The Dead and the Dying

sod off
*pauper & bauble*

Not surprising, but telling: The “British Royal Family” have taken to marketing their mega-pampered zombie selves via marketing data-scraper Facebook.

Shows what amazing stuff plugs straight into this decrepit culture. The corporate capitalist overclass can’t bring itself to tolerate 10 seconds of serious discussion of any one of the smorgasbord of dire crises facing it (and us), but these paleo-Yahoos and their running IQ test (if you “like” them, you fail) are welcome news, a dear old friend of the culture of sponsored stupidity.

It’s what they call marketing synergy, one hand washing the other.  A pack of undead figurehead feudal claimants both lending and drawing aid and comfort to and from the heedless, clueless Davosian hackocracy now busily driving the world over the last cliff in history, with “royals” on their “friends” page.

5 Replies to “The Dead and the Dying”

  1. Luis, that is quite a link about overtime. Typical.

    What’s the main Australian political argument in favor of retaining the “royal” fiction? I understand and even sympathize with the human craving for stasis and comfort. Is it just a variation on that?

  2. Well, it’s hard to know, really. There’s the standard conservative eye-roller “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. A slightly more compelling argument is that the monarchy is a safe-guard for democracy, in that the Governor General, the monarch’s representative and official head of state, provides a counter-balance to any Prime Minister who tries to grab too much power or is too incompetent. He/she has the power to dismiss the PM, as happened in 1975 when Gough Whitlam was outed by the then Governor General John Kerr (apparently, if I’m not mistaken, the PM can dismiss the GG as well, but it depends upon who gets to the parliament house first, or something of that sort). However, it’s not at all clear to me why the GG wouldn’t be able to do this if he/she is not a representative of the crown.

    Another argument, which isn’t really an argument, is that the monarchy provides a spiritual link to Australia’s founding and development, or some such notion. Australia and Britain have gone through a lot together, and many older Australians identify with this. This is all dressed in terms like “values” (especially by Liberal Party enthusiasts), as though democracy is predicated upon deference to monarchs (and which ignores the gushing praise here for the United States as the world’s foremost democracy by our leaders. Australia, as I mentioned, is far more tied to American imperialism than to British power, which has obviously waned to the point that Britain is a deputy to the United States).

Comments are closed.