06 August 2008

The British Monarchy & Democracy

The British Royal family have taken the unprecedented step of releasing a statement to deny that Prince Philip has prostate cancer. They view the reporting of this matter as a serious breach of privacy. The newspapers are all agog and are waxing lyrically about prostate cancer, when are men likely to suffer from it and blah, blah, blah.
They fail, yet again, to ask a serious question:
Why the hell are we still paying for these people to live in the lap of luxury? How is it possible that in a so-called democratic society we, the British taxpayers, are still paying for these people to live high off the hog with barely a murmur from the 'royal subjects'/masses as the cost of living increases daily for the 'common person'?
Why? How did this happen?
Well, a long time ago there were fewer people living in the area now known as Britain. The people who raped and pillaged grew stronger and the weaker people worked the land and received little or no money at all for their extremely hard labour. The ones who raped and pillaged found they needed to control the land and could band together and give each other titles (a lot like the Mafia and other gangs) - so someone became King, Prince, Duke, etc. They each tried to double-cross each other and murder friends and family who stood in the way of them making money or keeping hold of their ill-gotten gains (again very Mafia-like).
The minions had to be controlled and it helped that along the way a profitable means was found of subduing the people and this is where religion played a vital role and various versions of texts came into play - one of many versions of The Bible! 'You will get your reward in heaven, folks!' And the minions watched as the people in the castles held lavish banquets as their lackeys carried out unspeakable cruelty against the common folk.
People were taught that failure to bow and scrape to these thugs meant a painful, often torturous death. (Forgive me for simplifying a very long and complex period in British history, but you get my point?)
And then we swing around to the present day - we are supposed to bow and scrape to them whilst they live fabulous lifestyles and own some of the most expensive real estate in the world. Their homes have priceless masterpieces of artwork adorning their walls and we are not allowed to enter without permission because although we pay for it all it doesn't actually belong to us. We are the minions, remember?
But, I hear someone cry, what about all the tourist money they bring into the country? Let me answer a question by asking a question: How many people visit the UK specifically because they want to meet the Queen? Very few. People will visit the UK regardless of whether a monarchy exists. People like history, especially those from other places who have ancestors who left the British Isles for a better life elsewhere. In any case that line of argument is weak - to require the British taxpayer to continually fork out millions each year to keep others in a glorified state of opulence and a position of power is wrong on any level.
To compound the problem the Queen is the head of the Church of England and this is a classic illustration of church and state working hand in hand - they need each other to exert pressure on the masses to conform to the imposed societal norms, which incidentally benefit those at the top of the tree. If you don't know how the Church of England came into being then please click here for a Wikipedia article.

You will notice that the media seems to prop up this unfair system and makes a lot of money from coverage of the Royal Family and does its best to curtail and muffle any scandals which may make Joe and Joan Bloggs wonder why they are paying to be ruled over by these people. What's worse we have the next generation waiting in the wings to take over and continue the dynasty! This is supposed to be the 21st century, People! It is incredible that we are where we are.
Regardless of your nationality does it seem morally right to be ruled by non-elected people? That their children will be automatically placed in the same position of power and will rule over you at a time appointed by them, not you?
I'm for being as fair as possible in this dog-eat-dog world and this just seems neither fair nor reasonable to me. What do you think?

12 comments:

J.K. Baltzersen said...

Methinks you live under the popular delusion that democracy is freedom, madam.

Anonymous said...

As usual, a terrfic article, Zee! I shall be linking to it from my site. Hope you don't mind!

Tom

Original GRITS said...

Although I'm from the US and can find more fault with our system of governing now, more than ever, I have never understood the British (or any other, for that matter) Monarchy. As much as I see our President and legislators as a drain on our coffers, the Royalty seems to be even moreso of a drain because they do nothing (that I'm aware of, anyway) besides serve as figureheads (please correct me if I'm wrong.)

No government is perfect, no country has everything just right, but some have it better than others. I think it's just sad that we, the people, whatever the country, cannot come together enough in our respective countries to bring about the changes that are needed for improvement. Whether it be changing laws, removing figureheads, overthrowing dictatorships, etc., I wish the people had more of a voice but I don't see it happening in our lifetime.

At least that's my thoughts.

And by the way, thank you. Saying I should write a book is such a huge compliment!..and I have thought about it, it's the "doing" that I seem to have a problem getting around to. I get overwhelmed when I try to start.

philip said...

I'm w/ JK above on this one. Democracy does not equal freedom. In fact, I would say that democracy equals the most common denominator. And, if the common opinion (common denominator) happens to be dumb you get horrible results. George W. Bush getting elected for two terms is an excellent example of this. If you are so unhappy with the Royal Family getting your tax dollars, I recommend you formally protest it. If you do this in any truly revolutionary way, you will be put down. Power still reigns supreme, and it's hard to get around that unless you are Ghandi; but truthfully, I don't think his tactics would even work anymore.

Thanks for the great post!

Ralph Dumain said...

I'll say what I've said for years: the British royalty should be chopped up for lunch meat and fed to the poor on the dole. Then I would never have to see the repulsive faces of these parasites in the media ever again. Have you ever noticed how these inbred creatures look like horses? Smell like horses, too.

janice said...

I agree with your article.I mean no harm to the royals but I don't want them. They are the country's "pampered pets" as you say people come to England because they want to.WE should have a government we can vote for.

ccch said...

I wonder if the ex-colonies still have to "subsidise" them?. I'm asking because I know the Governor General of the island where I was born in the Caribbean is appointed by HRH.
Still, that hot ginge prince looks like he could be lots of fun to tame........and I mean this in all it's sexual connotations......

Zee Harrison said...

Thank you all for responding.

J.K & Philip:
Yes, I must be totally delusional! The powers that be want us to believe it works and is fair. Thanks for pointing that out.
George W., at least the 2nd time was actually appointed.

Tom, thank you. I'm very glad you have your site up and running. Keep up the good work and glad you like the post/blog.

Original Grits:
The Queen/King holds a lot of power and in my view should not hold these positions at all. Britain has turned into a herd of non-thinkers and I suspect the USA is the same, if not worse in some respects. But at least you do not have the parades of pomposity and privilege that we have in Britain. The class divisions are like great chasms and although some people have shifted into the monied classes they will never be accepted due to their low status and new money. Old money rules. Otherthrow the regimes? Not likely in our lifetimes. The haves have too much to lose to allow that to happen.

Ralph,
Just say what you think, Man!!!

Janice,
They should not be there. It is plainly wrong. Obvious. These people should not be in the positions they are in and they should be demoted as quickly as possible to the regular Joe's like the rest of us. I mean them no harm either but just want them off of their self-erected pedestals asap. Get rid!

ccch,
Well, I know about your thing for redheads so there's a bias right there!!
The Queen appoints all the arse-licky people called Governor Generals in the ex-colonies. I know these people having spent time with them - they are without exception people who are good at sucking up to the 'right people' in order to get into the positions they crave. I am going to find out if and how the ex-colonies continue to fund the 'mother country' - will let you know. Please feel free, anyone, to share your knowledge on this point.

Thanks again for taking the time to comment. It really thrills me to receive comments on my posts - I don't just want to hear from people who agree so regardless just let's keep engaging!
Zee

Rob said...

At least the U.K. has a government that still gets some respect. If you want to switch, I'll give you George and he'll bankrupt you in a week. Be thankful for what you have.

ccch said...

You know what?. I'm kinda tired hearing/reading how horribly George Bush sucks. Really guys,my opinion?. I have ways less respect for the Brits, and many other European heads who didn't show the cojones to stand up to the US government, but instead passively condone their international politics while profiting......and we sit here high and mighty pointing fingers!!!.

Caledonian Jim said...

The Russian solution commends itself

Anonymous said...

Here is an interesting fact. Earl Godwin (Harlod) was defeated by the Normans in 1066 at the battle of Hastings. I actually married into his lineage many years back. Anyone bearing the name Godwin, Goodwin or Goodins is a direct descendant. Now we have something called Godwin's Law - which is all about Blog dicussions always ending up in polarised doomongering. If the Normans had not invaded Britain I wonder if the Godwins would have bothered to think about anything other than their palacial God given wealth?

Interstingly the Queen of England actually 100% believes that she is divinely entitled by God to rule. I'd rather be poor and oppressed than rich and deluded anyday. Poor woman.

Robin