Tuesday, 12 April 2011

Why I will not be celebrating the ‘Royal’ wedding.


If you're like me and you wince whenever you see a story in the media about the ‘Royal’ wedding then you may well appreciate this blog. The utterly riveting stories about what music is going to be played at Williams stag party or what colour Kate’s toe nails will be painted have thoroughly entertained us – haven’t they?

What about the local coverage of a school play where under 10’s have acted out the ‘Royal’ wedding in a new school production? How brilliant.

-No.

I will happily take the paid leave; however will not be taking part in any celebrations. I shall be actively shutting myself away and aim not to see or hear anything about the wedding. The media onslaught regarding the ‘Royal’ wedding is inescapable every other day there is a ‘news’ item deemed worth enough to be in a newspaper or news slot. Even on my daily commute past Westminster Abbey a vast stand is currently being constructed to give media/commentators an unobstructed view of the action. I dread to think what non-sensical meaningless drivel the news presenters will be polluting the airwaves with during their commentary of the ‘Royal’ wedding. I can guess they will be showing the same shots over and over again whilst waiting for the couple to show etc. And once they have there will be a melee of crowd shots, aerial and close-ups and the inevitable look at the ‘Royal’ family.

I have no interest in the nuptials of the pin up poster couple for the polo playing, gilet wearing, holidaying in the south of France, Eton educated elitist segment of our population.

Sadly it is not just the very wealthy of our country who feel such adoration for the ‘Royal’ family. The ‘Royal’ families’ popularity permeates social barriers. The inevitable scenes across the country of people waving small plastic union jack flags and the predictable cut outs from The Sun newspaper will make me feel quite sick.

The sentimentality the British public have for the ‘Royal’ family makes me quite sad. The collections of ‘Royal’ plates and tea-cups adorning the display cabinets of many two-up, two-down semis are all over the country – why?

Why do people care so much about an incredibly wealthy, elitist family that undoubtedly does not care about them? The ‘Royal’ family squeeze whatever it can out of this country and give as little back as they can. Perhaps ‘Royals’ think the country owes them something some kind of eternal right to do whatever they like because of the family they are born into.
But they will not care one iota about the British public. I for one would love to hear what the couple have to say about the general public when behind closed doors away from advisers and servants.

I do not seem to be alone in my distaste for the ‘Royal’ wedding as anarchists plan to cause mayhem across London on the day of the wedding. I don’t exactly support this as London will be swamped with young families lining the streets trying to catch a glimpse of the event and they won’t necessarily be familiar with the capital. A large stunt will cause panic which may lead to tragedy because of packed streets and fears of a terrorist attack.

The ‘Royal’ family is such an out dated, redundant institution; I believe the government should cut all ties with it completely. British tax payers should not be contributing to the ever-increasing purse of the ‘Royal’ family. Whether it be for Andrews trade and investment envoys; for whatever purpose they serve, scheduling private trains or planes Charles and Camilla or the highly trained armed guards following ‘Royals’ wherever they go.

They are quite capable of footing the bill themselves so why not let them?

Whatever the proportion of tourism the ‘Royal’ family is said to be responsible for is unsure. However, whatever it is would the tourists still come to London to see Buckingham Palace and the Tower of London if the ‘Royal’ family were made redundant from their role of head of state?
Of course they would. They come here for the history, architecture and tourism gimmicks that entice a tourist to any major metropolis.

Besides the Cameron and Clegg alliance seems intent on cutting everything else why shouldn’t the revenue streams to the ‘Royal’ family be stopped. Especially when the services that benefit the common man in the country have been cut so deeply.

Is it one rule for the rich and powerful and one rule for everyone else? From my totally biased point of view it certainly seems so. Conversely from the perspective of a British aristocrat it may seem a very different story. Particularly when one looks at the benefit cheats, the immigrant families living in multi-million pound Chelsea apartments. So for the most of us in that new buzz word the ‘squeezed middle’ we carry on regardless. Constantly striving to better ourselves and take the next step up on the social ladder.

Moreover who knows, perhaps in a few generations time it may be a member of my own family marrying into the ‘Royals’.

6 comments:

  1. The great thing about the Royals is that they do not really *do* anything and thus can be safely ignored if you wish. Their effect on civil society is pretty much voluntary, unlike almost everything else the real State does, which is for the most part corrosive and coercive.

    I would be delighted to pay twice as much to the Royals if I could pay half as much to the rest if the State.

    This would leave me vastly better off as a consequence as it would have the effect of, well, halving my tax bill, given that the Royals cost chump change by comparison to the rest of the regulatory welfare state that works tirelessly to crush the economy and fund a vast parasite class.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'The royals cost chump change'
    Get your head out of the sand and see the disingenuous palace spin for what it is. Chump change is what it cost for the MPs' expenses of 2009, so that's all right then. Why did we ever feel the need to complain?

    ReplyDelete
  3. If the Royald "do nothing", then what is the point of them? A benign wart on the end of your nose may not be harmful from a health point of view but is still unsightly. So you get it removed forthwith.

    Unlike the wart, the royals are both harmful AND unsightly! They are harmful because they and more importantly thier supporters stifle debate and make the royals the focal point of EVERY positive point about britain, whether it be history, heritage, culture, fashion etc.

    They are also unsightly as they represent a warped, cliche ridden, backward looking view of Britain whan the country should be looking forward!

    ReplyDelete
  4. The royals present an outmoded view of Britain which harms the international perception of our country. The youth are taught to accept benign subservience to the hereditary principle. Singing a national anthem vowing 'long live the Queen - long to reign over us and send her victorious' Combining a christian God with the head of state alienates other faiths and denys inclusivity.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Combining a christian God with the head of state alienates other faiths and denys inclusivity"

    Other faiths are alien and inclusivity is overrated. God save the Queen!!!!

    ReplyDelete