Royal Standards

We know who wins elections in this country, and we know who does not. We should not want any of the former as our Head of State. The republican and the monarchist cases are both rubbish. Abolishing the monarchy would not make Britain less class-bound or less corrupt, unless we were to aspire to the classless cleanliness of Ireland, France, Germany, Italy or the United States. The obscene political power that the Royal Family enjoys because of its extreme wealth is the obscene political power of extreme wealth. Other people also have it, and the problem is hardly confined to Britain or to monarchies.

Nor does the monarchy guarantee stability or liberty in a country that had three General Elections in the four years from 2015, that has had four Prime Ministers in the last six years, and that is blessed with the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act, the Overseas Operations (Service Personnel and Veterans) Act, the Nationality and Borders Act, the Elections Act, and the staggering Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act, still officially soon to be joined by the Online Safety Bill. Were the liberties of the Canadian truckers guaranteed by the Crown? On the contrary, it was precisely the Crown that empowered Justin Trudeau.

But the monarchy is what we have. Merely keeping it would not involve spending legislative time on something that would not make matters any better. In any case, the moment has gone. It was always supposed to have been "when the Queen died", but that made no sense either in principle, since the monarchy is either right or it is wrong, or in practice, since succession is instantaneous, as we have just seen. As for the Royal Prerogative, we should be seeking, not to abolish it, but to exercise it in the cause of economic equality and international peace. The whole of the Royal Prerogative, that is. The Deep State would fight us to the death. That death must be its own.