Parsimony

castle

‘My lords, I have too much love for my poor people who obtain their bread by the employment of knitting to give my money to forward an invention that will tend to their ruin by depriving them of employment and thus make them beggars.’

                                                                                                                                                                                                Queen Elizabeth I

Since the sublime philosophy of anarchy is beyond human nature in its present stage of intellectual development, a constitutional monarchy seems to be the most practical system and political framework to organise the affairs of a sovereign state, for the monarch fulfils the position of head of that state but cannot exercise the powers with which they are so endowed. Thus these powers cannot be misused by any devious and self-seeking politician.  However, it then, as always, depends on the integrity of a Monarch to fulfil that role with dignity and foresight.

What may one ask if the basic function of a Queen?

Apart from awarding gongs and titles to the great and good – Sir this and that, or Lord something or other, an exercise in self-aggrandisement and functionally useless to boot, is it only to rule over her subjects and maintain the peace amongst the people. Surely there is a degree of morality also involved whereby she personally cares for them and uses her influence and the riches that go with her position to exercise concern for their wellbeing.

One might be forgiven for thinking so.

Poor old woman, brought up from a child to believe she is a Queen, what a bum trip to be so deluded for her whole life. She is one of the, if not the richest women in the world, who sits on many millions in wealth, (Crown estates £7.33 billion) with a collection of jewels beyond price; and a vast store of priceless works of art, with palaces set in huge acres, while ignoring the many of her helpless subjects who spend long bitter winters curled up and shivering in sleeping bags in shop doorways, while charity funded food-banks distribute cheap junk food to the hungry.

But it would seem that any concern she expresses is a hollow charade, for did she not have the outrageous effrontery to appear on television on Christmas day to say that:

 ‘The life of Jesus Christ is an inspiration and an anchor in my life!’

What about feeding the hungry then?

With all respects to the lady and her advisers, who allowed her to so clumsily put her Royal foot in it, this cannot be allowed to pass; what lies!  What hypocrisy!

Buckingham Palace; Windsor Castle; Holyrood; Sandringham; St James’ Palace; Kensington Palace. Clarence House etc. (how many homeless would even one of these accommodate)

But no Royal free food canteens, or Royal shelters for the homeless it is noticed, although her children and grandchildren are provided with properties; mansions and obscene incomes far beyond the dreams of most of her hapless subjects.

This is the stark truth, and all the tut-tutting from the great and the good at this view cannot gainsay it; and as far as setting an example to the subjects of the realm in these straitened and frugal times, and in regard to this flagrant hypocrisy methinks one can feel some justification in saying: ‘A pox on the whole disgusting house.’

 

Dave Tomlin
Montage: Claire Palmer

 

 

 


This entry was posted on in homepage and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *