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.

When oul’ Queeny kicks the Golden Bucket…

Day after day we’re sold the fiction  that the Royal Family – and in particular The Queen – is some sort of ever present po faced Demi God. But, you know what….she’s gonna go….

Elizabeth Windsor was born in 1926. Phillip Mountbatten was born in 1921. They’re both going to die, probably within the next decade. There’ll be a clamour for wailing peasants and tearful celebrities on an unprecedented scale. The black ties that BBC reporters carry with them, will be donned as part of  Operation London Bridge .

queen-774389

Your Revolting Scribe here feels sympathy for any human being who dies, and it’s not a great look to be actively cheering on an Old Persons Death. Ultimately, a rich aristocrat  who I never met, will have be gone and I won’t be in any way upset, but  because I’m human – nor will I be leading a buckfast drinking Conga down the Mall.

But I will be resisting the compulsary sadfacing that is expected of us.

Because schedules will be cleared.  The BBC will drop all comedy ( how dare you LAUGH at a time like this ?). Drippy music will be played even on Radio 1. The message will be clear – an posh old lady dying after a long life of luxury  is a NATIONAL TRAGEDY.

How will this work with other news ? What if Betty pops her clogs on the same day as Brexit ? Or a horrible violent attack elsewhere? Or an hour before the Champions League final? How will the BBC cover differing reactions – Windsor will react in a very different way from the Falls Road Belfast, or Liverpool, or Glasgow….( answer – they won’t ).

[ a slightly odd Vanity Fair video about events]

The establishment knows, an interegnum, is a potentially volatile time. Whilst Republicans will be screamed at to show respect, the machinery of the establishment will kick in, ruthless ensuring  that daring to even discuss the future of the monarchy is a sacriligous scandal.  If we dare to ask if King Charles is really such a Good idea, the Royal Experts ( who already cashed in by signing exclusive deals to be part of Sky News rolling coverage) will declare we’re crass and hateful…

At the EXACT moment, when it’s vital to discuss whether The Monarchy should continue, UK Republicans will be  told to be silent or be labelled callous opportunists.

I hope Republic have a plan for dealing with this, I hope Republican MPs speak up.

But in the age of social media, they can’t just declare that we’re ALL inconsolable  weeping wrecks. We can make our voices heard. We can be visible. We have to say….

Sorry For Your Loss Windsors, But Lets Leave it There….

[ Please share this blog on Facebook, or elsewhere. Win the Revolution comes, you’ll get a free AIR BnB discount voucher for a Night in Balmoral*]

[ *not true. But do share]

jadediana

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….

The Royal Family, Spitfire Crywanking and Brexit…

The Royal Family embody an unpleasant  jingoistic strain of Britishness – entitled,  posh, and greeted with unquestioning deference everywhere they go.

They are all about inherited wealth, about never explaining their actions, about  Union jacks, military, hunting, public school.  They are about rigid hierarchy and unquestioned privilege. When purple faced idiots harrumph that The Royal Family Is All About  Tradition – we should say well  lets examine the toxic  traditions they embody…

761

And in that grumpy visage of the queen, the tabloids and MPs seem to take pride in an arrogant notion that there is no requirement for the ruling class to explain, justify or listen.

They are presented as ‘The Best of British’  and this in turn infects British culture ( and in more recent times, that would be more specifically English culture ) with a bovine, entrenched certainty and a nostalgia for an glorified past where everyone knew their place under the royal family.

I call it – Spitfire Crywanking. The culture that weeps and simultaneously gets shamefully turned on by spitfires, royalty and  the empire. Yet the same culture wallows in self pity – curdling to bitterness-  because the rest of the world refuses to be impressed by such a mouldy reactionary world view.

In Fintan O’Toole’s book on Brexit, he argues that Britain never got over winning the war – that Britain triumphed but the spoils went elsewhere. Germany, Italy, Japan had to reinvent themselves, to get rid of old archaic nationalistic symbols, like, Royal Families.

Screenshot 2018-12-11 at 21.18.34

But UK still has its dreary, dense Windors. The BBC dredges up some an tedious item about Spitfires every 4 days. The Royal Variety show is tugging its forelock as I type this.

And ultimately, after festering in the  culture of Spitfire Crywanking for years, Britain is going to huffs its way out of Europe.  The Royal Family didn’t cause Brexit, but they are part of the right wing horseshit in which such regressive thinking blooms.

The rightwing culture  we are steeped in dares not name itself. But you heard it here first SpitFireCrywanking.  Reject it. Reject the Royals.

 

Boris-RAF-415

 

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.

 

 

Top 5 BBC Royal Grovels

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.Screen Shot 2018-09-26 at 20.31.43.png

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.

nicholas-witchell-large

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