FINAL RESULT Slabbery Royal Idiots 0 Meghan Markle 1

I’m enjoying Meghangate.

A rich couple have a new baby then made a sensible decision to bring up their baby as – mercy me ! – a normal kid. The cold, stiff establishment (& the countless bovine followers) would prefer the kid faces a life of exhausting scrutiny and burdened with ridiculous symbolism. ( Maybe Harry reads this blog...).

The whole thing is catnip for Britains Right Wing Roasters – Racism, royalty, feminism & rejecting the UK – suddenly red white and blue bile was fountaining up from every royalist arsehole in the country.

Equally inept were the broadcast media. They Cannot Compute That People May Not Adore The Royal Family – even when those people are Your Actual Members of the Royal family. Thus Celebrity Feudalism blows a fuse.

BBC & ITN are hard wired to revere and reinforce the place of the monarchy. So when Harry and Meghan made their Fuck It announcement, the broadcasters rushed to the usual florid faces who spouted their unsightful and unsourced assertions that the queen would be disappointed. ( does anyone else let their 95 year old Tory granny make all the decisions for their life ?) . These craven courtiers basically coughed up establishment pearl clutching on demand.

The debate was framed around what ‘Meghan had done’ to the queen – but nobody dared to question the fundamentals – the embarassing absurdity of having a dull family of aristocrats living in golden palaces as a national symbol. Nor the effect of this set up has had on Meghan, Harry and their kid.

Foaming tabloids seemed keen to present the 93 year old queen as some sort of decisive demi-Thatcher.

There was an odd exception – Suzanne Moore wrote a great piece, and weirdly the most touching thing in it was her observation that she..

” went to Diana’s funeral. I watched those boys walk behind that coffin. Even in Westminster Abbey, no one touched or hugged them.”

I remember that too. I don’t remember the royal sycophants criticising or demanding a bit more humanity from the emotionally damaged queen.

If you’ll indulge me on Meghan and Harry – I predicted this exact scenario last year. Given that royal experts are often paid for their contribution, maybe I should buy a pair of red jumbo courduroys and stand outside Buckingham Palace offering my opinion.

And what is spectacularly absent in all this Fwah Fwah Fwah analysis is any critical insight – Monarchy itself is ridiculous. It’s entirely out of date. It damages those within it. It infantalises the country and legitimises – glamourises even – inequality. Instead we have to hear Royal Expert Penny Junor descibe the Windsors as ‘the best people who sprinkle fairy dust whereever they go’ ( nice spot @uk_republic !)

Lots of British folk are completely disinterested or actively oppose the Monarchy. Our opinions are not even welcome, not asked for, not heard. The media will give airtime to those who appear to be quite unwell, but rational opinion is subversive.

I hope Harry and Meghan disappear off across the Atlantic, and when Archie is a daft wee 23 year old getting drunk and falling out of parties with girlfriends, there aren’t creepy Piers Morgan type men judging his behaviour.

And I hope he can say to his girlfriend –

“Remember when Britain used to have a royal family ? When it had a queen and that, before Charles fucked it all up ? Before the revolution ? Well…I was part of that. TRUE ! WAS TOO ! Ach lets have another joint !”

Please share this blog – especially on Facebook, then everyone at your school will think you are the coolest kid. We’re bombarded with relentless royal propaganda….throw in some salt. Thank you.

Prince Andrew Scandal should be the End the Monarchy…

Before anything, let me express my sympathy and support for the women and girls who were enslaved and abused. Virginia Giuffre ( formerly Roberts) and other girls / young women – your innocence, your vulnerability were exploited by powerful men, and you deserve justice.

In speaking out you are heroic, courageous and to be supported. I believe what your saying and am in awe of your resilience.

Beyond the personal trauma this criminal episode, exposes the whole monarchy, not just Prince Andrew.

The Questions that need answered….

Did the Royal Family / the government / the Queen know about Prince Andrew’s visits to Epstein’s island ? To his mansion in New York ?

Who did his security detail ( who we pay for ) report to and what did they say ? (“Prince on island with lots of teenage girls and sleazy men. Some of girls may be underage.” ?)

Was there a reluctance to confront the Duke with his behaviour? After all he is notoriously a boor and shouts at anyone who questions him ?

If the authorties / royal family / establishment knew what was going on – what did they do about it ? Anything ?

There is a toxic, corrupting secrecy around the Royal Family, and we are allowed to know almost nothing, despite paying for almost everything. They are exempt from Freedom of Information. We’re not allowed to know.

It’s one thing to argue that they are entitled to secrecy because why-should-the-public-know-how much-one’s-holidays cost – but quite another, when the secrecy is harnessed to protect them from being questioned about a very serious and ugly crime. Abuse. That’s the word. Abuse.

Stop and think about this for a moment.

The most reviled and hideous paedophile in the UK in decades was Jimmy Savile. Who Prince Charles counted as a good friend and advisor.

The most reviled and notorious paedophile in US currently was Jeffrey Epstein. Who Prince Andrew counted as a good friend and holiday friend ( even after his conviction).

Prince Andrew is patron of the NSPCC ( National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children) who campaign against trafficking. Tweet them and ask them about this [ September UPDATE: NSPCC have since disowned Prince Andrew’s patronage since this article has been published.]

Charles Mountbatten Windsor and Andrew Mountbatten Windsor – arrogant, idiotic, sleazy men – we are told – REPRESENT US. We are told they are role models. We are requested to call them Your Royal Highness. We are expected to pay for their life of luxury.

Doesn’t that make you wince ? Make you angry ?

So here’s the news….The Queen is going to die soon.

So make a stand. She’s must be the last monarch. Argue, cause embarrassment, rattle cages, exploit the up and coming political shitstorm.

No more royals. No more Feudalism. No more secrecy. No more golden carriages and slobbering royal weddings.

[ and if you could kick off the rebellion by ReTweeting or Sharing this article on Facebook, then you will be awarded the Revolting Subject Medal of Showing some Spine in an Obsequious world]

Facebook it or Tweet it like a good ‘un.

Harry & William – don’t pass on this curse to your kids…

Despite my punk republicanism, I’m not a big fan of criticising the royal kiddies. They’re children. They DID NOT have a choice.

Wee George, Charlotte, Louis and now Archie Parchie are blameless infants. But, due to the Monarchy, these kids fate is sealed..

Royal children are there to be scrutinised, judged, photographed, ridiculed, venerated, manipulated and intruded upon from the moment they are born until the moment they die (and beyond).

Their nursery teacher curtseys to them. Their schoolmates will whisper about them. They need security – think about that for a second – a little kid, due to being a symbol of UK, is inadvertently a target for terrorism. How can that ever be ok?

As teenagers, they smoke a joint and the world knows about it. Any potential schoolboy crush will be vetted by the security services. Paul Burrell was dispatched to the newsagent to buy Razzle when William and Harry were adolescents. Royal kids can’t aspire to any sort of normal life.

They are so obsessed with royal children they kiss dolls of royal children

Monarchy turns these kids into freaks.

And the people who created these conditions are the Royal family and the fans of royalty, who insist they have the right to intrude on a childs privacy. The stroppy Media Boo-Hoo-ing that went on about Archie’s christening is instructive. You’ve been born on stage wee man, and the Royalists DEMAND the right to coo and bubble over you.

Harry and William know all about this freakish life. With stiff, inhumane theatricality, they were made to walk behind their mothers coffin in front of millions. They’ve said it was torture, that people were grabbing at them.

So Royal boyos & their partners, here’s the thing.

Take your kids away. Don’t pass this curse onto your own children. You are very rich, very connected. Go live in a ranch in Africa, or California. It’s too late for you two – you’ll be in the public eye no matter what – but go now, and your kids stand a chance. And their kids might even be anonymous toffs.

I want rid of the monarchy for moral and political reasons, but fucks sake, monarchy is a brutal and cruel thing to inflict on your kid.

Please share on Facebook or Twitter or cut this out and drop leaflets from the sky .( But Facebook is better.)

Meghan is a good argument against the Monarchy.

Meghan is utterly eclipsing the rest of the whingey Windsors.

She’s smart. She is undeniably beautiful, she is mixed race, she is a feminist, she has a natural warmth compared to the frigid awkward one note Royal Family..

yeah…about that.

Ridiculously, one of the reasons that people are mesmerised by Meghan is that she can speak with some charm and humour. She can handle fame. She knows how to do an interview. The job of the royal family is to be smile, feign interest in ordinary people. and play up for the media.

Meghan exposes how utterly pathetic Harry, Kate, William, Charles, the Queen et al are at these fundamental aspects of their job. Think about Prince Charles and his hesitant mumbling whinges, his charisma bypass. Think of shy William blazering and balding around nodding earnestly. Watch as Harry almost shrinks when interviewed alongside his fiance…

Meghan is disruptive, albeit not on purpose.

Sycophantic royal reporters argue that she’s ‘modernising’ the Monarchy.’

No, she’s not. Her presences is exposing how drab and bad at they are at their job. Wags have dubbed the British Monarchy Celebrity Feudalism. Meghan is now the star turn. And if she is better at being a royal than the royals are….well…why don’t we follow this through and just get a load of attractive celebrities to be our figureheads ? The Netflix Crown is so much more entertaining than the British Crown. Lets just CAST them.

And recently a very nasty, reactionary tone to some of the reporting – as if HOW VERY DARE SHE COME ALONG AND BE SMARTER, BETTER LOOKING, AND BETTER AT CHARMING PEOPLE THAN OUR ENGLAND’S ROYAL FAMILY.

Uncle Andrew, what would you do if you met a young woman from America ?

Does anyone think she’ll still be here in a decade ? My objection to monarchy is primarily political, so I don’t wish unhappiness on anyone – but unlike Stepford Royal Wives – Meghan has history – a glam career in LA, with luxury friends and freedom. She’s lived a bit. She’s not a mute.

For now she’s imprisoned in a world of uptight Brits and stilted palace protocol. Obsessives watching her every move. But for the rest of her days ? Really. ? Draughty Balmoral in Aberdeenshire in 2022 ? Nope, she’ll go back to California sooner or later, and will long to see the back of the hunting, polo and public school dullard set. Maybe Harry will go with her.

So where’s the republican vitriol you’re asking ?

Of course, to anyone over 7, the whole idea of a Princess is preposterous, and a feminist Princess is an oxymoron. The ridiculous titles – I believe she’s the Duchess of Dumbarton ( here poor people, have some celebrity crumbs ) and the ostentatious wealth, clothes, wardrobe leave a bad taste. But try as I might I can’t resent Meghan the way I loathe the rest of the Windsors. In the same way that I don’t resent American tourists for being curious about royalty ( c’mon, tourism is about gawping at local oddities) but will happily mock British monarchists.

So to conclude….when the Palace burns and the royals are being forced out at the end of a pitchfork, I might get a wee selfy with Meghan – just before I lock the gates.

Our media is filled with relentless royal sycophancy. Please Facebook-asize and Tweet And Do your Shit.

Why I SUPPOSE YOU’D PREFER TONY BLAIR is a stupid thing to say….

Monarchists quickly run out of arguments when confronted with the very reasonable idea of an Elected Head of State.

So it foot stomping petulance they blurt out “Oh so I supposed you’d prefer President Blair ?”

So for clarity…

  • An elected Head of State would be elected – why do you presume your compatriots would all rush vote for a discredited figure like Blair ? Isn’t that a bit insulting ?
  • Whoever chose put themselves forward to be Head of State would face scrutiny and have to account for themselves. There would be justification. ( Emerging from a Windsor Vagina does not require anyone to explain themselves, nor volunteer )
  • Even if this unlikely scenario came to pass – President Blair – I actually WOULD prefer it, because I could campaign against him and argue that he’s not a suitable candidate and hopefully the next time the head of state electionsadolf-hitler-duke-and-duchess-of-windsortook place he would be gone. If Prince Charles confirms his status as a disastrous ol’ clown, there’s no real way his ‘subjects’ can hold him to account. Bear in mind that Edward was due to be King, and he was an Nazi Sympathiser. Only an American divorcee and his abdication saved the UK from a fascist leaning Head of State.
  • Finally look at our neighbours Ireland, they’ve had a good run of Presidents in recent years, who’ve stood up for the people, and occasionally offered guidance during national debates.

When you get into a discussion with a puce face monarchist, it’s worth sending them to this blog post when they bust out the PRESIDENT BLAIR idiocy.

Republic have a good site – Monarchy Myth Buster

And if you want to speculate about who COULD be President of the United Kingdom, here’s a little democratic pie I prepared earlier….

Scotland versus the Royal family

 

The royal family, should more accurately be called The London Royal Family. They never really leave their palaces in the exclusive parts of  London.

The (very dubious)  argument that they Are Good For Tourism should really read The Are Good For Tourism in Very Wealthy Parts of London.

There are however,  transparently patronising attempts to win favour with the ‘regions’ of their kingdom….

The Prince of Wales ( lives  in London )

The Duke of Edinburgh ( lives in London )

The Duchess of York ( lives in London )

not to mention the newly anointed…

Earl and Duchess of Dumbarton ( 175 Dumbarton Main Street – NAW !…only kidding. London. )

It’s a feeble distraction tactic by those who hold power. Could Duchess Meghan tell you a single fact about daily life in Dumbarton ?

But it is Scotland that’s most proving difficult for the PR spinners of the royal family. Because –  despite being forced to stump up £35m a year  – most Scots are not enchanted by the forelock tugging crap any more.

Rebellious Scots to Crush ( this is the 6th verse of God Save the Queen)

Some of our pals in England may wonder if Anti-Royal sentiment in Scotland is a symptom of a wider Anti-English feeling ?  Nope, not the case – for most Independently minded Scots, the idea of Independence is motivated by democratic self respect ( is Scotland a country? Yes it is. Should the people of a country have the right to elect their own government ? Yes they should. See ? ), and to mischaracterise it as Anti-English is like Gammon Gavin the golf club moron braying that Feminism Is Just An Excuse to HATE MEN.

People in Scotland (including many of the English people who live here)  want independence as a means to change society for the better.

dce3e43685081036e49c23057f2f9370

That week in the marines where Edward won all those medals. And his kilt.

And whilst the SNP leadership characterise an Independent Scotland as retaining the Monarchy, it’s fig leaf-  essentially trying to keep an older, more shortbread strain of Scottish electorate on board. Even campaigners for Scottish Independence don’t want to make Monarchy a foreground issue, because, why frighten off the hesitant pensioners and Sunday Post readers ?

But there’s very little love for the royal family in Scotland.

 

There was just ONE party in the entire country for Harry & Meghan’s wedding. There was no bunting for any of the royal weddings recently.  When a brand new edfd3e6a2ffb48b690140ed589e16280--scottish-independence-princeGlasgow Hospital was named after the queen, over 16,000 people signed a petition to object ( wrote about it here  ). The Scotland fans sang ‘Oh I’d rather have a Panda Than A Prince.” Only 41% of Scots are supportive.

So what can the Royal Family do ? Prince Charles regularly dreary’s himself up in a kilt and writes crappy tales about Lochnigar, but the effect is patronising, rather than ingratiating. It reminds Scots of The Laird, the Hunting Shooting and Fishing class who own Scotland with the result that  the landscape  is deserted so that they can gammon together and shoot things.

Central to all this is Balmoral. The Aberdeenshire castle has always been a key part of the Royals Love Scotland narrative.  When the royals stay at Balmoral, a piper plays outside every morning to wake them. So you know, they’re in touch with what life is like for people in Glasgow. In fact, the very romanticised, pantomime image of Scotland that Queen Victoria confected -has held Scotland back for years. We bought the Balmoralification of our culture, but not any more.

queennazi

Enchanting picture of the Queen at learning Bal-morality as a kid

The Firm also have an oncoming generational problem – do we really think that Harry and William will want to spend every wet September in rural Aberdeenshire ? I very much doubt it. An attempt to win favour was made by sending Prince William to St Andrews – and this is emphasised on every occasion – but St Andrews is hardly typical of Scottish life. Anyway, he didn’t like it.

And most significantly of all, the Queen politically interfered in the most important democratic event in Scotland’s modern history. The one rule of being a ceremonial monarch is don’t abuse your position.

She abused her position. Remember that.

None of this is tangible in the Relentless Grovel Fest that passes for royal journalism, but it’s happening on the ground. We’re on the road to a Scottish Republic ! ( but shhh…don’t tell anyone )

Everyone, across the UK, is welcome to my 2025 Balmoral Scotland Republic Party ( hopefully in the next 5 years ). We’ll put on Prince Charles’s old kilts and drink malt whisky and rifle through the attic searching for Seig Heil pictures.

Everyday is Royal Propaganda Day in the Media. But NOW you’re gonna RT this or Facebookise it or be Luke Skywalker engaging with The Force for the first time.

Share please & follow @unroyalreporter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The BBC & the Royal Family

The World-wide-web-super-highway is filled with angry people who foam and rage against the BBC. And yours truly, is not one of them. Public service broadcasting is a rare  and fragile thing, and though hugely flawed – don’t @ me – the BBC should be defended and saved from its worst impulses  ( otherwise it’s privatised telly –  Fox News & ITN for us all, for ever).

But royalty brings out the worst in the BBC. The broadcaster is at its most servile and unctuous, never kneeling when it can lie on the ground and drool at the green wellies of the nearest Windsor.

The royal fawning  is incessant and relentless. Every day, some trivial ephemera about Das Windsors No angle is too silly. Never hold power to account when you can grovel. It’s constantly reinforced – Everything The Royal Family Do is deemed Significant Enough To Be Celebrated.

Look below at the BBC’s Royal Charter – it’s  one of those establishment documents that tells you nothing but at the same time tells your everything….

charter

This is supposed to be a modern country

 

After the Hey-nonny-nonny-nonsense it states:

the BBC should accurately and authentically represent and portray the lives of the people of the United Kingdom today, and raise awareness of the different cultures and alternative viewpoints that make up its society.

So far so good. Hurrah for ‘alternative’ points of view. But  the charter then goes on to say…

The BBC should bring people together for shared experiences and help contribute to the social cohesion and wellbeing of the United Kingdom.

So Royal Weddings, Births, Speechifying, Deaths, Tours = shared experiences that are deemed to help contribute to social cohesion. And by social cohesion, I think what’s implied is docility. Circuses for everyone ( but you can read about the bread ).

Despite the fact that the majority don’t care about events like royal weddings, the BBC go to Def Fawn 1. Everything any royal commentator says is treated as completely credible, and the rarely  moments when a sceptical voice is invited to contribute, they are treated with scorn and their logical observations reacted to as if they were outrageous.

These days ‘National’ events are consolidated by almost weekly feudal porn likeseries The Queen: A Passion For Horses or Prince Charles dedicating an hour long episode of Countryfile to how great he is…, or even Prince Harry taking over The Today Programme.

Occasionally, something mildly contextualising will come up – such as a series called Reinventing the Royals -but it was pulled at the last minute, then broadcast 6 weeks later, after the royals had neutered any interesting content.

Do the BBC employ censors monitoring it’s output for the slightest hint of republican sentiment? Naw, they Make Staff do It Themselves. And so, critical voices get no airtime, and even journalists who cringe at what it does to the corporations credibility, must play along. I can’t imagine a senior BBC reporter being allowed to do what Michael Crick does here…

Royal Footage held by the BBC is strictly controlled (  editorial  compliance forms require producers to state if they plan to use any royal footage and in what context, which then has to be sanctioned ) – hence no repeat screenings for cringefests like  It’s a Royal Knockout.

The sad truth is the BBC is essential and complicit in the continuation of reverence for the Royal Family. They, more than anyone else, frame the narrative. Without BBC coverage, the monarchy fades away.

There is some hope. The BBC didn’t bother to cover Princess Andrews Daughter And that Posh Tequila Face guy’s wedding, which though hardly revolutionary, at least shows that public opinion can shift the dial a notch. And, amidst the 30 separate BBC Website updates – there was one that was at least not cheering but factual….

 

The point is, the BBC is suppose to reflect a diversity of opinion. It’s Your BBC, not just the 1%’s BBC. So rattle the cages. Visibly show disdain towards all this grovelling.

So please follow on twitter (@unroyalreporter) or share this CyberSemtex on Facebook and get into arguments with Fat Jeremy the Royalist in your office.