With the Coronation of King Charles less than a month away, and the national conversation turning inevitably towards this event, I thought it might be interesting to examine the evolution of my thoughts on the monarchy.
I remember when I was a small child, perhaps five or six, I wasn't much taken with the idea of the monarchy. It was nothing more than a simple feeling of unfairness I had about it all. Why are they better than us and how dare they parade around waving in that fashion? I just couldn't understand it.
This was the sort of simplistic, ignorant, unsophisticated and childish opinion you might expect from a little boy. But where had this idea come from? Almost certainly my Primary School teachers rather than myself, who I'm sure were all ageing, Hippy, left-wing activists.
Being unnaturally sure of my opinions for one so young, I was always willing to voice this point of view to my parents and grandparents, all committed monarchists. Perhaps that was the first indication of a rebellious streak within me, maybe it was foolish arrogance. Whatever the root of my presumptuous utterance was, I was lucky not to receive a backhander from any of them.
As I got older, my view slowly started to mature and change. I had a growing respect for the traditional, as well as a respect for my parents and by extension their point of view. Perhaps they were right. After all, I was young, and what did I know?
Later on, I had a growing sense that democracy was an illusion. The mainstream political parties continually betray the British people. How much worse would it be to have an all-powerful monarch in charge? There might even be some contentment in acceptance of our powerlessness instead of the delusion that we have some influence over the decisions made on our behalf. I also mused that if, in some fantasy scenario, the political order was to be overthrown, who would be best placed to take over? Who would garner instant and loyal support? Who would, most importantly, be able to consolidate power with the essential support of the military? Why the monarchy, of course.
It was a mixture of feelings, informed by this respect for tradition and my elders, that characterised my attitude toward the monarchy in the intervening years. Largely indifferent, with a splash of respect for tradition and an institution that didn't affect my life one way or the other. I had no reason to feel that the abolition of the monarchy, and the setting up of a republic would be of any benefit to myself or the country as a whole. It was it seemed to me, largely benign, and if anything inspired a spirit of patriotism in a great many people. Why would I want to interfere with that?
There was a slight wobble in the surety of my view at some point in the mid-two-thousands when as a reaction to the influx of Muslims there was, helped by the counter-jihad movement, a rise in English nationalism that appealed to me and many others who were disturbed by these developments and rightly perceived them as a threat to our identity and safety. Part of this was the idea, not entirely false in my estimation, that the English had not had their own monarch since 1066, and had been under Norman oppression ever since.
However, the potency of this feeling was, for me at least, short-lived. Nearly a thousand years had since passed, it was a bit late to complain now, and it seemed to me that correcting it was hardly a pressing issue. In any case, this wasn't an argument against monarchy itself, but rather the House of Windsor. Although truthfully, I couldn't tell you how closely the House of Windsor is related to William the Conqueror, or King Harold for that matter. It's all academic now.
There has been a great deal of criticism levelled at Queen Elizabeth for failing to speak out against our replacement and the denigration of our traditions, culture and very being. This view I have been largely unmoved by. Whilst she did not so much as squeak a word in our defence, neither did she appear, to me at least, to actively aid our destruction. She may have seen her role as representing all the people of Britain's former empire, a point of view I can at least understand, and chose to remain apolitical. The same cannot be said of her successor, King Charles.
Charles, a long-time campaigner on environmental issues, is fully signed up to the WEF's opportunistic attempt to use "The Pandemic" to perform, in their own words, a "Great Reset". Furthermore, he plans to use his upcoming Coronation to promote the joys of diversity and include leaders from all faiths in the traditionally Anglican ceremony. A move which has even provoked complaints from the painfully left-wing Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby. And that's not all. He is now attempting to advance the cause of blacks seeking reparations for slavery by supporting an "inquiry" by the University of Manchester into the family's historic links with the slave trade, which will only embolden them to make further claims. It could be that he is gambling on the loyalty and tolerance of the natives being elastic enough to attempt to appeal to "New Britons".
Criticism of the Windsors doesn't begin and end with Charles, though. The heir to the throne, William, has been critical of the government's plan to send migrants to Rwanda, leading historian David Starkey to brand the Prince "William the Woke". In a visit to Jamaica last spring, William said slavery "should never have happened" and "forever stains our history". His brother, once an extremely popular poster boy for laddishness and un-PC behaviour, has under the influence of his odious wife, Meghan Markle become an insufferable left-wing activist.
So where in the evolution of my thoughts on the monarchy am I now? It seems that the Royal Family, far from representing tradition and the native people of this land, are intent on destroying both. But despite it all, I'm not about to call for abolition and a republic.
Republicanism is far too left-wing for my liking and regardless of the shortcomings of the current crop of Windsors, the Monarchy does still for many people, probably a majority, represent tradition and the British people. It's not a democratic institution either. We aren't required to like it. All this "not my King" stuff that you see around is counterfactual. He is our King whether we like it or not, and I don't.
We will see in the month ahead a surge in patriotic fervour and shows of loyalty to the new King, just like we did upon the death of Queen Elizabeth, and this will upset all the right people. Despite all the wokery, the Royal Family still has the power to push leftist buttons. They will mobilise with calls for a Republic, and we should oppose them.
A republic in the current climate would mean a Rainbow Revolution and a Rainbow Dictatorship even worse than the one we have at the moment.
If you'll permit me a bit of optimism, I'd like to say there is a small slither of hope. Things never stay the same forever and perhaps by the time little Prince George grows up the cultural and political winds may have changed. He may rebel against his parents and end up being, dare I say, based. Pray for him.
I will, for the sake of my mother, probably go around and watch the Coronation with her. But unlike the little boy I once was, I shall bite my tongue for diplomatic reasons, and when the ceremony has its more sickening moments I shall go to the kitchen to make tea.
So with all that in mind, I say God save the King!
But God help him, and us too.
Comments
Post a Comment