Elizabeth the Last

Respect, they say, is earned and not given. This most definitely doesn’t hold true for one family in this supposedly United Kingdom, the family whose head is celebrating her 90th birthday. You may have noticed the wall to wall gushing sycophancy in lieu of news on the telly today. It’s hard to avoid it, deliberately so. You’re not allowed to avoid it because you’re a peasant who needs to learn how to respect your betters and the way you’re taught to respect them is by having Nicolas Witchell waffle insulting nonsense on the Six O’Clock news.

The fact that Prince Charles visited a garden centre and uttered a platitude is far more important than the fact that the UK government is stripping us all of our dignity and the money we need to make it through the week in order to reward rich wastes of space like Charles. It’s more important than illegal wars, than whitewashed reports into government misdeeds, than the lack of democracy in this country.

We don’t just have to pay this family respect, we also have to pay them vast amounts of cash to keep them in luxury. Palaces, flunkies, horses, landed estates, and an amount of bling that a Kardashian would think was a bit over the top, who knew that respect was so expensive? Who knew that it was going to cost us so much money to make ourselves look so powerless. Nicolas Witchell knows, but he doesn’t mind. He’s got a cosy supporting role in the world’s most expensive soap opera. A royal correspondent isn’t going to tell the unvarnished truth about the royals because his job depends on preserving the myths. That’s what his job is, preserving the myths and telling us fairy stories of magical princes and princesses. He makes me wish I had a magic fairy wand so I could turn him into a frog. Then at least he’d perform a useful role in the pondlife ecosystem.

Respect is apparently obligatory for this particular bunch, a family who truly deserve the tabloid title of wastrel benefits spongers. But you’d never see that in the Sun or the Mail, it’s only poor claimants who get ritually disembowelled in the tabloids, poor social inadequates who self-medicate on drugs or alcohol. Rich social inadequates who self-medicate on horses, fancy uniforms, Bentleys, and valets who squeeze their toothbrushes for them get gushing praise of the sort that Mediaeval hagiography writers would find a bit over the top. St Elizabeth the patron saint of walking and waving at the same time, isn’t she maaahvellous! Look at Prince Charles with a chest full of medals that his mammy gave him for services to being her wean. Walking and waving at the same time is what royals call working, and the state takes squillions of our taxes and turns it over to them for services to everyday pedestrianism. There’s another miracle right there.

Today the papers are full of the news that an old lady with access to the very best of healthcare is still in good health. This is a good thing, no one wishes ill on the elderly. And in this case we have particular reason to be grateful because the longer that the Queen keeps going the more she can stave off lumbering us with her meddling halfwit son. It’s the only real public service she performs, but then since she was the one who lumbered us with him in the first place that’s really not saying much. Royalists claim that Charles will be an excellent king. This is of course entirely correct, but only if we admit that this is an instance of the use of the word excellent with the meaning “utter constitutional distaster waiting to happen”.

The UK is a patronage state, it runs on graces and favours bestowed by the powerful on those that are in their good books and who do their bidding. And at the very pinnacle of this pyramid of privilege sit the royal family. A peerage is meaningless without a monarch. We can only have a House of Lords because we have a monarchy. The royals are the keystone in the arch of unaccountable authority that rules over us, that determines our laws and tells us what the national priorities must be.

Scotland, by and large, seems to be relatively immune to the dubious charms of the royals. The BBC was clearly embarrassed by the lack of enthusiasm that we surly Caledonians showed for Will-n-Kate’s nuptials. Since there was a national shortage of spontaneous street parties they had to fulfil their London ordered quota of royal themed items on the news by telling us how much we could get if you sold off your patriotic made in China commemorative teacup on eBay. Not much, as it turns out. The royals cost a lot of money, and they’re really cheap.

The lack of enthusiasm for the royal family in Scotland is representative of the disconnect between the British state and the Scottish people. Charles donning a kilt to attend some Highland games does not foster any affection for the institution of monarchy amongst the Scottish people. It just makes us see him as yet another rich and privileged aristo who owns vast tracts of our country and who has more of a say in running it than we do.

With the Westminster Parliament we’re going to be stuck with the royals forever. They’re central to Westminster’s mythology of itself, the absolute authority of the Westminster parliament derives ultimately from the monarch. They’re never going to concede that the people are sovereign, because that places a body above the Westminster parliament. The only chance we’ve got of getting rid of them is with Scottish independence.

The official line of the SNP might be to retain the monarchy. But in an independent Scotland the people will be sovereign and the people will decide, not any one political party. An independent Scottish parliament is far more likely to concede a referendum on the monarchy for the simple reason that republican sentiment is far stronger in Scotland, and few are thrilled by the prospect of Charles as king. Then we’ll get to decide whether the current monarch should be Elizabeth the Last.

BUTRT cover front(1)BARKING UP THE RIGHT TREE Barking Up the Right Tree has now been published and is an anthology of my articles for The National newspaper. You can submit an advance order for the book on the Vagabond Voices website at http://vagabondvoices.co.uk/?page_id=1993

Price is just £7.95 for 156 pages of doggy goodness. Order today!

A limited number of signed copies of the two volumes of the Collected Yaps is also still available. See below for order details.

Donate to the Dug This blog relies on your support and donations to keep going – I need to make a living, and have bills to pay. Clicking the donate button will allow you to make a payment directly to my Paypal account. You do not need a Paypal account yourself to make a donation. You can donate as little, or as much, as you want. Many thanks.

Donate Button

Order the Collected Yaps of the Wee Ginger Dug Vols 1 & 2 for only £21.90 for both volumes. A limited number of signed copies is still available, so get your order in now! P&P will be extra, approximately £3 per single volume or £4 for both sent together. If you only want to order one volume, please specify which. Single volumes are available for £10.95 per copy.

To order please send an email with WEE GINGER BOOK ORDER in the subject field to weegingerbook@yahoo.com giving your name, postal address, and email address and which volumes (1, 2 or both) you wish to order. I will contact you with details of how to make payment. Payment can be made by Paypal, or by cheque or bank transfer.

62 comments on “Elizabeth the Last

  1. Hugh Curtains says:

    I fundilymundily agree.

  2. BampotsUtd.wordpress.com says:

    Reblogged this on Bampots Utd.

  3. Wullie says:

    Paul. You too could live a long time if you got regular blood transfusions,new blood in aw that. Does wonders apparently.

  4. Angus Skye says:

    Well said Paul. It is truly sickening that in 2016 many public officials (servants!) have to plead allegiance to the queen. The same applies to new UK citizens.

  5. Illy says:

    Whereas, the gossip on the king of Denmark is that he’s just a rich guy running a line of tourist attractions*, without any government assistance.

    I wouldn’t object to the royals, as long as we don’t have to pay them.

    * “Roll up, roll up, come see the palace of the King of Denmark” counts as a tourist attraction, right?

  6. On 7th January 1997, a Carlton TV programme, called, ‘Monarchy: The Nation Decides’, hosted a studio debate and phone poll, where 2.6 million viewers voted.

    In the UK as a whole, 34% of voters wanted to abolish the monarchy.

    Scotland voted by a majority of 56% to get rid of the Windsors. (Hooray for us)!

    Northern Ireland was evenly split 50% for & 50% against abolishing the monarchy.

    Wales voted by a slight margin in favour of keeping the Windsors.

    England was the only nation with a large majority voting to keep the Windsors.

    Andrew Neil blotted his jotter permanently that night, with Liz the Last, and all her large brood, by declaring on the show, “The Royals are not value for money. But perhaps the biggest price we pay for the monarchy is not to be found in any balance sheet; it’s the depressing signal that wealth, power and position are still inherited, rather than earned.”

    And that was the first and last time I ever agreed with A Neil…

    • lanark says:

      I remember clearly watching that show. I was proud that Scotland was the only red part of the UK map (I think the pro royal parts were green). I think that was the first stirrings of a desire for independence.

  7. JGedd says:

    Whenever I hear people talking of this or that conspiracy, my default position was always usually that it would be difficult to keep so many secrets from leaking out to the public. Then I think of the Royal family and wonder.

    There have been times when the wall of silence has been breached, such as when the Charles and Diana scandal was broken and then when Diana died. As a result of this cascade of bad news for the Royal family, even the usually royalist press carried outraged opinion columns beginning to consider that it might be time for the monarchy to end and for the present queen to be, in fact, Elizabeth the Last.

    Didn’t last though. The establishment looked into the future without the royal extravaganza and frightened themselves silly. That’s when you see the establishment PR at work. It’s like a theatrical event when the audience knows that the scene shifters are at work behind the curtains, but when the curtain rises, the audience accepts the contrivance as reality and is prepared to be dazzled.

    The royal family is part of celebrity culture and is being promoted as relentlessly as any high-powered PR agency would project their clients – keeping their profile constantly high in the media, smothering any negative publicity, protecting the brand. Her majesty is the ‘kingpin’ that holds the whole shoddy enterprise together. She is the establishment’s security that as long as the public is prepared to go along with the whole daft business, then they are safe. It confirms for the establishment, that enough of the public are prepared to believe six impossible things before breakfast, like Lewis Carroll’s queen.

  8. […] Wee Ginger Dug Elizabeth the Last […]

  9. Macart says:

    They are rich beyond the dreams of avarice, (so the saying goes).

    I don’t know these people and they most certainly don’t know me. They live on a different plane of existence from me and indeed anyone I know. They have different values, a different world view. So why on earth do I, do we, owe them anything? The answer of course, is that we don’t.

    We’re not all in it together y’know? We never have been and never will be and to be honest, because of that galactic societal distance I don’t really see why some people pay them such deference. I reserve my respect and my cash for real heroes, real princes and princesses among the people. They work in food banks, hospitals and community charities. They repair power lines in the middle of winter storms and deliver aid to the needy. My royalty, my nobility wear work clothes and put the poor and the needy, the sick and the elderly first.

    No harm to Brenda and the weans, but frankly if they want respect? I suggest they live off their own wealth and the produce of their own estates. I reckon they’ve enough to get by on for several lifetimes. Some of us will be delighted if we leave this life breaking even.

    • Al. says:

      My understanding is that those estates are state-owned. The royals are already reaping massive profits from them. Their “private” wealth is something of a grey area. There is a very informative book available. “Living off the State”, I think.

      • Macart says:

        Not sure how it is these days (last I recall), but ‘as sovereign’ the queen owns the Crown Estate whose profits are credited to public funds through act of parliament. Also ‘as sovereign’ the crown holds the occupied royal palaces of Windsor, Kensington, St James’ and Buckingham. The whole sovereign grant, civil list, crown and state management thing is fantastically vague and complex to say the least.

        Personal ownership though is another thing and I believe Balmoral, Sandringham and the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall (But n’ bens really) fall into that category. What else there may be, who knows? I don’t reckon the family is short of a roof however. 😀

      • hettyforindy says:

        yes indeed. ‘Living off the state, a critical guide to royal finance’ is excellent. By Jon Temple, I think it’s 2008, so things will need updating, but basically the biggest scroungers in the UKok, are massively, unbelievably rich on the back of the people. They are also very protected and very very secretive regards finance, property, business’s and taxes etc. The book makes for shocking reading, if you can get hold if it, it took me a year to source it.

    • Weel said, Macart.
      I doff my cap to no man or woman.
      Kings, queens, princes, princesses, Lord, Ladies, Earls and the like.
      The heredity ones plundered and pillaged their way to their wealth and position, while the modern ‘Nobility’, the HoL hangers on, have been rewarded for keeping the citizens in their place.
      The history of kings queens, and their Lords reads like a box set of the Sopranos.

      The Lord gave Noah the rainbow sign,
      No more water, the fire next time.

      First we take back our sovereignty, then rebuild Scotland as an Independent nation.
      The royals get blanket coverage, statues, and portraits everywhere; rather like Mao, Stalin, Saddam Hussein, or Gaddafi.
      Big Lizzie is watching you.
      It is an absolute insult to 21st Century freedom and democracy that this Oligarchy still has power over us all.
      Can I expect a knock at four in the morning and be ‘renditioned’ to the Tower?

  10. Steve Wood. says:

    Good article Paul. You seem to have similar feelings about our Royal “betters” as myself.
    People say that the royals are not political. Shite. The royals are the most political organisation in the UK. They are the glue that holds all of the establishment together.
    I could perfectly accept the queen or prince Charles as head of state of an independent Scotland – as long as they had put themselves up for election and got voted in.

    • Saor Alba says:

      I cannot accept any of them in Scotland as head of anything. Paul is absolutely spot-on in his comments, for example;

      “They’re central to Westminster’s mythology of itself, the absolute authority of the Westminster parliament derives ultimately from the monarch. They’re never going to concede that the people are sovereign, because that places a body above the Westminster parliament. The only chance we’ve got of getting rid of them is with Scottish independence.”

      Therefore, they have to go.


      • WRH2 says:

        I agree that they need to go and with independence we must become a republic with the same kind of presidents as the Republic of Ireland. They have, in recent years, been very fortunate in having two great presidents in Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese. That’s what I hope to see in an independent Scotland.

  11. tris says:

    I’m absolutely indifferent to them. What I can’t abide is the slavering idiots who worship them, but when asked why haven’t a clue.

    And I’m heartily sick of hearing about them on the news.

    Pap for the hard of thinking.

  12. lanark says:

    Excellent article. Let the Republic of Ireland be joined by the Republic of Scotland as another part of these islands to say cheerio to the Saxe-Coburg-Windsor-Gothas.

  13. PQsCPRTeam says:

    The first article I ever read by George Monbiot explained in great detail about the ‘square mile’ . The Lord Mayors procession and the wool gatherers United club, followed by some other ridiculous throwbacks to a different time , anointed by a different monarch. The great untouchables with a seat at the speakers elbow.
    It was then I realised not why Westminster wouldn’t change, it’s that it couldn’t change and sitting on top of the whole ‘ bally lot’ the monarchy.
    Funnily enough last week, when the Panama papers were released and David Cameron was having his ‘ issues’ someone quipped on Twitter, when the King is in trouble , throw the Archbishop to the people. Mr Wellby duly obliged.
    No personal Ill will to them just indifference

  14. mealer says:

    I find it a tad inconvenient that the countries which I most admire are mostly monarchies.

    • Anthony Little says:

      There is nothing wrong with a monarchy per se (e.g look at the Netherlands model) albeit that it is totally undemocratic 😉 But in some respects a benign dictatorship would work well in many countries. However, it becomes a distinct problem when the monarchy/’ruling class’ forget that their prime objective should be to manage the country FOR ALL its citizens.

      Our political system caters for the 1% irrespective of which of the London parties in is power, This is their overriding ‘hidden’ policy – to maintain and enhance the Establishment. They are supported in this by a Corporate Media owned by a handful of billionaires, none of whom live in the UK. The BBC is simply the mouthpiece of the Establishment and usually support whichever of the London Parties is in power this time around.

      This situation can only last for so long until the pressure on the 99% becomes too great. Although Brits are fairly poor at civil revolution, the use of the political system to snub the Establishment in Scotland in 2015 is a demonstration (to me at least) that we are in a critical stage of the constitutional debate.

      IF the SNP win another majority in May, and IF there is a breakthrough at local authority level next year, then the cycle of ‘quiet revolution’ will be in full swing. After that the entire UK establishment/political structures are in their last stages. The obvious final step is Independence.

      It’s coming

  15. Saor Alba says:

    Off topic – but I think this is important.

    I was talking to one of the janitors today in the school I used to teach in latterly in my career.
    We were talking about voting and I carelessly asked how his leanings were. He replied that he and all of his family used to be labour through and through, but they are all SNP now. He said he was voting SNP.

    However, I became aware that he did not realise that there were 2 votes – constituency and list. Another of his colleagues, who was listening intently said that he knew that there were 2 votes, but opined that the second vote was to allow him to vote for another party. Apparently, he did not realise that the second vote could be used to vote for the same party on the list.

    I wonder how many people out there who are not completely au fait with the voting system might fall into a trap and may not use their second vote as they might wish. I am not suggesting that you tell them how to vote, just to point out their options. It may be good to keep this in mind when you are talking to anyone, friends, colleagues, neighbours etc, who may not know the ins and outs of the system.

    As for me, my intention is to use the constituency vote for my party of preference and the second list vote for the same party. This is because I believe that they have governed well and, in fact are the only party capable of proper democratic government. They also have the policies that match my aspirations for an Independent Scotland and its people. So my vote is a proper tactical vote which is not a gamble – twice for the same party.

    SNP X 2.


    • A timely reminder, Saor Alba.
      I hear the Unionists are lying on the doorsteps, alleging that it iss illegal to vote for the same party at constituency and regional level.
      They are kakking themselves.
      I was in Dumbarton High Street today. JaBa the But has tasken over an empty shop.
      Bothe windows plastered with a few wee Jackie Baillie posters, and a sign on the door.
      ‘Out leafleting. Back shortly’.
      Oh dear, they can’t even get somebody to mind the store in her ‘heartland’.

      • WRH2 says:

        I’ve seen this on Facebook as well that Labour are telling people it’s illegal to vote SNP X 2. Someone should ask them how they would know since we are given two separate papers. Or is there something they are not telling us about scrutiny of the ballot papers? Anyway, if they want to read WGD I’ll save them time and trouble as it’s SNP X 2 for me.

        • We’re 4 x SNP x2 Chez Collatin, WRH2.
          I’ve tried my best to get a hold of Ruth’s and Willie’s ‘manifestos’.
          Just a long list of losers’ Platitudes from both, with Davidson actually admitting defeat before a postal vote has been covertly counted.
          Willie Rennie’s 10 point platitudes is quite frankly an amateur joke.
          Nothing from Dugdale yet except £3000 to FT buyers, and Ban the Bomb, but whisper it if you happen to be down South, London Town.
          O/T I see liar Carbuncle got off Scot free. ‘Nothing to see here’, ‘we don’t have jurisdiction’ says the Westminster Watchdog. He joins a long list of Lib Dems who got away with it.
          The sooner we untangle from this failed Southern State, the better.
          Two weeks and counting.

  16. Sooz says:

    Excellent piece, Paul. And praise, too, for Macart’s post.

    I don’t wish the elderly lady any ill will, but I do mind that we will be saddled with a king and his heirs who will be in post for no other reasons than a) the family firm being handed on and b) to keep the Them and Us culture alive and breathing.

    I notice William was being taken to task by some in the media for being workshy, and defended his apparent inaction by saying he wanted to spend time with the family before launching himself fully into royal duties. His job as a pilot seems to be as and when he can spare the time, which is about once or twice a month. If he was dreading the thought of his future life cocooned in this make-believe world, wouldn’t he be making the most of an ordinary job that brings him face to face with reality and salt-of-the-earth workers? Am I being too harsh, perhaps, and he really is hating the whole idea of his life being mapped out until death? In which case, wouldn’t it be absolutely wrong for a fawning public to expect him to live out their fantasies of what royalty is because it makes them feel all warm and fuzzy?

    Enough. Enough of this Grimm’s fairy tale. End it, and soon, and give this family a relatively normal life. Let’s not condemn Charles, or William, or George, or their descendants, to the horrors of such a restricted and rigid life. Let Elizabeth see out her days and then retire the rest of them.

  17. Black Rab says:

    I’d shoot the fuck wits in the head if I could get away with it. I find it boring debating what they are and their supposed value is to anything……………….fuck em all.
    Great post Paul.

    • hettyforindy says:

      Tempted to agree with you. But I would take their land and castles and turn them into environmental educational centres, and the royals can live in tenements, or even a wee bungalow, no 100 room palaces, with 100s more rooms in even more castles they occupy, as and when they bloody well choose! FFS, to have a royal family with so much property and land, is just sick. Its 2016, not 1616!

  18. punklin says:

    I watched yesterday as thousands slavishly cheered on a woman who has accrued far too much power in a cult of the personality that is worrying for the future of our nation’s democracy.

    But enough about the launch of the SNP manifesto.

    Just my wee joke…

    Both votes SNP.

  19. Guga says:

    Regarding Betty Windsor, or to give her full name, Elizabeth Hanover Saxe-Coburg Gotha Schleswig-Holstein Soenderburg-Glucksburg, and her baggage, they are all little better than benefits scroungers that we as a nation can do without.

    Betty is also the head of an amoral establishment which is riddled with corruption and greed. But, despite her position, she has never done anything to attempt to change the situation in favour of the hoi polloi who are forced to keep her and her hangers-on in their lavish life style. Incidentally, her personal wealth consists of assets which she and her predecessors have stolen from the people over the centuries; though despite her personal wealth, we still regularly have to fork out millions to keep her and her baggage in absolute comfort.

    As for her being 90, that is not surprising considering that she, like her mother before her, has had the best of health care that other people’s money could provide.

    On the question of sovereignty, the supreme authority in Scotland is the Scottish people a fact
    acknowledged by Lord Cooper as Lord President at the Court of Session in 1953: “The unlimited sovereignty of Parliament has no counterpart in Scottish Constitutional Law”. The English may be subservient to the English parliament, but the Scottish people are not subservient to any parliament.

    Anyway, the sooner we are rid of this bunch of foreign benefits scroungers, the better; and when Betty pops he clogs would be the ideal time, especially before we get lumbered with the half-wit, “tampon” Charlie.

  20. David Agnew says:

    Thomas Paine called the monarch a “mental leveling” system: the idea that political sovereignty can be passed down from one generation to the next through a bloodline, and that any “legitimate” sovereign has an equal right to that political power regardless of their skills, capacities, or moral character. This is a major reason why Paine called “hereditary monarchy” the most “ridiculous figure of government” imaginable.

    My favorite quote on royalty is from Mark Twain’s The chronicle of young Satan, where he described them as a parcel of usurping little monarchs who despise you, who would feel defiled if you touched them. Would shut the door in your face if you proposed to call. They are mendicants supported by your alms but address you as benefactor towards beggar.

    We have something worse in the UK. We have a monarchy that reigns but does not rule. She is paid to be a rubber stamp to whatever government is elected. Designed to prevent another civil war it is way past any benefits and is just a drain on resources. They should have been done away with ages ago.

  21. Polscot says:

    Elizabeth the First and Last
    excellent commentary, WGD. Especially on this day when it seems to be impossible to escape the propaganda onslaught.

  22. Kenzie says:

    I too as an ex-serviceman constantly wonder what Charlie’s medals are for? I can understand why Harry got his medals but I cannot understand how Charlie and Bungalow Bill (nothing upstairs) got theirs.

    • benmadigan says:

      as far as I know the Royals always have to have more medals, more praise, more kudos etc than any career officer of the same age or one who started his/her career when they did. Even when the Royals do sweet f . . . all!

      it must be very hard for career servicemen and women to stomach – they risk their lives etc and get their medals but can never match the Royals who will always trump their achievements because the Royals always have to be in command of the Armed Forces.

  23. Lewis Thomson says:

    That makes it all pretty clear. You have the right of it.

  24. Morna Kirk says:

    Excellent post as always, Paul, and I so enjoy the comments too. The Independant Republic of Scotland: it’s got a lovely ring to it. I can’t wait!

  25. Norma Slimmon says:

    And this is the only media I will read today!

  26. Luigi says:

    For all those fiercely loyal subjects, who constantly remind us how great the royals are and how all the other countries in the world are jealous of us, money well spent etc., I have a very simple solution:

    A voluntary royal tax for those who wish to support it. Everyone else can opt out. If you love the monarchy, then pay for it, but don’t ask the rest of us to pay for it.

    The monarchy would disappear overnight.

    Same goes for Trident. 🙂

  27. Dan Huil says:

    The so-called royal family makes me retch. The sycophancy surrounding them makes me puke.

  28. Iain says:

    I would like to congratulate the queen on reaching the age of 90. It isn’t everyone living on benefits who manages to live so long.

    • I recall during the Great Fall of the Unionists last May, that some of Margaret Curran’s (former) constituents should have got a telegram from Auld Betty on their 60th birthday, a rare achievement in some of the wards.
      Half a century of Labour/New Labour, and a Labour Cooncil.
      They did a bang up job, didn’t they?
      ‘Pooling and sharing’, ‘the best of both worlds’, ‘hard working families’.
      What a sick Unionist joke.
      I see she’s back, faffing on about twitter outrage.
      After May 5th, onwards to the 2017 LA elections.
      What price a juicy wee SNP BAD Sex Scandal days before the vote?
      Can’t wait.

    • benmadigan says:

      I suppose it’s to be expected when you never work, never bring up children or grandchildren, never spend nights up with a sick child or parent, never worry about making ends meet or paying the rent/mortgage, eat the best of food cooked by top chefs and never, ever wash up or make a bed, have 1st class medical attention on call, with no drug ever too expensive for you, exercise regularly by gentle horse-riding in the fresh country air of your own park and estate.
      i suppose we could all reach 90 if we lived like that

  29. Prince Charles received his first medal from his wee, auld maw at the age of four years old (aw bless)!

    As he ages he is automatically given some military rank or other, e.g when he turned 58 he was automatically made a 4 star general, admiral and air-marshall. He threatened to throw a temper tantrum otherwise.

    The wee soul picks & chooses what badges he will wear, on any ‘big day’ for the UK plebs – i.e. any ‘hatches, matches or dispatches’ in his extended family.

    Charles also receives lots of medals from foreign countries on his birthday! So while plebs wear ‘I am 6′ badges, Charles’ birthday badges are really his medals, (aw, bless).

    I imagine all his birthday badges etc. are kept in a big toy chest, at the foot of his bed, marked, ‘Dressing Up Box’.

  30. Robert Graham says:

    Very apt and funny and your take on Charles Priceless ,today’s slabering by the English media would make you puke , This constant Elizabeth ll pish , oh no she’s not and never has been ll try finding a post box with ER ll in Scotland they were all changed in 1954 after a few dubious explosions when a number apperntly disappeared , this was later found to have been instigated by Ml5 who supplied the explosives and encouraged the use of said explosives this was uncovered in a later trial all Ml5 work to discredit any Nationlist Party , in the case of this Scottish election watch out for strange events Ml5 still at it today and as eager as in 1954 , same shit different day .

  31. The Duchess of Grimsby says:

    The boys in my Cub Scout troop are honouring Her Majesty’s unparalleled achievement by holding a 21 fart salute this evening outside the Mafeking Arms Hotel at 8pm. Come along and join in.

  32. Jan Cowan says:

    Excellent post, WGD. I can see they’re going to have problems with their latest George but that won’t be a worry for us. We’ll have regained independence by then and left that family in our wake.

  33. Stuart Knox says:

    Hello Paul,
    This is about a much earlier post of yours called The Great Gingerbread Robbery. I’m just talking to someone and they’re asking for a source about the Alcohol Tax on Scottish whiskey being included in the area where they were exported and not from Scotland.
    Sorry to be a pest

  34. william heath says:

    Very interesting

  35. hettyforindy says:

    Excellent article Paul. I included in an earlier comment that a very good book, called ‘living off the state, a critical guide to royal finance’ is well worth a read if you can get hold of it. By Jon Temple, 2008. Published by Progress books., 203 pages of staggering facts about how the royals operate, and just how much power and ridiculous amounts of money they actually have.

  36. Dr-De-la_Zouch says:

    Good on Brenda…she has succeeded in being a po-faced non-entity for 90 years…and along the way we get her embarrassing racist husband and an extended odious brood to continue the line come what may.

    Let’s face it there isn’t a thing that they have they haven’t stolen from the people. William the conqueror stole the whole of England and Henry VIII stole the Catholic Church.

    And there isn’t a thing that they do that isn’t a party political broadcast for the Windsors. Harry for example whizzes off to Swaziland to play football with dirt poor black kids in an orphanage and the knee-bending sycophants all gush about what an ordinary good egg he is and how he is worth the money. Never mind the fact he didn’t bother to enquire of his equal the King why he needed to buy top of the range BMW’s for his 13 wives in a country with no roads. They always avoid the awkward questions in favour of the easy sound bite and photo opportunity.

  37. arthur thomson says:

    The monarchy is the linchpin of the British state. The Royals exist to give a veneer of justification to obscene wealth, inequality and state violence.

    My heart is with Black Rab but we can never countenance violence. We are above that.

  38. You all sound quite traumatised. I praise the Lord, yet again, that I have no TV.


  39. Great post, articulated the thoughts of many I know.
    When the subject comes up, I imagine the Royal family sitting round the dinner table, laughing their heads off that they haven’t been found out yet.

  40. jon temple says:

    Speaking – unashamedly of course! – as the author of ‘Living Off The State: a critical guide to UK royal finance’, I feel I must let you know that the latest available paperback (2nd) 2012 edition is available – just Google it – through Amazon, but that the updated (3rd) 2015 edition is also available from the Kindle store in eBook format. Hopefully it will be Elizabeth the Last, and the end of a dynasty that has done – and continues to do so – so very well courtesy of the British taxpayer….

Comments are closed.