Posted by Thersites on  UTC 2017-12-28 14:16


Queen Elizabeth II has sat on the throne of the United Kingdom for 65 years. In that time she has said nothing of any importance. On the great issues during that time – Common Market entry, Thatcherism, the Falklands War, European Union membership, Iraq war, Brexit – her subjects have heard not a peep from her. Excellent! As a result, she still manages to be respected even in today's disrespectful age.

She survived the attempt of the Blair gang to manipulate her over the death of the deranged Diana in a drunken paparazzi chase through Paris with her playboy Egyptian lover. At every monarchical celebration Queen Elizabeth can pull the crowds out like no one else. Polls of her approval rating in the UK and countries around the world deliver numbers about which politicians can only dream. The reason for this popularity is incontestable: she has kept her mouth shut, kept her opinions to herself and got on with the job.


In contrast, all the heirs to the throne deeply believe that they have something to say. Charles is dim but believes he knows best. In his chosen fields he is merely an epigone, parroting the thoughts of others. There is no subject, no argument, no opinion that he can claim to be his alone. His causes are a strange mixture of a reactionary traditionalism (the ridiculous Poundbury) and radical breastbeating (the ridiculous Global Warming scare). He is too dim and inflated with self importance to realise that a majority of his subjects beg to differ about his passions.

No one can seriously believe that when this opinionated dimwit finally ascends the throne he will be able to keep his opinions to himself. The moment of enthronement may anyway be the moment of the end of the House of Windsor, since it is difficult to think of anyone with a good word to say about him. The fact that there are seemingly many people who seriously maintain that the succession should just jump over this unloved tampon nibbling buffoon and go directly to William is eloquent.


The next one in the succession pipeline, William, spent a lot of time in 2017 wailing in interviews about his lost mother (with Harry in chorus), too dim to appreciate the implied criticism of his father, the future king, and his father's former mistress, now his wife and William's stepmother. William says the odd stupid thing, but that is just his dimness speaking. He is now appearing in TV adverts. His wife seems to be performing her duties well, almost in the mode of Queen Elizabeth II. We know nothing about her opinions, which is greatly to her credit. She is a stick-insect on whom clothes hang well, she smiles a lot and charms people. The children are growing and we have nothing to blame them for – yet.


Harry, dimmer than them all, is turning out to be the instrument of Diana's revenge on the Windsors. His has introduced a strange Californian flake into the family.

In so doing he has turned the old marriage formula on its head: the man should be at least five years older than the woman, giving him time to develop and prove himself in some way. Women are also smarter and develop earlier than men, who consequently need the headstart to become acceptable partners.

In contrast, Meghan Markle is three years older than Harry. She is 36 and has been around the block a few times, including a marriage and a divorce. She is a vegan when it suits her and she seems to have all the vacuous opinions of her West Coast ilk.

There is a lot still to come out about her. She will, we think, also have the distinction of being the first non-white member of a European royal house. Ever. For some observers the foundations will shake and tiles fall from the roof, others will wonder what the fuss is about – although no one so far has dared to make a fuss.

Destiny, biding its time

Even the early signs for this union are bad. Harry was lured into presenting a radio show. Instead of asking himself the key questions – 'would my grandmother do this' and 'what possible good can this do me' – he ploughed on and exposed himself as a dimwit with no taste in music, as a simpering friend of Obama's and as an eco-loon like his father.

He announced that poor Meghan never had a proper family – which came as a pleasant Christmas surprise for her family, no doubt. Harry wants us to believe that the Windsor's indoor games around the Christmas tree in the drawing room, while the flunkeys are clearing away the lunch debris elsewhere, was a model of family life. We can be pretty sure that poor Meghan had never seen its like before. Some may recall Diana's opinion of this abysmal event.

The couple – particularly Meghan – have lost the affection of the vast majority of Daily Mail readers, if the comments on these stories are to be credited. The Mail and the other tabloids are now producing story after story on the dim-Harry/no-class-Meghan theme, for which they get lots of comments and referrals. Meghan managed a curtsy without falling over, but for some reason stuck her tongue out at Her Majesty's subjects. Will the Obamas be invited to the wedding? (Trump certainly won't be) Will her father travel from his Mexican seclusion and put on a tie? Will some of her relatives even qualify for a visa?

We are told that Harry has stopped smoking at her insistence and is not allowed to take part in one of his passions, shooting. She will be baptised into the Anglican church five minutes before the wedding ceremony – such a demonstration of commitment. Archbishop Just-in-Wimp Welby will do what is required of him and go through with this brazen sham, an induction of convenience into a church for which many once gave their lives.

As atheists, we on this blog view the sham induction and sham ceremony as being par for the modern religious course. Since Christians seem reluctant to do anything to defend their now debased practices from the assault from the east, they will continue to crumble.

The questions of the age from the unbiased observer: Will this pair make it to the wedding? If they do, how long will they last after it? This blog still thinks that in the subsequent divorce settlement Kensington Palace will be hers – and Balmoral, too, if she plays her cards right, which she seems to be doing so far. Well done, Harry, Diana would be proud of you!

As republicans, we on this blog view the fall of the House of Windsor with indifference. It is an historical inevitability, but not without some entertainment value as we watch the dim sprogs bring it crashing down about their own ears.

0 Comments UTC Loaded:

Input rules for comments: No HTML, no images. Comments can be nested to a depth of eight. Surround a long quotation with curly braces: {blockquote}. Well-formed URLs will be rendered as links automatically. Do not click on links unless you are confident that they are safe. You have been warned!

Name  [max. characters: 24]
Type   into this field then press return:
Comment [max. characters: 4,000]