dissent and debate

The YES to Independence campaign is about to launch in Scotland this Friday, followed shortly thereafter by the 'Jubilee' holiday - the establishment trying to reinforce the institution of monarchy aided by a sycophantic media hyperbole.  So vile it is like trying to spoonfeed us, and especially children, something sickening and poisonous while rotting corpses litter the house.  It's out of control.  Astonishingly, this weekend there has been an attempt by parts of the YES campaign to silence any discussion whatsoever on the subject of the monarchy, saying this will damage the campaign.  The reality is that trying to silence people is what is damaging and absolutely unacceptable.  As if the intolerance and imposition of monarchy upon us was not bad enough already.  It is completely and utterly wrong to try to stifle debate on this or any other issue. 

Scratch the surface and one of them declares as a monarchist.  So no-one is supposed to say anything for fear of upsetting the monarchists?  Why would that be?  The answer is because they have no arguments to debate with, which they even admit themselves, 'not one decent, logical, morally-sound argument for the retention of the Royal family in the 21st century'  wrote a monarchist on Sunday here before claiming 'we love' Liz Windsor, as if it was about her as a person and not about a secretive, monolithic institution absorbing millions in public money every year, with an outrageous sense of entitlement to any and all public money astonishing populated by anonymous officials who speak as buildings - 'the palace says' 'Clarence House denies', an institution reinforcing and perpetuating an antiquated feudal political system with monarchic powers swilling around to be accessed by whomsoever manoeuvres their way into Number 10, completely disproportionate to the democratic mandate their party did, or did not, gain and irrelevant to any deals struck with other parties.  Too much of the wrong kind of corrupting power, available at Westminster.

How can we 'love' this remote woman who most of us have never met, nor ever will meet, and whose image is so very carefully controlled, as is she?  We do not know her.  Your town will contain a sweet old lady who may appreciate a bunch of flowers if that's your motivation - give one of them some of your 'love'.  Monarchists who profess 'love' for Liz Windsor should perhaps consider being at the centre of this stultifying institution as 'their' queen is an abuse of her a sad life  She has no human right to vote, stand for election or determine her own destiny, she has not the right to speak anything but the elected government's words.  She is silenced in public as the institution also tries to silence dissent from the people. She and her son do have the right to veto government legislation of course and she has access to the Prime Minister's ear every week where no-one knows what she says then when she is not silenced.  Still it would appear that this 'royal' family would be happier and we'd all be healthier if they were a corgi-whisperer or a woffly weatherman.  Certainly there are monarchy fanatics like this who fill their homes, or business as in this case, with memorabilia and try to impose their fanaticism on others, but there are fanatics of many things and people, so what?   Should one of the Beatles or Bay City Rollers have been head of state?

We're told 'the problem' for republicans is everything we say 'makes perfect sense 'and yet here we are'.  Ah, as if by magic.   The monarchy springs up like a snowdrop through the frozen ground.  Absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the £36,000+ ,of public money of course, that offices at Clarence House and Buckingham Palace have access to every single day to use in the PR promotion of the institution of monarchy then?  Not the relentless sycophantic media.  Nothing whatsoever to do with the insidious permeation of institutions and organisations with 'royal' this, 'royal' that, patron of this, patron of that, the Crown in Parliament, the Sovereign at the core and apogee of a class structure never dismantled, the same families in power century after century.  The descendant of the schemer behind the Glencoe massacre and the union, John Dalrymple Master of Stair, in the House of Lords now.  In 1911 the House of Lords and parliament passed an Act stating it would become determined by popular vote rather than heredity, and then, what happened?  Did they all prick their fingers on a needle and fall asleep for a hundred years?  They may as well have.  The excruciating spectacle last year of the Speaker of the House of Commons whispering in the chamber about how "very rare, very sparing and very respectful" any mention of the royal family should be, when MPs were trying to discuss the unfortunate behaviour and associations of Andrew Windsor.  Perhaps a fairy dies every time the royal family is mentioned in Westminster.  But apparently none of this is what is reinforcing the monarchy, which is actually a Christmas miracle in the face of its own indefensibility.  Aye right.


Monarchists are trying to tell us that a majority of people are so enamoured of Elizabeth Windsor and so thrilled in anticipation at the prospect of Charles as their next head of state that they won't vote YES to independence if they think NO is the best way of keeping the monarchy?  The concept is ridiculous.  What about the many who will vote YES as the best and quickest way to get rid of it?  That's the reality.  And how do you argue for escape from the Westminster system without talking about what the Westminster system entails?  It makes no sense.  Tell the truth and shame the devil.  This should be about opening things up not shutting them down, about moving forward not standing still and terrified.     
    
People should not be silent, nor bow their heads, nor be forced to stand up for something they don't believe in or are actively opposed to and they should not be forced to swear an oath of allegiance they do not mean one word of.  Any blind faith some people might have in monarchy is their problem, not ours, and they're welcome to it.  People can carry on their worshipping and fanaticism about this family after they have been removed from hereditary position in government, access to public money and occupation of public buildings and land.  Don't be surprised if they might not want you to though.