. Stiff. I don’t need my Head of State to be weeping and embracing like an X Factor Finalist, but it’s kind of weird that the only display of genuine emotion was when her taxpayer funded yacht was taken away.

All Elizabeth Windsor really has to do is not offend people for 40 minutes during her dull visits. During one of the many BBC tug-your-forelock-fests, the queen’s ‘legendary’ ( © all papers all the time, no evidence ) sense of humour was recalled as she referred to ambassador’s from another country as ‘a gorilla’ ( no racism there then ). Clap. Clap. Clap. And lets face it, those sulky dull Christmas Messages are hardly a masterclass in charismatic communication.

1877-newspaper-headlines-palace-makeover-or-369m-splurge Even on a practical side, she’s terrible at being Managing the Monarchy – that’s why you, and I, and everyone else is about to cough up £369m to repair the palaces that she has let fall into neglect ( the Sovereign Grant is supposed to pay towards maintenance of palaces, not £8m helicopters for your idle grandchildren ).

She even had the cheek to try to take money from funds meant for the poor.

I have no problems with Elizabeth Windsor being elected queen, if that’s what the people want. But please don’t get your union jack knickers in a twist telling me she’s a brilliant queen. You’ve no idea if she’s a brilliant queen.

Davina might be better at waving, smiling and breeding than Regina. But we have no choice. Nothing to compare Mrs Windsor to.

So there you go.

Her Christmas Message will always be the same.

The message is always…. posh people are in control. From the palaces you pay for, they’ll tell you that the army are great and that they’ve had a tough year.

This is tradition plebs,so don’t question it.

Merry Christmas !

Relentless royal rubbish…

February 24, 2016February 24, 2016 / Revolting Subject / Leave a comment

The pinnacle of british genes

The Windsor family cost us an estimated £334m.

A couple of days a week, they do comfy cushion 45 minute visits but it’s hardly Real Work

They feed their dogs steak from silver trays ( according to rank, even corgis are subject to snobbery ).

Any colour, as long as it’s fawn

And now, fellow serfs – bless your lucky forelock – you are being offered the chance to Clean For the Queen. Get onto your knees Britain… for the approval of someone who believes that every single one of you are inherently and justifiably beneath her.

Not for your community, not for the environment, not for wildlife. But to impress a sour faced old aristocrat who lives in a palace filled with servants. Oh whilst you’re down there grovelling …can you grab that rusty Tennant’s Super can and those Wotsit wrappers…?

And just to underline the unimpeachable integrity of the idea, Clean for the Queen sponsors include…McDonalds, Greggs, Wrigley, Costa – yeah shut your lefty critical mouth, you CANNOT criticise any of those companies for contributing to the litter problem can you ? ( 3% of all litter is fast food related and chewing gum costs a fortune to remove).

Wrigley, keeping the queens highway clean

It’s also worth remembering that those who Did Clean for the Queen had to fight to get a living wage. Maybe she expected them to work for free too.

Occasionally, at Revolting Subject Rebel Command, I think that I’ve spotted the exhaust port in the Royal Death star, and with one republican X wing torpedo, the whole feudal circus will go kaboom ( Princess Leah is allowed to be a princess until the medals are dispersed, but then she must change her name to BunFace McGinty ). And Clean For the Queen feels monumentally unjust.

Think about it – to bail out the banks ( = the super-rich) vast amounts have been cut from essential front line services. The super-rich royals got a 29% pay rise last year. But local councils who clean up the streets ? Cuts, cuts, cuts. The whole Clean for the Queen idea is predicated on the failed ‘Big Society’ premise – ruddy faced toffs at the top of the class pyramid cajole the underlings to clean up for their viewing pleasure ?

The taxes you pay no longer fund binmen and street sweepers – increasingly, it subsidises the lives of the super rich, the private jets, the unaccountable… [ good Monbiot article on tax here]. So services suffer. Clean up serfs. If you don’t a TV documentary crews will turn up and mock the poorest in society for living in squalor.

This isn’t directly the fault of the Windsors of course. But they’re part of this horrible,stinking, vile, social conditioning. Some will fall for it – the Keep Calm and Carry On deference is hard to root out from British culture. But social media allows us to howl at the dumbness of such an approach, to say to the 70 mps – the very MPs who are cutting local authority cleaning budgets – show some concern for the ordinary people rather than sniffing around for gongs and publicity you shameless self centred imbeciles.

Here’s an alternative suggesting: Queen for the Clean Up – announce that the queen will be the last monarch, gently wind down all tax & state support for the Windsor family, give them a palace and couple of horses and let them live a yah lifestyle elsewhere.

Clean out the cynical anti-democratic House of Lords, the dusty posh landowners and sycophantic bauble chasers.

Get off your knees and clean up democracy.

Here. Sign a petition.

Oh yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh THAT WILL DO IT !

EMBARRASSING TRANSPARENT PLEA FOR RTs: There are hundreds of uncritical royal correspondents, hours of Ant n Dec fawning, BBC sycophancy, and an army of civil servants paid for by your tax dedicated to selling the royal circus as harmless fun. So if you can share this post via Facebook or Twitter ( or elsewhere) then it’ll make you cyber Che Guevara.

There’s no evidence oul Queeny is lovely….

January 25, 2016 / Revolting Subject / 2 Comments

Little Maam

“She’s lovely” & “she seems really normal” are the two absurd responses from Forelock Tuggers Who’ve Met the Queen.

Of course, if the BBC stuck a mic under some plebs nose and they scratched their head and announced “She seemed a bit cold and aloof and I didn’t enjoy feeling like a little person” then they’ll never make the daily 6 o’clock fawnfest. That’s the way vox-pops work – it’s about confirming a red courduroy establishment view and the less you know the about the subject the more weight is given to your response. It’s fundamentally patronising to viewer and person being interviewed (ergo it’s perfect for Royal Coverage)

Anyway, there it is. A sacred totem of royal coverage.

The Queen, is lovely.

There’ll be the occasional critic of Charles, and even William these days, but the Queen is UNCRITICISABLE.

*clears throat*

Firstly, lets have some sympathy for ol’ Elizabeth. As Johann Hari wisely argues, Monarchy Damages Everyone the Windsor Family. She was walled up in a palace from the

don’t buy The Sun. Written by the posh, to fool the thick, into hating the poor.

moment she was born. Her uncle – the man who would be King – taught her how to salute the admired Mr Hitler whilst her father was reduced to stammering wreck when he had to become King ( The Kings Speech is a well made film, but it is fiction ).

Being in the monarchy meant that Lizzy had no pals, didn’t go to school, and was not allowed to behave like a normal kid. She hung out with horses and corgis. She was inspecting military regiments by the time she was 16 ( I was slow dancing to Frankie Goes to Hollywood Power of Love with Sally McChristie in my Wranglers when I was 16 . And that was nerve wracking ).

But maybe that’s enough sympathy. This bizarre life warped her.

The Monarchy can’t have it both ways – you criticise the institution and people say “stop it… the queen is lovely’. You criticise the individual members of the Windsor clan and apologists say “it’s not fair to attack them”.

So lets look at some of the queen’s history for evidence of loveliness…

Consider this: When Charles was just 5 years old, the queen went on a royal tour for…6 MONTHS. Then, when she returned, she spent 4 days dealing with paperwork and then a day at the races before she saw poor oul’ Chuck – and then….SHE SHOOK HIS HAND. No wonder Charles is a dithering shuffling basket case.

For more evidence of prince charles’s ‘mummy’ see this Johann Hari article from Independent points out –

“Anthony Jay, who scripted the documentary Elizabeth R, explains: “She’s one of those people who is deeply unemotional. For people who are emotionally detached in that way, institutions become more important than families. The Queen’s children were handed over to nannies, and a kind of emotional cauterisation took place. Something was sealed off very early. For her, that is a strength. If she were emotionally involved, she couldn’t do her job.”

princess-of-wales-princess-diana-29995608-452-597

*weeps*

Despite the cinematic revisionist history, the queen didn’t appear to be upset by the death of Diana, and in fact rigidly stuck to cold protocol until the Blairite government poked her ( Camilla like ) with it’s touchy feely stick and told her to get her royal arse emoting. Dead daughter-in-law ? Cold non reaction ( until told ). For royal yacht britannia – public weeping.

The press often celebrate her casual unpleasantness – with that wry-end-of-the-bulletin-newsreader-smirk…

For example, Royal protection officers who’s job description -lets not forget – is to throw their body onto a grenade if anyone were to attack the queen, made her “furious” by…er… nibbling some of the taxpayer funded nuts left out in bowls in Buckingham palace.

Then there are news stories such as this – the queen being so impatient she couldn’t wait for some toddlers to move aside for her jaguar – had this been about any other aristocrat or celebrity, the tabloids would be lining up experts from the AA to condemn her driving. Instead the Mirror still managed to spin it as Brilliant Royals.

Then there’s the fact that she makes her family curtsy, bow and grovel to her and each other, as she strictly enforces etiquette and protocol. Most people give their granny a hug or at least make a nice cup of tea. The queen makes her family bow to her.

And just..generally. She never looks happy, she looks grumpy, bored, disinterested in the life of gilded privilege and opportunity she was born into. At least an elected head of state would be there of their own volition.

So anyway, every time someone opines The Queen Is Lovely. Stand up and shout NO SHES HORRIBLE and slam the door as you leave the room. This will help the Republican cause enormously.

FINAL SCORE

Seemed Like A Lovely Old Woman 0

Seems Like a Damaged Old Snob 5

[ whiney voice: every day, almost every paper publishes some sycophantic drivel about the Windsor family. Please tweet & facebook this article as a pathetic act of republican defiance]

article-1338484243981-1330b285000005dc-708947_568x387

Tonight I’m gonna party like it’s 1899

The magical Windsor Vagina.

November 18, 2015January 27, 2019 / Revolting Subject / Leave a comment

To become the head of state in Britain, you basically have to emerge from the vagina of someone called Windsor. That’s yer qualifications right there.

This woman made a cake of George. Brain like a sponge.

Ability, talent, intelligence, desire, diplomatic skills, wisdom, looks, popularity – who needs these qualities in a head of state ? Not us ! We’ve got DAS WINDSORS. As I’m fond of blurting out after a few bottles of Frosty Jacks – the thickest, laziest, sleaziest royal is automatically granted more influence & wealth than the hardest working, smartest, coolest working class kid could ever earn.

And by that I mean your kid too. This seems blatantly unfair. They know it.

So the royals like to pretend that they’re a diverse bunch. That there’s a rich and diverse gene pool of talent surrounding the crown. As oppose to a bunch of unimpressive dim toffs spawned from one unremarkable family in the wealthiest part of London.

Charles Mountbatten Windsor is known as: His Royal Highness Prince Charles Philip Arthur George, Prince of Wales, KG, KT, GCB, OM, AK, QSO, PC, ADC, Earl of Chester, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland.

The media often cravenly mutter “In Scotland, where Prince Charles is known as the Duke of Rothesay…“. Er….to be honest, when I nip out for a pint in Glasgow he’s known as that useless tosspot in the barbour jacket.

Andrew Mountbatten Windsor – pretends his name is The Duke of York or In Scotland he’s called The Earl of Inverness. He’s not. Of course if you want to use the less formal term you can call him The One With The Paedophile Friend Who Meets With Trafficked Young Girls For Disgusting Exploitative Reasons. See here.

William ( “Wills” ) is Prince William Arthur Philip Louis Mountbatten Windsor is The Duke of Cambridge ( he doesn’t live in Cambridge). Harry has “WALES” on his uniform, but that’s not his name. The Duke of Edinburgh isn’t seen in Leith much.

Of course, even the Windsors are a confection to keep popular with the plebs. They were the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha family until 1917, when they became the Windsors to hide their Germanic roots (this is pointed out not from xenophobia, but to highlight how certain Eternal Traditions are quickly ignored if it saves their skin ). I’d imagine the Mountbatten will be being discretely dropped….

They’re dull. They’re snobs. Despite a compliant media who do everything they can to create the illusion of a diverse and multiskilled dynamic royal family, reality bites.

They’re a bunch of dull old bores who sit on their arse most of the time. Prince Charles even has a cushion man to ensure his arse is comfortable.

And every time they complain about media intrustion into their private lives, remember that it is the monarchy is the one obsessed with bloodlines…

So who they sleep with…is fair game.

That’s the price one pays for insisting that the finest way to choose a head of state is to finda kinda regina vagina.

Please RT & Facebook Share. I don’t have relentless grovelling media toadys to disseminate such subversion…..]

Glasgow versus the Queen

September 11, 2015November 12, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 7 Comments

In Scotland, there’s a bit of a smart thing going on.

During the referendum Scotland started questioning everything, trying to figure out, from scratch What’s Important For A (Reborn) Country. And even though, in the end, Scots opted to stay in the UK, the country had got the hang of the idea of interrogating the assumptions of the powerful.

This year, the Scottish Government completed a new hospital in Glasgow, the biggest in the country. The entire £842m cost was financed by the Scottish taxpayer, built on time, and without some lame brain PFI malarky. Glasgow, and Scotland is proud of it.

Then a rich old aristocratic woman shows up, who is doesn’t use the NHS, who sits on her arse eating swans in palace 345 miles from Glasgow… she stays for about 45 minutes, says nothing of interest, then pisses off and…..they Name The NHS Hospital After Her.

Glasgwegian. RAGING WITH QUEEN.

Glasgow has an appalling health record, mostly as a result of poverty and vast inequality. But now, as the stricken from Drumchapel, Castlemilk and Govan gasp for help, they will be obliged to say take me to….The Queen Elizabeth University Hospital.

It’s like a sick joke. But, as airport bombers found out, Glasgow likes to put up a fight.

About a mile from the hospital, is Sunny Govan Community Radio, and one if its broadcasters, John Beattie – who worked in the NHS for 10 years – felt annoyed enough to started a petition saying that “we the people oppose the new South Glasgow University Hospital being named after a monarch“, hoping for a few thousand signatures.

So far, over 13,500 people have signed the petition. ( please sign here)

Purple faced and pathetic, NHS Glasgow Glasgow Health board hit back, claiming it was ‘an honour’ for staff & patients to meet the queen and have the hospital named after her.

Lets ask the staff then….. A senior Dr Keith McKillop wrote to the Glasgow Herald saying….

“Queen Elizabeth is the most potent symbol of the glaring inequalities in our society, a vivid representation of the growing gulf between rich and poor. The name of the new hospital is not unimportant. One of my other bits of paper is an honours degree in theology, so I’m qualified to know that symbols carry meaning, power and influence. I am reluctantly obliged to reinforce the illusion that our hospital, and therefore our health, is the charitable gift of a benevolent monarch to her less fortunate subjects.”

Dr McKillop goes on to say that the general feeling amongst staff is far from being ‘honoured’ they are either indifferent or object to the name.

Contrary to recieved wisdom, some Doctors can write very clearly…he goes on…

“The association of royalty with healing is a medieval superstition with no place in the 21st century NHS. How can I realistically encourage the people of Glasgow to take responsibility for their health and wellbeing, for self-improvement, when the renamed hospital perpetuates the ideal of an inflexible social order? It suggests they should take life as it comes and accept their subsidiary position. It quite literally subjugates its patients.”

Bravo Dr McKillop !

So who made this crass offensive decision ?

Such was the controversy that Andrew Robertson ( OBE ! Ha ! ), the chairman of Greater Glasgow Health Board wrote to the Glasgow Herald, “explaining” that they couldn’t consider a range of different names for the hospital as it would result in disappointment for those who’s preferred names weren’t chosen (this is establishment patronising speak for It’ll End In Tears…).

He claimed that Senior staff and senior nurses ‘considered’ the royal name ( and, it is implied, approved). But when the Herald made a request to see the minutes of the meetings, it turns out they didn’t exist.

Inviting this uneducated privately treated woman to Daimler up to Scotland to name the hospital after herself cost over £100,000 ( this was only revealed after a Wings Over Scotland submitted a FoI request).

It looks unlikely that the hospital will be renamed. Naming a hospital after a royal is a risible idea, and I hope members of the Scottish government are squirming with embarrassment,

But at least Glasgow didn’t roll over and fawn. And that’s a start.

( despite the fact that -for once – this IS an interesting royal news story, it got very little attention, so please share on Facebook and Twitter and spray on the walls of royal palaces. Ta.)

UPDATE: 12 November 2015 – having gathered over 16,000 names, the petition is now closed.

5 moments the royals proved they are Shit At Their Job.

July 22, 2015March 2, 2016 / Revolting Subject / 3 Comments

The royals jobs description should be – Be a groomed toff, shake hands, smile and mute your thicko opinions. Some can do this ( *bows obscenely to Stepford Royal Wife Kate* ), some can’t.

Despite this imbecilic formula – on an almost weekly basis they say something stupid, insensitive, offensive or utterly inappropriate. A pliant press fall over themselves to excuse their idiocy as ‘A Gaffe’ – as if, we should enjoy an Only Human moment of informality in the Buttock Tightened world of Royal Protocol.

Lets not call them ‘gaffes’. Lets call it Being Shit At Their Job

Racist, crass, embarassing and thick. Even his own son called him a bully.

1. Prince Phillip bullies a wee boy to tears – at Salford University, Phil the Bullying Tyrant ( © Prince Charles ) meets a 13 year old kid who tells him he wants to be an astronaut. “You could do with losing weight” judges a man who lived his life in a palace surrounded by unctuous yesmen.

Poor Wee Fella. Horrible Old Shit.

The kid said afterwards “‘The other people were laughing but I didn’t find it a very good joke because I am sensitive about my weight. I felt like crying but I had to keep a strong face.”.

Poor wee Strong Face. PRINCE PHILLIP YOU’RE SHIT AT YOUR JOB.

Man of the (rich) people

2. Prince Andrew a Diplomatic Disaster: He turns up at Lockerbie and tells a grieving community that ‘it was much worse for the americans’. His best pals include a paedosadist ( see my vitriolic blog post Barely Regal ) and Gaddafi’s son. His marriage was an embarassment, ( 500k ? To be instroduced to Prince Andrew ? WHAT ? ) there’s the highly dubious sale of his crass crappy house and the American government is laughing at his sheer stupidity as revealed in Wikileaks. He’s an arrogant talentless clown, and possibly a criminal. He was sacked from his role, but mummy slapped another medal on him and he’s still wheeled out as if he’s working for the UK. Oh, and in case you’re all sadface for unemployed Andy, this minger just spunked £13m on a ski chalet. Love the royals ? Then you Love His Pudgy Face and Want To Kiss Him with his dirty big venison breath tongue in yours. PRINCE ANDREW IS SHIT AT HIS JOB ( & should be questioned by the cops )

Actually, Anne, I’ll just have tea & a biscuit

3. Prince Anne – Let Them Eat Horses – this is just one of those bizarre things posh people say. And it was pronounced at a moment when cheap horse meat had been found in poor peoples food, it was insulting .I mean, Anne doesn’t say much, so it was bizarre that this equine-a-holic blurted out that we should be eating Black Beauty. “If it doesn’t fart or eat hay she isn’t interested” said Prince Phillip ( ok, Revolters, we can admit that’s quite funny from the oul’ goat). PRINCESS ANNE – YOU’RE ACTUALLY OK AT BEING A MUTE TOFF BUT YOUR SHIT AT DINNER ADVICE.

4. I’m not racist, I even pretend to be a half caste – Princess Michael of Kent once opined. This was defending herself after barking at black people in New York restaurant to ‘go back to the colonies’. Of course toffs being racist is indulged and overlooked in a way it would never be for ordinary folk. But even at that …Princess Michael of Kent is a Royal Idiot amongst Royal Idiots. When trying to defend Prince Harry after nazi-gate ( Nazi Gate part I) she said ‘most of the English believe the wogs begin at Calais’. She said public breast feeding was a ‘dreadful practice’ and adding that she didn’t breastfeed because ‘my nanny said it was disgusting’. This horrible ol’ trout may be a fringe royal but she is still patron of many charities and we’re supposed to tug the forelock to her…PRINCESS MICHAEL OF KENT, YOU’RE SHIT AT YOUR JOB.

5. Prince William – Lets Mock the Poorest Having attended Eton ( poshest of posh), then St Andrews ( strategically forced to go to Scotland – think about it – to attend posh university ), then Sandringham ( posh army thing ) Prince

Nastyness in the Heir

William and his posh officer mates dressed up as…. Britain’s poorest people ! What snobs call ‘a chav’. Hilarious ! Imagine being poor ! We will mock them for not having any of the opportunities and privileges we take for granted ! Ha Ha they wear cheap jewellery not the Crown Jewels ! And William even brandished a baseball bat – yeah that’s right, the poor are feral savages with violent tendencies…He’s NOT EVEN POOR, in fact he’s going to be the fuckin’ King ! What a LAUGH ! Geddit ? PRINCE WILLIAM – SHIT AT YOUR JOB.

Of course they don’t have to be good at their jobs. You and I can’t have their jobs. No one can. Your children can’t have Prince George’s job. In fact, Prince George can’t even have another job.

KNOW YOUR PLACE – either suck right up to those Windsors… or actively tell them where to shove it…

As ever, be a revolting dude or a revolting duderino and share via Facebook or Twitter. We’re up against relentless royal propaganda at all times.

Sharing this makes you like social media version of Che Guevara. And one retweeter will get a free motorbike!*

*not true.

They assume you love the Windsor Family

July 13, 2015April 23, 2018 / Revolting Subject / Leave a comment

We’re relentlessly told that the Monarchy projects a good image of the UK on a world stage.

Er… posh, stale, bloodsport loving, thick, white, boorish, military cloned hereditary Windsor Yahs – is that what we want the world to think of first when they think of the UK in 2015?

I know the snootyness actually appeals to some ( “oh gee I love your Downtown Abby” ) but c’mon we don’t sentimentalise rickets, or workhouses, or other symptoms of class discrimination.

I’ve battered on about the arguments against royalty here, there and everywhere, and Republic do it better at their Winning the Argument section. But sometimes logic doesn’t make people change their minds.

What’s important, is to change perceptions, to point out that the Windsors are naff. Are ugly and uncool. Are as appealing as Nicholas Witchell’s lesbian crushing bumhole.

There will always be Peasant Crown Monkeys who gimp it up for the camera….

People like this guy – who wrote Diana and Dodi’s name on his face every day at the Diana inquest. You’ll also spot him at outside their private hospital festooned in union jacks.

“I’ve always been a Diana fan, but last year I woke up one day and decided to paint her name on my forehead – it just felt right,”

Ok, I’m a sarcastic snidey blogger and don’t want to be cruel to this man but clearly…he has a few issues. But again and again, the uk media and (embarrassingly) the international media love these ‘umble types, and play up the idea that they’re representative of attitudes towards the Windsors.

And who else do they count as a monarchists ?

You actually. The media default assumption is we all are. If Das Feudal Circus is in town and an office worker munching on tasty Greggs sausage roll dawdles over to the kerb for a gawp, they’re hailed by the press as a royal ‘well-wisher’, who ‘welcomed’ that vulgar big Bentley into town.

Anyone staring at the bizarre freakshow family is portrayed as in thrall to the monarchy.

And every criticism is shunned and buried, no-one draws attention to disinterest…

Consider the scandalous fact that Scotland’s newly opened hospital – built entirely with public money – was opened by the queen in front a few hundred folk, some of whom were keen to see the monarchy, some of whom were just hanging out.

For unfathomable reasons the hospital was named the Queen Elizabeth University hospital Glasgow ( despite the fact that the queen doesn’t use the nhs, hasn’t been to university, and purred with pleasure down the phone to David Cameron when Scotland shat it at the referendum. Glasgow voted yes ).

So far so tediously predictable..

Don’t let them count you as a Monarchist.

People Behave Like Freaks Around the Royal Family

June 17, 2015May 24, 2020 / Revolting Subject / 2 Comments

One of the regular heavy boots moments in British civic life is when sane, smart people melt in the presence of royalty.

Whether it’s Wiggo kneeling down, or PJ Harvey scurrying off to Buckingham Palace to become A Member of the British Empire, a little part of me weeps every time someone (formerly) cool accepts a gong or tugs the forelock ( even if they claim it’s for their nan. )

It doesn’t matter what the excuse – when the call came they obediently fell to their knees for a Sir or to get letter after their name ( EPZ – Establishment Petting Zoo – in recognition that when asked to, they opted to place themselves above the people).

But the corrupt gong-a-dong world of honours is a post for a separate time.

What is it with normal folk becoming idiots in the presence of Windsors ?

Look at this video, of the Queen’s guard, presented to us so we can sneer….

The poor man was just distracted yet he’s shoved, shouted at and ridiculed. It’s horrible boorish behaviour by some tossers in red coats under the pretence of tradition. Yeah boys, you’re all fuckin’ heroes, why don’t you bayonet the poor old guy for Her Maj ?

But even more disturbing is this kind of behaviour. Again, here’s the clip….

The poor kid gets battered in the face by a soldier – AND NOBODY HELPS HER BECAUSE THE QUEEN IS MORE IMPORTANT.

Are they not human ?

It was like the time a pageboy collapsed during the Queens Speech and nobody reacted. In fact the royal press pack swooned at her callousness.

Of course these incidents are accidents and not directly due to the pathetic Feudal Freak Show, but nobody present reacts. What is WRONG with these people ? A kid is hurt, a wee boy faints, and their priority is to ensure that nothing disrupts their precious grovelling protocol ?

Please tweet or Facebook this. Everyday we’re foi-grassed royal pish. Fight back.

Prince Andrew – Barely Regal…..

May 28, 2015July 7, 2019 / Revolting Subject / 4 Comments

Prince Andrew, is repellent.

There are many scandals associated with the boorish, rude, cocky clown ( just remember he represents ‘us’ around the world. *slow clap*).

There’s the fact that he sold his crappy tasteless house in circumstance that reek of corruption…..

And that you could buy an audience with him….

And that a man on a ‘modest naval pension’ this year bought a ski chalet for £13m ?

But for the sake of brevity, lets focus on the most obvious scandal.

I’m quoting from this excellent article in Vanity Fair….

As the article reveals, in 2010, a journalist called Buckingham palace and revealed they were about to publish an interview with….

“a young woman named Virginia Roberts, who claimed that the billionaire American money manager Jeffrey Epstein had trained her as an under-age prostitute and flown her to London in 2001, when she was just 17 years old, for the express purpose of spending time with Prince Andrew “

“According to Virginia [ she was recruited ] as Epstein’s “sex slave” when she was 15 years old and arranged for her to see Andrew three times, in London and New York and on Epstein’s private Caribbean island, Little Saint James. She said she’d been “sexually exploited by Epstein’s adult male peers, including royalty.”

None of this has been explained adequately. Study the incriminating sleazy photo of Andrew’s Windsor’s fat sweaty mitts on a vulnerable young girl who’s been trafficked to him – can you imagine any MP or public servant who’d survive such a sleazy snap ? Without even being questioned about it ? The more recent ‘charges’ against Andrew may not be being pursued – but this is a technicality, not an exoneration.

Think about it. Look at her.

She’s a young girl. Who was groomed and exploited by a convicted paedophile. Was flown to London. And she was ‘given’ to Prince Andrew Duke of York. Or, in laymans term, a grotesque old rich pervert who thinks he’s above the law.

Can you think of an innocent explanation ? Why did Andrew go to meet her and why was a 17 year old from Florida accompanied by Robert Maxwell’s daughter?

Fortunately for Grand Old Duke Of York, he’s not held to account because of the media’s supine attitude to royalty. In his presence royal “journalists” refuse to put him on the spot. Forget Monarchists versus Republicans, you’d hope that for the sake of a disturbed young woman they’d at least have the moral courage to ask…. ‘Mr Windsor – can you explain why a teenager was flown in a paedophile’s private jet to meet you in private ?’ (come to think of it – how is this ugly man actually allowed into schools and near young people ? ).

Virgina Roberts was 17 when she met 51 year old Prince Andrew. In UK terms, this doesn’t constitute a crime. But it sickens us all. Workers pay taxes and fund this sleazebag’s repellent lifestyle. Oh, and make sure you call him Your Royal Highness.

There are plenty of blogs online that will scream accusations against the royals of paedophilia. I am not one of them. It’s a heinous accusation and though there are many unanswered questions – there seems to be no actual evidence and my objection to the monarchy is political. But the Virginia Roberts story exposes how the secrecy laws surrounding the royal family – exempt from Freedom of Information requests allowed greater personal privacy that others – is horrific and unjust.

So what can be done ? Not a lot it seems. There was a suggestion of a BBC panorama about Andrew, but there’s no sign of it. The royal family arrogantly refused to even look at legal documents.

Of course, the blinkered fawning monarchists will declare that The Queen can run her household and discipline her children.

So what did Elizabeth Windsor do when her favourite son was accused of having a groomed teenager trafficked to London for his use ?

She gave him the highest medal for service to the queen.

Then, earlier this year, after the toxic scandal resurfaced, the queen…. made Andrew Vice Admiral of the Navy.

Amazingly, even some of the hardcore royal press pack were sickened….( this is the Express’s reporter’s tweet)

Anyone reading our press would assume that we all have a bovine love and for the ugly toffs of the Windsor family.

So please retweet and share on facebook.

Don’t criticise the media, become the media.

Actually, you don’t like the royal family as much as you think you do…

May 15, 2015December 24, 2018 / Revolting Subject / 8 Comments

I sort of understand if you’re a daft tourist visiting Britain, and you want to gawp at the weirdo freakazoid Brit monarchy (though of course the whole Good For Tourism thing is somewhat mythical ). But many smart, politically aware UK citizens Who-Should-Know-Better go slightly soft in the head when it comes to the Windsor Family.

So I’ve prepared a little diagnostic test to solidify your royal love….

1) Do you think snobbery – real and symbolic – should be celebrated ?

Despite the countless – gor blimey Prince ‘Arry’s just One of the Lads type coverage- The Monarchy is Built on Snobbery. The premise of the royal family is that these dullard poshos are inherently finer than anyone else, and therefore we must all bow, curtsey and call them Your Highness.

If you think ‘oh-mate-piss-off-with-that’ then… don’t indulge the monarchy.

Your granny might like the queen, but the queen thinks your lovely oul’ granny is a caste beneath her and insists on grovelling from all inferior blood….

If you write to the queen, you are advised to sign off – ‘I have the honour to be, Madam, Your Majesty’s humble and obedient servant’. Thanks Betty, the media may love your Golden Reign….but not me…

2) Do you like that our ‘ideal family’ kill animals for Toff Fun? Hilariously, the queen is the patron of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty To Animals – this Fig Leaf is a classic case of Who’s-Getting-The-Endorsement here ? Because the queen, her husband, her sons, her grandsons love nothing more than killing animals with other florid faced hooray henrys. Prince Phillip ( patron, World Wildlife Fund ) is particularly unrepentant – loving blasting the fuck out of anything that moves, including a couple of tigers ( and don’t give me the That Was Then argument, it was hugely controversial even at the time). And Prince Charles – after a life of pampered luxury at our expense – threatened to leave Britain if democratically elected government banned fox hunting….still waiting Chuck….

By the way, that stupid scene in “The Queen” where Helen Mirren doesn’t shoot the deer ? HA ! Royals love shooting animals and show no compassion, the old royal dear would have blasted the poor Scottish deer and drank diana’s blood from it’s antlers. Or run it over in a tunnel with a white Fiat.

3) Do you approve of the Old Boys network ?

Prince Charles got into Cambridge University. His grades ? Oh, after an expensive education and every advantage in life, he got 2 A-levels a B and a C. Prince Edward too attended Cambridge with…a C and two D’s. Throughout life, these lazy thicko clowns cheat and are helped to avoid exposing their lack of talent. Obstacles are removed and meritocracy is trampled . Your friends, your children and you will not be allowed such leeway. And to make matters worse….patronage is alive and well, and they endorse other toffs..…

That’s right. That BBC article claims the Palace endorsed David Cameron. And we’re all laughing our way to the foodbank.

Thought ALL PILOTS in RAF were supposed to have perfect vision ?

4) Do you like rich lazy people who can never ever lose their job ?

When the royals turn up to open some NHS hospital they’ll never attend, the BBC, the papers and the monarchists bore on about how amazingly hardworking they are ( yeah, forget the nurses / firemen etc, praise the toffs). But think about it – typically, a royal engagement takes about 45 minutes. They Rolls Royce up, they are fawned over, they shake hands, they look bored. Then, they are whisked off again. That, is what the royal press calls ‘hard work’. They can sometimes manage 2 or 3 of these dullard appointments a day, and therefore at the end of the year proclaim how many Engagements they took on.

Prince William – after leaving the RAF ( early, costing taxpayer money)

worked only the equivalent of 46 days in a year. This was only revealed due to excellent work by Republic ( join here ). Poor William, his hard graft included two trips to the cinema, 14 to a show, sports event or theme park, 21 parties, 10 a dinners, 2 Church services. My heart bleeds….

Nice work if you can get it. ( But you can’t. Unless you emerge from a magic Windsor vagina.)

On the other hand when they sit on their arse being tended to by a litany of butlers and servants, nobody complains. Or reports.

5) Do you think rich aristocrats should be allowed to abuse public funds ?

Most of these stories are hidden now due to the scandalous lack of accountability around the royal family, but there’s still plenty of evidence. Princess Anne used (funded) Queen’s helicopter cause she didn’t want to miss her beloved horses. You pay for that. The queen tried to use funds earmarked for her poorest citizens to heat her large empty palaces…Prince Andrew even allows his paedo pal to use RAF bases to land his private plane….

OK are we ready ? WHO LOVES THE ROYAL FAMILY ?

…

Bueller ? Bueller ?

[ Everyday, the media publish relentless uncritical grovelling nonsense about the Windsors, so, in the interests of balance, please share this article on Facebook and Twitter ]

royal baby 2: awwwww cute feudalism…..

May 2, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 13 Comments

You can’t hate a baby.

It’s just not fair. But what happens between a wee Windsor girl born …..and them growing into an arrogant Prince Andrew-esque monster that strides the globe offending every poor soul he encounters ?

Well, from the moment the kid emerges from the Magic Head Of State Producing Vagina…. the poor wee mite’s fate is sealed. Welcome to the Non Stop Golden Snobby Feudal Freakshow !

Immediately, the media tells us how brilliant this baby is. They tell us to bow down and be grateful. They tell us this baby is VERY IMPORTANT, and there’s rolling coverage despite the fact that 61% of people polled have said they are Not Interested. Mostly, it’s only loonies and feebles who are excited. When a frothing Kay Burley asked people outside the hospital for a reaction ( when George was born), one of them suggested he’d heard it was ‘a black boy’ ( ha ! Even The Magic Head Of State Producing Vagina’s not THAT magic ).

What’s overtly implied, is that royal babies are more important than Your Baby. Am I overstating it ? Maybe a bit – obviously the press and PR push the Awww….We Love The New Baby angle – but stop blubbing into your Nicholas Witchell Memorial Royal Hankie and examine the “logic” of monarchy.

No matter how hard your kids work, no matter how smart and clever they are, no matter how much talent and charm they have, your kids will never be as important as this girl. Your kids will not be considered to be head of state. Because our head of state is based solely on the rather obnoxious idea of Bloodlines. The pathetic idea is that the Windsor family are intrinsically superior. The queen – a keen snob- has even decreed Kate she must curtsy to other princesses when blando Will isn’t about.

No wonder Republic had the admirable Born Equal campaign. I mean, come on…over the decades the horse munching, repeatedly racist, snobby, nazi loving, tampon impersonating, tiger shooting Windsor clan have been consistently dysfunctional.

Once you accept the argument that they’re clearly not anything special, then the whole dumb facade that we should grovel to these florid cheeked lazy yahs falls apart.

So if this new baby is brought up in the Windsor tradition, it’ll be fawned over, given it’s every need, have nannies, servants, have its primary school teachers bowing down, be followed by bodyguards at every step, be pursued by bovine monarchists, become a target for terrorists, have his first girlfriend / boyfriend speculated about, be supplied with copies of Razzle by the butler, be denied a private life ( and if you’re going to insist on a bloodline monarchy then you can’t complain when people take an interest in who you’re firing into…). The thing is monarchy fucks you up. It’s not the kids fault. As I’ve argued before, the best bit of parenting that William Windsor and Kate Thingy could do is to move to a remote ranch in California and let the wee ones grow up ‘normal’.

Cue a posh dinner table in the Napa Valley in 2030… A 15 year old skategirl …looks at her baldy fat father… “So like…ummm….when we were royal the public just like…ummm…thought we were better than them…? That must So suck….”

It’s not the sprog’s fault. Yet.

A Modest Proposal: Use the NHS

April 15, 2015January 23, 2019 / Revolting Subject / 8 Comments

We’re constantly told by the Ruling Classes that The Royals Represent Us.

As I’ve venom-ed elsewhere, this is risible regal guff.

In a world full of slobbering sycophants and relentless royal fawnery – I don’t like to help the Windsor family with their PR at all….but whilst we wait for that guillotine bought on ebay, I have a modest suggestions.

Get one’s royal arse to the NHS.

Bizarrely, at the opening of each new NHS hospital, the royal family turn up, awkward and blazered. They pull a wee rope, try to hide how bored they are, patronise the staff, nod at some equipment, then 45 minutes later hop into their luxury cars and get rushed back to one of their many palaces ( this is what the papers call ‘hard working royals’ ). In some respects, it’d be more appropriate if they turned up to close NHS wards given the drain on the national finances….

Well know sex trafficker and boor Prince Andrew declares he’d like to leave now

But when Das Windsor get the golden trots, or need their heir pulled, or get their piles fixed, they don’t trust the NHS. Even though – scandalously – they only have an NHS surgery which no one else can use in Buckingham Palace. And they interfere and try to make the NHS spunk money on their uninformed idiotic ideas. Anyway when they get the lurgy, all their faux NHS interest and bland nodding disappears, and like a rat up a golden-drainpipe, they scuttle off to some expensive private hospital. The press rarely draw any attention to this.

Imagine how good it would be if the headline was “Toff Tot: Kate snubs NHS again”?

Of course monarchists will waffle on about security and a load of other bollocks to justify their snooty preferences. Just think of the positive endorsement it would give the NHS. It would show solidarity with the people. It would reveal to the world how good the NHS is. It would show commitment to something that we all use.

But the monarchy is steeped in snobbery, and they won’t. And even if they did it’d be tokenistic.

But amidst the impending royal-baby idiocy that most of us aren’t even interested in, it’s good to at least draw attention to the fact that, feudal sprogs emerge from magic windsor vaginas ( you wanna be head of state? You didn’t fall from a Windsor Womb ? Fugedabout it ) in private hospitals that cost £6k a night.

To them, NHS staff are from the wrong caste.

Everyday, every newspaper churns out royal praise and platitudes. Please tweet or share this blog on Facebook as a Tiny Act Of Resistance.

7 Reasons to Revolt against All This Royal Bum Dribble

March 31, 2015March 31, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 3 Comments

1) They’re unreformed snobs. You are supposed to sycophantically BOW or CURTSEY when you meet these thick dullards. I mean, c’mon people, show some self respect. Brits strut about claiming they take No-shit from anyone yet grovel and tug their forelock when faced with Prince Andrew’s beefy visage ? If your inner serf can’t help it and you do want to bow – be consistent, and bow to every posh rich aristocrat you meet. If you can’t grovel in person, and you want to write to the queen – the official website recommends you sign off with ‘I have the honour to be, Madam, Your Majesty’s humble and obedient servant’.

Wiggo shows what a Rebel He Is, by, er…kneeling and bowing at the Establishment Petting Zoo

2) They’re EXPENSIVE and our funds are used to keep them in pampered luxury. Of course the BBC will trot out the old Buckingham Palace bollocks about ONLY £36 million a year ( even that – for ONE FAMILY !) equating it with costing a few pennies per ‘umble serf per week. This is deeply disingenuous, but of course, they face no scrutiny. Other European monarchy’s cost much less. Republic ( yes, you should join ) estimate that the true cost to taxpayer- including security, and royal visits is at least 9 TIMES that at nearly £300m. And for this, they get servants to squeeze toothpaste onto their toothbrush

3) They’re EMBARRASSINGLY CRAP AT THEIR “JOB”. So basically, their job is to nod and smile and be pleasant – how come the queen is such a sour faced trout every-time she appears ? Of course BBC multi-cam directors don’t often cut to her dour dish, but occasionally a revealing shot slips through and she often looks like a bulldog chewing a wasp. I mean, fair enough, if I was watching a sycophantic sex offender singing a crap song, I too might be bored, but Liz, for fucks sake, it’s your job to at least look like you’re enjoying sitting on your arse in the finest seat at your party / the Olympic opening ceremony / new year at the millennium dome. We only catch a glimpse of the Crown Frown inadvertently on live TV spectacles, and the press only print pics of beaming Betty. As for royal diplomacy, well, Charles just compared Putin to Hitler, and if you’re looking at them as role models, then there’s Prince Andrew, who’s repulsive paedophile friend flew a vulnerable teenage girl across the world for a private meeting with Andrew. Crap at events, crap role models. That only leaves waving. They can wave from luxury limos, I’ll give them that.

4) They’re Naff. I mean some tolerate them as – supposedly – They Bring In The Tourists. This is highly dubious in any case, but my point is… just look at them – do you want the UK being defined globally by a sycophantic culture

of deference to some corn-beef cheeked inbred toffs ? Do intelligent England fans not cringe at every international where they got to sing about ‘send her victorious / happy and glorious / long to reign over us’ ? If you’re not cringing already, here’s an American giving the whole thing a kicking….

5) They Cement the 1% – repeat after me – “the thickest, laziest, dumbest royal will be given more influence and respect than the smartest most hardworking person I know…”. You and I can never be royal ( cue ), and They can never be sacked. They are at the top of the class pyramid. They get promoted in the military. They cheat at school. They secretly think people should not try to rise above their station. And sadly, lots of feeble minded forelock tuggers think This Is The Natural Order Of Things. The whole ‘tradition’ argument, their enormous wealth, and the ridiculous idea that we must automatically respect them acts as a useful fig leaf for a society where the richest are not challenged nor asked to redistribute.

6) It’s Cruel – a tiny bit of sympathy for them here – they’re born into a feudal freakshow. That wee baby George has almost no say in his future – his course in life is to be a Windsor. The boy who’s born to be king, is cursed. Any parent ( with the amount of money William & Kate have) worth their salt would up and leave.

7) This photograph

Please share this article were ‘soft monarchists’ can read it. The Windsors get effusive praise almost every day from every newspaper, and nobody makes the argument against their duffness. We need to rattle the golden cages….

Who’d be POTUK?

March 29, 2015March 29, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 4 Comments

One of the problems of being ANTI-monarchist is that you’re essentially defining yourself as Against Them. A Negative Force. It’s sort of exhausting, curmudgeonly, bad karma. On royal bank holidays, you’re the Pain-In-The-Arse griping about the Windsors as you quaff a sneaky wee beer under the bunting ( note. there’s no bucking funting where I live). You’re the one offending the Nice Oul’ granny who likes Kate.

And when the media do pay lip-service to republicanism (almost never) we’re portrayed as quaint eccentrics, with outlandish views ( worth a listen to this mad monarchist from about 3.20). Bizarrely, it’s often framed as evidence of how jolly good sports monarchists are – sort of Isn’t Britain Bloody Great Because We Tolerate Those Who Question Her MAJESTY….

Part of the problem is that the positive case for a Constitutional Alternative ( I know…yawn right ? ) can’t be condensed into a pithy tweet or retort. I’ve tried.

But it’s good to plant the seed of an alternative UK, a Head Of State.

I say this because the as soon as you mention an elected President the monarchists veins begin to bulge and wee foamy bits of spittle appear on their trembling lip until they play their Ace Card…

“What ? I suppose you’d prefer PRESIDENT BLAIR ?”

This is an utterly feeble line of attack and in fact an insult to the electorate. As if that’s the best option. As if the trauma of being abandoned by the Windsors would put the public into such a depression that they’d immediately vote for a war mongering lying politician that the majority of them hate. When some monarchist clown pipes up with the President Blair line it simply affirms that they’ve never had the imagination to contemplate any alternative to the monarchy.

So if not Blair, then who ?

I remember years ago some columnist writing – why don’t we make Michael Palin our head of state ? He seems like a lovely man, he’s self effacing and polite. He’s good at meeting people from other countries without spouting lazy racist stereotypes, he smiles a lot, drinks tea and is kinda funny. I don’t care who our first elected head of state is ( or indeed, if we need one), but the stardust Michael Palin thought is a useful one just to contrast with the turgid spectacle of the Windsors double-breasting their way through the next century.

Or Clare Baulding. I mean, OBVIOUSLY I can’t bear her Barbour-Jacketed Top Girl schtick- but y’know – she’s like an uber Windsor only more skilled with the media. Horses, poshness, sport, communicates. And she’s gay which gives a bit of international kudos (there’s certain places in Empire she couldn’t visit).

Or…anyone really.

A president could serve ten year terms, or retire without it being ‘a constitutional crisis’. President’s can be black, gay, disabled, catholic, muslim, eccentric, transexual – all those things that the Daily Mail would scream about if the Windsor family showed any sign of. A president would be entitled to more personal privacy – after all, the press have an absolute right to sniff around the Windsors private life because of the unignorable fact that the Head of State is dependent on bloodline. If they’re shagging around, it’s a perfectly valid story.

A president would also want the job, as opposed to some poor intellectually feeble snob out of his depth forever moaning that he doesn’t get enough influence on politics.

And it wouldn’t cost us so much. They could have one palace, instead of 8. They would have met real people before, and not have been brought up surrounded by flunkeys.

Of course, we’d get a duff Head of State occasionally – but….we do anyway. And if we get a Boris, we can always vote him out.

Finally, in these political times, consider that the queen gets £13m annually, and Prince Charles gets £19m from the Duchy of Cornwall.

Michael D Higgins, the poet president of Ireland has a salary of €270,000.

One of his first acts when elected…. was to reduce it to €207,000.

Well played Mr President.

Ruddy Prince Charles, the Jar Jar Binks of the Windsors

March 26, 2015March 5, 2019 / Revolting Subject / 4 Comments

Prince Charles. Even saying his name is like a sigh or a roll of the eyes.

His full name is Charles Phillip Arthur George Mountbatten Windsor (aka Prince Charles aka The Prince of Wales aka The Duke of Rothesay ) but c’mon folks, get a grip – this is 2015, not 1715. Look beyond the grandiose titles these clowns anoint themselves to remind you that they consider themselves above you. So what do we see ? A morose, dim, arrogant, uncharismatic, meddling ol’ dullard who you wouldn’t want to sit next to at a wedding.

Yeah yeah, poor Charles – I know, yeah yeah, uncaring mother , an aggressive tyrant father ( Jonathan Dimbleby reports that Phil The Greek would ‘seem intent on correcting the Prince but mocking him as well, so that he seemeed to be foolish and tongue tied in front of friends and family…the small boy was frequently reduced to tears ‘ – awww, the role model family ). Bullied at school ( he wrote to the queen to tell her he was getting battered but as is the form for posh people, she ignored him). He meets Diana 13 times then gets married to the teenager sloane.

Being in the monarchy fucks people up and if they weren’t so steeped in it’s stupid upper-class snobby ethos they’d figure that out and waltz away ( see my tender plea to Willz)

But we’re stuck with Charlie Windsor the damaged moany faced Meddler. In British culture there’s always been a weird tradition of indulging and in fact celebrating the eccentricities of the posh.

But, please lets not celebrate a man who….

Despite his privileged education, he has only 2 A-levels ( B in history, C in French, this was good enough to get him into Cambridge, please don’t try this at home kids )… yet happily lectures healthcare professional that coffee enemas can cure cancer ? Eh..actually….no, you’re alright Charles, I’m fine with tea thanks.

My favourite letter about Charles. I wondered who dared to publish such searing truth ? Turns out it was Viz.

Nor has Oul’ Carbuncle Face has no architectural training whatsoever but decrees what architecture should be, abusing his position and promoting the tweeville town Poundsbury…He’s an eager fox hunter and has a werido Haywain vision of the countryside, he once complained that farmers are being treated worse than “blacks or gays”. A couple of years ago one of his Countryside Heroes was a ‘scyther’. Yeah, Chaz – you’re so taking the pulse of country life !

I could go on about this self proclaimed ‘enemy of the enlightenment’ – and the damage he does.

Where does he get the confidence ? Well, surrounded by flunkeys, yes-men and a media who report every Posh-Fud-Has-An-Opinion story as if Moses himself had come back from the palace with tablets of stone. As always with royal bumfawnery – there is no context given – nobody questions whether Prince Charles has any authority or expertise. He’s never interviewed or held to account.

Hilariously, Charles even has the temerity to criticise others for aspiring – those who believe they could be “pop stars, High Court judges, TV presenters or heads of state” without putting in the effort ( putting in the effort means….falling out of a windsor womb). So much for all that Prince’s Trust guff ( do not get ideas above your station young people.)

The most incredible story has been the saga of the Spider Letters.

The palaces rationale for keeping them secret….that they would “seriously damage” Charles role as monarch if they were disclosed is beyond parody. The plebs can’t see his letters to the government because if they plebs saw this buffoon’s attempts to meddle in democracy, they might demand a bit more democracy.

This morning, the supreme court ( were the judges swear allegiance to Charles’s mummy ), ruled that we DO have a right to see Daft Chaz’s “particularly frank” interventions on public policy. It’s an absolute scandal.

Come On Guardian, get them published right now…after all The Sun reported on Wednesday that David Cameron has told Charles that he will attempt to change the law to prevent the letters ever being released.

Get your pitchforks, get your flaming torches, head for the palace…this is going to be fun.

They never interfere with democracy. Until they do.

March 21, 2015March 21, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 7 Comments

Of all the laughable falsehoods about The Windsors, the idea that they are apolitical is the most mendacious.

Apolitical ? In a Land Owning-Fox-Hunting-Posh Worshipping-Class-Structure-Entrenching-Public School Promoting-Army-Lovin-Aristocrat-justifying-Red-white-and-blue-patriotism type way? Apolitical in the way that reinforces the idea of a class system where those at the top deserve their status because they DO RIGHT? Remind you of any political outlook?

Their very existence is a deterrent to progressive social change, they are a mascot for the 1%, always have been, always will be, no matter how many faux matey Harry’s Just One o’ The Lads type photo-bullshit they do in The Sun.

So, they’re a massive icon of traditional right wing establishment thinking, seeding the idea that Things Cannot Be Any Other Way. That is bad enough….

But the dim Windsor family ( go on, count those A-levels… ) interfere politically behind close doors, and occasionally, in the open.

Prince Charles, of course, famously interferes, championing a whole host of -mostly moronic -causes. Even when he’s on the right track, he has no right to interfere. That’s the deal. So whilst I agree with Chazza about the environment, as a Windsor he has no right to voice an opinion. More on the Republican’s Great Hope another time.

Instead, lets look at Betty Windsor’s meddling in last years Scottish Independence Referendum – an absolute straight down the line abuse of power. It’s an outrage, but of course, the sycophantic scribblers just cheered louder.

With the polls tight, and 4 days to go in the most exciting democratic event in UK politics, which could enable radical change….Betty went to church in Aberdeenshire.

For the first time in 12 years, the press are invited – fancy that ! Betty comes out – and highly unusually – fancy that ! she goes for a walkabout outside the church. The Police then “invited press to observe exchanges” ( this is almost completely verboten – fancy that ! ), and queeny “warns” an onlooker – who prefers not to be named ( fancy that ! )- that Scots should “think very carefully about the future”.

Of course, it wasn’t a spontaneous remark ( the fact that there’s wriggle room suggests it’s been written with spin doctors ) but with the BBC & tabs in full British Unionist Cry she didn’t need to spell it out.

So there you have it. Regardless what you think of the referendum, the queen deliberately and consciously interfered. She tried to sway the most important vote in UK politics for years. The establishment was threatened, and she intervened on the side of the establishment.

There as almost no criticism. No journalists was bold enough to ask her if she’d interfered.

Most of the people who voted No, were older, and richer.

David Cameron phoned her with the result, and she “purred” down the line.

Boak.

Boak Boak Boak Boak Boak.

They don’t interfere in politics. Except when they do.

Dear William….

March 16, 2015March 16, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 9 Comments

Dear William Windsor,

You, like me, aren’t exactly enthralled with The Monarchy. You’re trying to please, but it seems obvious.

Royal-prenup-suggested-in-case-of-unhappy-ending

HAPPY DAYS

You keep refusing to be a ‘full time’ working royal ( yeah, right, full time, but that’s for another day), you look awkward and – lets be frank – like a bit of a fanny on those stilted formal occasions when you’re required to interact in front of the cameras. It’s not really your fault – who want’s to be an over groomed establishment stooge surrounded by obsequious thickos ? Apart from Gary Barlow.

The monarchy, you believe, was inadvertently responsible for the death of your mum.

Lots of women meet their boyfriend’s in Paris. But not many of them get pursued by paparazzi on motorbikes. And the reason that she was pursued was because monarchists – and I’m talking here about the Hello Magazine souvenir edition buyers – have an insatiable appetite for moronic royal pictures. They create the market.

Simpletons who LOVE the monarchy are a bit like the people who go to see killer whales in captivity – because they say they LOVE animals.

You’ve been born into a golden freakshow. It’s horrible. 250 photographers turned up on your first day at school. Creepy long lens photography of your wife topless. Simply by being part of the monarchy, you & your family are a target for terrorist attack. You can’t express an opinion, you can’t move without bodyguards, you can’t hide. You joked you wanted to be an astronaut, but of course, you can’t. Because it’s decreed, you’re going to be in the glare of the spotlight your whole life, scrutinized, ridiculed, criticised, fawned over. The role is directionless, dumb, and damaging to you, to the uk, to the saddos who adore it…

What’s worse is, the same rigid insufferable fate awaits your kids. When Georgey-Porgy plays with a fire-engine and says he’d like to be a fireman do you say, son, actually you’ll be a symbol of an entrenched establishment with your every move choreographed in case of criticism? Oh, and you’ll have no privacy ever…

Monarchy is all to blame.

So, be brave. Walk away. You have to choose to go, you can’t just hope.

Say you have no desire to be a prancing Toff Pony at the centre of a snobby, bloodline obsessed feudal circus. It’ll be the last statement you’ll ever have to give to the press. Ever.

There’ll be a big storm to be sure, a few rough months…. but in a few years, you could be living in California, ignoring the media and George & Mildred ( maybe? ) can grow up skateboarding, getting tattoos, smoking dope, and talking shite without tabloid lenses. They’ll be safe. You’ll be rich. The monarchy can go fuck itself.

I am a republican and would enjoy the whole thing being in chaos. But that’s not why you should do it. You should do it cause you’ll be happier.

One day we can all sit round drinking a few cans of Kestrel, sharing a joint with George and his new boyfriend, and laugh at the idiocy of it all ( then you can give me all my tax money back )

Not Yours…

Revolting Subject

Reporting on the Royals…

March 12, 2015March 12, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 1 Comment

The first problem with royal reports being dribble-jizzed all over our papers and telly is that it exists at all. That it’s seen as Vitally Important That You Pay Attention To These Rich Dullards.

But lets park that, and not linger on the pacifying effects on the national psyche.

What kind of journalism is royal reporting ? Because, essentially, what the royals do is deadly dull. A typical ‘appointment’ sees a Windsor arrives, a Windsor inspects some non-controversial thing, A Windsor nods, A Windsor leaves in a fast car ( about 45 minutes later). They usually say nothing, or if they do, it’s excruciatingly tedious. Surely journalists stare at one another after with ghastly realisation that they have to confect some guff around…THAT ?

And if they do say something that can be used as a feeble quote – “my brother would never let me live it down” the press present this cold turd to us as if Oscar Wilde and Martin Luther King had been brainstorming over a bottle of buckfast.

And there’s never any context, let alone criticism- when opening an NHS hospital none of the reporters ever say – “this is the only time the Windsor family are in an NHS hospital because despite the hugely positive message royal endorsment of NHS would send would send… they landrover off to the clutches of expensive private care when they need treatment…”

Who are you ? Whats the NHS ? And When can one leave?

Weirdly, it’s not only me who is appalled by the press – but the Windsor family themselves clearly treat them with contempt. So not only do royal-hacks have to write 2000 words of fawning copy based around Prince Harry having a ball-achingly boring look at some red squirrels – they have to do it knowing that the very people they’re sooking up to, can’t bear the sight of them. I mean, imagine for a second, you’re life’s work is devoted to praising dull toffs who won’t deign to speak to you because they despise you. Bloody Awful – http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4397667.stm.

It would not surprise me, if many of the hacks are much more cynical about Das Feudal Circus than their deferential copy suggests, but they need to pay the mortgage, and they get nice trips around the world at license-payer / Daily Mail’s expense. At least, I hope that’s the case, it’d be much more shocking if they were actually in a sycophantic thrall to The Firm.

Enough sympathy for the red-faced boozy royal hack pack…it’s us – the viewer, the reader, the citizen – that our sympathies lie. I mean, those BBC reports are insulting to our intelligence.

Consider today’s bilge..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31856606

The royal says not a thing. It’s entirely choreographed. It’s completely unenlightening. Nicholas Witchell ( who scabbed during the 1989 BBC strike, and who Prince Chaz described as ‘an awful man’ ) tells us she’ll really remember it ( without a shred of evidence). It’s not news !

The point is, Nicholas Witchell pre-chews everything here, he brightly beams about how brilliant it was that a posh women had a short visit to a set, and then tells us it’s memorable.

It’s not important to us at all. And it pushes other stories from the news agenda. Not only that, after reports about the fucked up world, this sugary baby food gently suggests that despite the rest of the news – EVERYTHING IS FINE, because The Posh People Find that Things Are As They Should Be When They Are Presented For Inspection. Be good serfs. Don’t question those above. They’re nice and you should fawn to them

How can this be news ? How can these people consider themselves journalists ?

What I’m saying is, I can’t bear Nicholas Witchell masticating with the royals.

Masticating with Kate.

Masticating with The Queen

Masticating with Prince Harry

Masticating with Prince Chaz

Masticating, dear viewer, over you.

masticating for the royals

Why bother ?

March 10, 2015March 10, 2015 / Revolting Subject / 1 Comment

In a fevered world of drowning polar bears and fat zillionaires crushing the fragile skulls of tear stained orphans – why EVEN bother to get steamed up about the antics of a dullard family called The Windsors ?

Is contemptuous indifference not the best reaction ?

Alas, ignoring them is not an option…

Because no matter how dull, how irrelevant, how bland the activity, how lame the joke, how risible the premise – their activities are plastered approvingly across our newspapers and trumpeted through our TV screens – there’s no escape – and perhaps more disconcertingly, the coverage implies that Everything These Rich Clowns Do Is Important And Ordinary People Should Pay Attention To.

So turn the page ? Switch over.

Nope. Get annoyed. The relentlessly sycophantic coverage is an affront – it presumes we are all either bovine peasants who’ve staggered out of the Haywain and like to stare slack jawed awe at Pretty Princesses, or worse that we are Hyacinth Buckets who who embrace the entire hierarchical, feudal notion of modern class structure and our place in it ( looking upwards, paying our taxes to the 1%, not asking questions ).

The wretched corn beef faced royals can’t be avoided – they need publicity to maintain the feudal freakshow. And as long as people don’t complain, the BBC, The Mail, the entire foreign press categorize everyone in the UK as sycophantic Windsor bum crawler.

Social media offers a chance to challenge those perceptions, to provoke, to ridicule.

So be visible. Offend your sister Who-Quite-Likes-Kate. Argue. Tweet. Roll your eyes in the office. Say you think the queen looks like a sour faced ol’ trout.

And in this blog, Revolting Subjects will argue as to why the royal family are symptomatic – in fact, emblematic – of some of the bigger problems in the world.

Unlike the royal family….I work