-Caveat Lector-
>From www.wsws.org
}}}>Begin
WSWS : News & Analysis : Europe : Britain
The Queen Mother�s funeral and the campaign to save the British monarchy
By Julie Hyland
11 April 2002
Back to screen version| Send this link by email | Email the author
It has been said that no country does pomp and ceremony quite like Britain, and all
the stops were certainly pulled out for the Queen Mother�s funeral on April 9.
>From the time of her death, aged 101 years, on March 30 to the final ceremony, no
expense or effort was spared. Tens of thousands lined London�s streets for the
funeral, which was attended by 35 members of the British royal family and the
monarchs of Spain, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece
and Romania. The ranks of assembled dignitaries�which included UN Secretary
Kofi Annan and US First Lady Laura Bush�listened in silence as the Queen
Mother�s list of official titles was read out�Lady of the Most Noble Order of the
Garter, Lady of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle, Lady of the
Imperial Order of the Crown of India, etc. It hardly mattered that much of this made
little sense to the majority of those watching. Above all, the titles are meant to
signify
imperial tradition and continuity, hence Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon�s final
accolade�Mother of Her Most Excellent Majesty Elizabeth The Second, by the
Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her
other Realms and Territories, Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the
Faith, Sovereign of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.
The funeral was the culmination of a carefully choreographed 10-day programme, in
which the nation was ce fed a constant diet of royal grandeur and
militarism�canons, carriages, archers, trumpeters, bagpipes, royal beefeaters and
all manner of archaic, ridiculous and generally concocted traditions. On at least two
occasions, the Queen Mother�s coffin had been drawn through the streets of London
draped in the royal standard with the diamond-studded royal crown perched on top.
In a mawkish 20-minute ceremony the evening before the funeral, the Queen
Mother�s four grandsons stood solemnly at either corner of the catafalque as it lay in
state at Westminster Hall while a queue of tourists and royal watchers filed past to
gawp.
There was something frankly disgusting about the wealth and splendour on display.
Having proclaimed the end of the welfare state some two decades ago, the British
ruling class has created a country characterised by vast social inequalities. The
ceremony took place in the capital city of the world�s fourth richest economy, where
billions are traded every day. But in contrast the British working class is amongst the
poorest in Western Europe�despite working the longest hours. More than one-third
of all children are born into poverty. Many will leave school with little or no
meaningful
qualifications, where they will swell the ranks of the more than six million adults
already classified as functionally illiterate. How many teachers, nurses, or other
vital
services could have been brought with the money frittered away in this one royal
event?
Ending the so-called �something for nothing� society has not applied to the ruling
elite, however. The Labour government�s pledge of �radical� constitutional reform has
been a largely cosmetic exercise that has left hereditary privilege intact. Not for
nothing did the Mirror feel bold enough to editorialise on the Queen Mother: �Yes,
she was rich and privileged. Yes, she had palaces and servants. Yes, she had a
great life at our expense. But she was more than that.�
The extended and lavish nature of the funeral-cum-celebration was not dictated by
any public demand. Even amongst committed royalists, the Queen Mother�s death
could hardly be considered �tragic�. Not only had this extremely wealthy woman lived
to almost 102 years old, the last years of her life had been relatively free from major
illness or disease. Indeed, the death certificate recorded that she had died of
�extreme old age�. What was mounted was more akin to a sustained marketing and
public relations campaign on behalf of the institution of the monarchy. Globalisation
and the processes associated with it�especially those of sharp social
differentiation�have made it increasingly difficult for the powers that be to justify
the
survival of this feudal relic into the 21st century. Indeed, at the time of Princess
Diana�s death in August 1997, the monarchy had begun to feel its time might really
be up.
With the end of the century approaching, the Princess�s death had been used by
sections of the bourgeoisie to press for what they insisted was a more meritocratic
set up. Tony Blair and his New Labour government was chosen as the political
representative of a fabulously wealthy layer which had made its money during the
speculative boom of the 1980s, and which saw his calls for �modernisation� as a
vehicle through which the aristocratic old guard of the British establishment could be
pushed aside and their own political muscle made commensurate with their new-
found economic clout. They demanded at least the reform and scaling down of the
monarchy, if not the move to a republic. This met up with the powerful but politically
undefined feelings of social discontent amongst broader layers of the population,
which felt little sympathy any more for the House of Windsor.
Amidst talk that the royal family would be booed at Diana�s funeral, there was such
concern that a wave of republicanism might sweep the nation, out of all control, that
the Queen Mother had reportedly queried of the crowds on the day of Diana�s
funeral, �What would they do if I keeled over now?� It was a visibly shaken Queen
Elizabeth that appeared on television to tell of her upset on the death of her
estranged daughter-in-law. The Blair government and its supporters were afraid that
anything that undermined the monarchy as the ultimate symbol of inherited privilege
might in the end call into question the entire system of class privilege. The claim
that
Britain was supposedly a meritocracy because Rupert Murdoch was a self-made
man could hardly compensate for the loss of such a powerful symbol of traditional
social structures based on deference to the British state and its supposedly natural
rulers.
And so, having demonstrated how the monarchy�s tenuous existence depended on
their own power, ruling circles, their government and media have made every effort
to rebuild its public image. This has proved to be a difficult task. This year is the
occasion of the Queen�s Golden Jubilee, but there were fears that the lack of public
support for the event could produce a major humiliation with serious political
repercussions. In contrast to the thousands of street parties held during the Silver
Jubilee in 1977, local authorities were reporting bookings of just five or ten. Even
when the booking deadline was extended, the response remained desultory. In the
end, the Queen announced that she would throw her own party in the grounds of the
palace for which people could win tickets�a list of popular bands and musicians
hopefully ensuring a respectable turnout.
The funeral of Princess Margaret, the Queen�s sister, last month was also a non-
event. No one quite knew how to summon up public sympathy for a pampered and
spoilt woman, renowned only for her drinking and partying, and so it was all played
low-key.
In the days following the Queen Mother�s death, the anticipated crowds did not turn
out. Reporters rushed out to the London parks to find the crowds in mourning,
usually only turning up one man and his dog. Newspapers showed rows of queue
barriers, set up for people to pay their last respects, virtually empty. The crowds at
Buckingham Palace were reportedly �thin, consisting chiefly of tourists.... Books of
condolence were opened, but the queues to sign them were brisk to non-existent.�
The BBC was attacked for showing disrespect�its newscaster having worn a purple,
rather than a black tie when announcing the death. Its real crime was its inability to
pretend that there was anything less than mild interest in the royal death.
Media, politicians and royal family alike mounted a concerted campaign to shift the
public response. The Windsors went out of their way to prove that they had learned
their lessons from Diana�s death, and were prepared to �modernise��Princess Anne
in trousers for the funeral procession, flowers from the Queen to her mother, signed
simply �Lilibet�, Prince Charles perpetually, and publicly, on the verge of tears, in
contrast to his stony face during the period of official mourning for the wife he
detested, Diana.
The celebration of a �grand old lady�s� life became a vehicle for celebrating Great
Britain, with an emphasis on tradition and continuity. What better way to mark the
advent of the �new imperialism� recently proclaimed by the Blair government and
already being marked out in the Middle East and Africa, than with a display of the
pomp and ceremony of the old empire. One can only imagine Blair�s delight on
returning from his t�te-�-t�te with US President Bush, and their discussions on
bombing Iraq, to such a display of imperial grandeur and naked militarism on the
streets of London.
Monarchists expressed their hope that the Queen Mother�s death has helped
reinvigorate the monarchy just as in life she had saved the royal family during its
�darkest hour��an oblique reference to 1936 when King Edward VIII was forced to
abdicate, not because of his love for an American divorcee but due to his very public
pro-Nazi sympathies. Her husband, Albert, the Duke of York, was crowned as
George VI on May 12, 1937, to lend an illusion of stability and continuity by making a
direct association with the reign of his father, George V. Having preserved the
monarchy once, her death might just save it again, they opined. A little nip and tuck
here, and the status quo could be preserved�ensuring both stability and change.
Britain�s media has pronounced itself satisfied with their campaign in this regard. The
Mirror editorialised, �There has never been such respect and affection for the Royal
Family. What the Monarchy gives Britain is stability, an increasingly important quality
in an era of uncertainty. Yesterday we looked at Tony Blair and the other politicians
and did not know what the future will bring for them. Yet when we looked at that
small row of seats beside the coffin, we say the future of the Monarchy stretching
ahead for close on a century. Elizabeth, Charles and William. Our Queen and our
next two Kings.�
To pin so much on such a discredited institution�particularly on such deeply flawed
personalities as Charles and William�is a telling indication of political
disorientation,
even desperation. The media and the establishment circles it serves will find to its
cost that it is one thing to stage-manage a funeral and quite another to build a viable
base of social and political support for an outmoded system of rule. In the final
analysis, all the pomp and ceremony, all the talk about �saving� the monarchy only
underscores that it is precisely social and political support that is lacking.
Copyright 1998-2002
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved
End<{{{
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forwarded as information only; no automatic endorsement
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe
simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do
not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not
believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men.
Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it
agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it."
The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutta
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
