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.