The Queen died and is now being buried in a lengthy solemn ceremony. Tedious, if you ask me. As it unrolls before my eyes, I keep asking myself, what’s the difference between grieving Stalin and grieving the Queen? Stalin’s funeral is known to be a mass event too, but outside Russia it is mostly seen as another stroke to the portrait of a totalitarian GULAG that the USSR was according to many. Yet, Stalin was a controversial leader who consolidated the country and won the war of extermination 30 nations wages against us. Elizabeth II was a nominal leader of an Empire based on loot and pillage, she was not a very good mother-in-law and probably not the best sister either.
Interestingly, Stalin’s funeral was a Soviet affair, I don’t think that many global outlets followed the ceremony 24/7 telling the public who came to pay their last respects to Joseph I. But with Elizabeth II we have this obnoxious coverage that’s almost impossible to miss.
Moreover, many news outlets and blogs all over the world are colonized by the UK Royal family. We have had no royals since 1917, and I wish I could proudly say that I have no idea who Kate Middleton/Catherine of Cambridge is or that I have never heard of Meghan Markle. Unfortunately, I even know what these two women look like.
Now let me make myself clear. I don’t care about the UK Royal Family, I don’t care about the deceased Queen. Moreover, whenever I give her life a thought, I come to the conclusion that she was anything but great. What exactly has she achieved? Which wars did she prevent? How did she contribute to the well-being of the British people? Or her own family? Did she manage to prevent the wars in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Ukraine or other countries where NATO had interests. How about Northern Ireland and the Falkland islands? Being aloof doesn’t make one great, nor living to 96 does. Being a living image of an era doesn’t make one important. Being a symbol of a society that is still classist doesn’t make one great.
Actually, I would compare the Queen to Brezhnev in his last years. His death made people apprehensive of imminent changes which would probably not be very good. Those were in the air then. The Queen died during the energy crisis with the WWIII in the air, and lamenting her death people are very likely to be unconsciously lamenting the period of abundance, relative unity and relative peace.
Speaking of peace. European leaders keep abusing this word after WWII that they lost. Now they say that Russia violated peace [in Europe]. There is nothing more important than peace [in Europe]. The rest of the world can burn to ashes and serve as a fertilizer to Europe, but in Europe there must be peace.
“In remembering the appalling suffering of war on both sides, we recognise how precious is the peace we have built in Europe since 1945”
Elizabeth II
Except there was no peace even in Europe. Remember Yugoslavia? I keep saying that what happened to Belgrade made the EU a stillborn. It has blood at its foundation. Many would argue that it is the case for most countries, yes, but no. Yugoslavia was a ritual sacrifice to the rule based order, liberal democracy and the so-called European values. A gang rape to celebrate the hegemony of the Tausendjähriges Reich West. Even back then they would have preferred Russia, but …rusty Soviet nukes were still there. Scary.
And where was the Queen then? Did she say anything to oppose it? Nope, I don’t think so. Please, correct me, if I am wrong, but I failed to Google anything about her being particularly pro-peace then or anytime during her reign. I only managed to find some platitudes that are as useless, as they are right.
“It has always been easy to hate and destroy. To build and to cherish is much more difficult.”
“We know the reward is peace on earth, goodwill toward men, but we cannot win it without determination and concerted effort”.
Elizabeth II
To sum up, I think the Queen didn’t accomplish anything global, so her death is a British affair, not a global one. Let her rest in peace she could not protect or never tried to.
“It has perhaps always been the case that the waging of peace is the hardest form of leadership of all.”
Elizabeth II
*Quotes taken from https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/queen-elizabeth-ii-quotes and https://parade.com/1028154/alexandra-hurtado/queen-elizabeth-ii-quotes/.
The job of the head of state in the UK is to be non-partisan. So pretty much anything the Queen said as an official statement is going to be a particularly bland reflection of the views of the UK political élite as a whole. The whole point of the monarch’s position now is to do nothing, so it is a little unfair to criticise her for having done nothing.
But I think you are right about the parallel between her and Brezhnev. The UK is falling fast. The élites detest the British people and make little secret of it. They call us “gammon”. At least the Queen pretended not to hate us.
It’s more about arguing whether she was THAT great. She wasn’t. It’s a British affair, let them mourn. But don’t ask me to feel anything about it or admire her.
I think the Windsors are just very good at public relations.
I’m not surprised the Americans are interested in our Royal family – guilt for having betrayed King and Country back in 1776 no doubt haunts their conscience. I am a bit surprised that other countries are interested – your attitude seems more reasonable. I can’t say I’m that upset about her death either – she had a good innings after all.
Despite the Norman Conquest, the current Royal family is still descended from our old Kings of Wessex and England through the Plantagenets, but do you know the only surviving child of our last English King, Harold II, went to Russia and married Vladimir Monomakh? The Rurikovichi have as good a claim to the English throne as anyone, if there are any of them left. I wonder if that doesn’t explain a little of the bizarre long term Russophobia of the British élites: the knowledge that the people they robbed and expropriated 950 years ago are still out there and might come back to get them.
Aelfsige,
Thanks for weighing in. As a Brit, how do you overall assess the UK’s irrational Russophobia? They seem to have it much worse than even continental Europe.
Firstly, I’d like to thank you for all your work on this site, I really enjoy reading what you have to say.
As for the state of the UK, it’s a slow burning catastrophe. Almost every institution is failing at its publicly stated function. I think a lot of the anti-Russian campaign is the Establishment trying to distract the public from various failings of governments.
On the international stage, the UK is, aside from still having nukes, a third rate military power. The Ukraine has probably lost more men this year that we have in the whole Army. We have aircraft carriers without aircraft, but a sense of nation that depends an awful lot on our military successes in the past. We’ve left the EU, so where else can our politicians strut and posture before their peers except the corridors of NATO? I think Russophobia gives our elite a sense of purpose and they would otherwise lack.
It also doesn’t require much original thought. For example, the Cold War project to funnel troublesome immigrants into jihadi networks in Afghanistan could be easily redirected to “help” with Chechnya. Shame about Al-Qaeda, but no pain, no gain. Attracting oligarchs with their stolen billions to London in the 90’s helps the economy, but also gives us access to Russian resources and influence over Russian power (until it doesn’t). Russia has a huge advantage as a target for UK troublemaking in that it is plausibly powerful, but conveniently far away from the UK. Whitehall can brew as much trouble as it likes, but the chances Mr Kinzhal will come calling are very slim.
As to how they get to whip up public feeling so that the country is still festooned in blue and yellow flags, aside from social media control, the BBC has a huge role to play. There have been doubts as to whether the TV licence would be allowed to continue, whether non-payment may be decriminalised, so when Covid rolled into town, the BBC was first in line to trumpet the government line and to sideline and smear any dissidents. In the UK, because of the reduction in staffing in national papers, journalists and editors in practice don’t need to check the truth of any report that has been copied from the BBC. As it gives them control over the news agenda, the BBC don’t object to that sort of plagiarism either. It creates an effective (about the only thing in the UK that actually works, at least in an emergency) “information” channel: government – BBC – other media – public.
The “neutral” BBC can fulfil its formal requirement to be even-handed and still back up the government’s line. Prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, pro-war and anti-war speakers were almost exactly 50/50 on news programmes. However, the discussion was framed according to the government’s agenda: 94% of coverage assumed the government was telling the truth about Saddam’s WMD, only 6% of the time told what turned out to be the truth. Things haven’t got any better since then.
However they managed it, they have been very successful. When I came back from holiday, just after the SMO started, the office was full of people bursting to tell each other how much they wanted to hurt Russians, punish Russians, very loudly. This coming from citizens of a country which has bombed Yugoslavia, Libya, Syria, invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, all in the last quarter century.
Marija, as someone who is considered a non-Slovenian remnant of “Slovenia of the past” and as someone who was eight months old when our “Stalin and Brežnjev combined” Tito died and cried nonetheless – allegedly because everyone else was crying at the time, but I know it was just my reaction to the general lamenting of everyone and everything around me at the time – cuz babies are extremely prone to that – I’d totally make you an honorary Slovenian and ask you to join our presidential race … You’d actually bring something of essence to the election campaign in “my former” nation. You’re at least 300% more Slovene that whoever will end up running in this indolent ritual we call presidential election with the victor, the future “empress of Slovenian hearts” known and preselected in advance by our new actual sovereigns – the same people who are setting the passing of “the sovereign regina” (or vagina, according to BBC’s AI hearing impaired bot) of some absolutely insignificant island tribes/neighbors/former members of the artisanal (more anal than art) European commonwealth on it’s death bed soon to be known as “the former European Union” the focal point of our current public attention and debate whilst pretending the world isn’t burning… Actually drowning and soon to be freezing around us. I’d at least have someone to vote for.
Nice to see you here)), Slavic ppl do have a lot in common, and tend to deny it often).
Oh, I don’t have an ambition to become a president, and I’m ok with reigning in hearts of one cat, dog and man (it’s the alphabetic order). It’s more than enough.
Consortium News also ran a piece about why people from former British colonies are not mourning the Queen that much:
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/09/09/cruelties-of-the-queens-reign/
It’s funny how liberal elites and the legacy news media endlessly drone on about “critical race theory” but in the same breath glorify the aging monarch of what was possibly the worst imperialist regime in human history.
Any American caught praising the Queen or any member of they Royal family should be deported to Canada.
I think being deported to a logging camp in Alaska wouldn’t be unreasonable. Simping for the queen can be cured by fresh air and hard work.
For the hatred of England toward Russia, Emmanuel Todd, a French anthropologist, says that the family systems are totally opposite. The english ils liberal and inegalitarian, unlike the russian who is authoritarian and egalitarian. The way you are raised builds your vision of the world.
I am not sure I buy the idea that Russia was at any point MORE authoritarian than Britain.
https://elucid.media/politique/emmanuel-todd-la-russophobie-traduit-la-chute-d-une-amerique-brisee
Sorry, this is in French, but I think you could be interested.
He is of course French). I’m more and more convinced that an average Russian/Soviet is more capable of free and critical thinking than an average European.
I will not mourn the queen of England, but Agamben studied the relation between reign and glory, as the two concepts work together. The reign needs glory to legitimate himself. The queen of England appears to the feeble minded as glory without power, a morally virgin queen, the reality of power handled by civil servants, with blood on their hands.