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 It’s entirely out of date.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.

Relentless royal rubbish…

810a76fe902fdb2f9962462101cb5b5d

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 ).

4a0e8ebb_e803_44fe_a115_7d9194b42ed7

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).

chew460276

Wrigley, keeping the queens highway clean

Fair-pay-for-royal-cleaners

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.

cheselleck-111

 

 

 

 

 

 

Glasgow versus the Queen

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

1277678_608923449148847_770556601_oDuring 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 header_nsghc_wide_01biggest 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.

_MG_5543

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…

79-140R0131T9523“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.)

images

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

Who’d be POTUK?

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.sick bag

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 ?”

blair-image-3-813062157This 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 Brazil with Michael Palinlazy 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.POTI

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.