Category Archives: Media – Média

Be careful for what you wish for, Your Grace.

Handsome Harry has a problem: he hates belonging to the most privileged people in the world and says no Windsors currently wants to be king so now let’s have a quick look at the terrible fate that awaits him and his kin.

Being the monarch is a tough job, but someone has to do it, even if reluctantly. In a magazine interview, Prince Harry has suggested that none of the royal family actually wants the throne.

‘Tough job.” There are a lot of tough jobs out there: teaching, working in A&E, driving a bus, collecting bins, cleaning the streets and being a King apparently. Although, I highly doubt those jobs pay over £3 million every month like being a King does. I can’t speak for other professions, but as a teacher, I can expect a good £1.400/month if I take on some responsibilities in addition to my teaching. And that’s a good salary!

Yes the “tough job” Harry is describing currently pays about £40 million/year and, unlike the rest of the good working people of England in their tough job, the Windsors are in line for a raise of £2.8 million/year which adds to a 57% pay rise since 2012. So let’s admit the £40M stand, that’s £3.3 million/month. For the rest of the tough jobs, it’s bleak I am afraid but let’s try to empathise with the fate of the royal family.

Let’s not forget that the Windors’ tough job comes with free accommodation in the centre of London and a myriad of palaces paid off and maintained by the taxpayers. Weddings needn’t be paid for, nor need your birthdays or any other major life events for that matter. You are provided with hundreds of personal servant as well as bodyguards who parade at great expense everyday, a plethora of carriages – some in pure gold and a fleet of cars so large that even your crown has its own.

The question then begs: why? Why do they get to be given so much? What does the tough job involve to come with such perks, money and yet be such a drag?

“We are involved in modernising the British monarchy. We are not doing this for ourselves but for the greater good of the people,” he said.

My, that modernisation must be a heck of a job, whatever that means in actual fact. Marrying “commoners”, perhaps? That’s modern, ain’t it? No, that’s just because all your parents and grand-parents are cousins and you desperately need to avoid the fate of the Habsburgs or yet another inbreeding-related endemic like hemophilia and mental health issues that came after Queen Victoria and King Christian IX decided they wanted the whole of Europe’s rulers to be their grand-children.

So is it having a beard and playing football with kids in Africa – between two safaris, a hunting trip and some strip snooker in Las Vegas? Charity doesn’t pay (ask Doctors Without Borders), hunting is archaic, and the playing naked and drunk in Vegas is only seen as ‘modern’ by penniless chavs on their quite unenjoyable stag night.

Maybe I am being mistaken on what he means by modernising the monarchy but I don’t see why it justifies a rent-free life at Kensington or Buckingham Palace in addition to the 3.3 millions pounds you get every single month.

“Is there any one of the royal family who wants to be king or queen? I don’t think so, but we will carry out our duties at the right time.”

First, his father begs to differ.

Second, “we will carry our duties”, yes you will! That’s we pay you for so if we say “Dance monkey!”, you dance and you don’t get upset because comes to think about it, you have no other purpose whatsoever. Your tough job is not a job, it’s birth right that some people in a far past and who are as much related to you as to me gave themselves after they actually served a purpose. Their life was Games of Throne without the dragons. Whereas yours is a apology of privilege-born blasé laziness. Your academic degrees were given to you, your record in the army is anything but grand and the only reason why you can afford to do so much charity work is because your nan is the Queen so she gets paid £3.3 million/month.

Now, if you really do resent the “tough job” to the extent of going public with it, then remove yourself from the line of succession, give up your privileges, give the money back and live a normal life. But do not publicly go to tell the rest of us who struggle to meet ends and must go by in the shittiest jobs that you don’t want to be something you will be if and when your father, brother, nephew and niece were to die.

Be careful for what you wish for, Your Grace: do not lead your people to actually ponder a world where you don’t exist and where you have no use, for you will be surprised of how extremely livable life is without tending and pandering to the most outrageously over-privileged people the Earth has ever accommodated.

Your tough job…I’ll do it! Let’s swap. Not for a day but forever. I’ll give the 10-, 12-, 15-hour working days, the screaming kids, the insulting parents, the down-looking management and the pay squeeze and you give me the free money, the palaces, the never-ending holidays, the cooks, the fitness trainers, the countless servants and I will do the “tough job”. For that money, for that comfort in life, I will sit on that throne and smile until my teeth come off and the best dentist that ever that was gives me new ones…for free.

As an atheist, I will even graciously bow and blow smoke up the Archbishop of Canterbury’s arse if asked. I’ll do anything so my future can look as worry-free, secured and bright as yours looks everyday. I will do your tough job, Your Highness. Anything, so the only three things I can worry about is: my hair falling, the colour of my ties and who I am dating that doesn’t draw too much of my nan’s wrath.

And, my Lord, I think you’ll find millions of people would do your tough job if they could considering the life it comes with. I am not saying we would forever like it but for £3.3 million/month, I’ll do it for a couple of years then, once I am rich beyond my dreams, I’ll pass it on to the next volunteer and so on and so forth.

Maybe that’s it, maybe that’s modern monarchy.

 

Brexit: The Pandora’s box is open.

Before I start on the topic, I’d like to point out that I am not here to say whether I am in favour or against Brexit or siding with or against the “metropolitan elite”. As a gay, socialist foreigner who lived and worked in the UK for almost a decade as a language teacher, I belong to this elite that tends to favour remaining in the EU but as a continental working towards a more socialist and fairer Europe, I do see London as the biggest threat to our democracy, the rights and livelihood of everyday people for it has established itself as the spokesperson for the almighty business and neo-capitalism. So I am both, I guess.

Now the news is that, in the midst of uncertainties, the High Court of England and its three judges with lovely wigs have decided that the parliament has the final say on Brexit. Fair enough to remind everybody that democracy is best spoken by the elected assembly.

As an historian, I know all too well the referenda are tools of the popular, authoritarian executive facing with difficulties in pushing their agenda through a diverse elected legislative chamber and therefore grant the good people with a direct voice in the name of democracy. France has had its share of them: Napoleon III used it to become emperor and put an end to the Second Republic, De Gaulle used his prestige and popularity to overthrow the parliament-centred Fourth Republic and install the monarchy-like presidential Fifth Republic instead.

What surprises me is the “Victory!” cry from the Remainers as if everything was finally sorted out and was where it should have been to begin with, i.e. the way they want it to be. The High Court just said they think the parliament must have the final say on the trigger of Article 50. Why are the Remainers convinced it will stop Brexit?

Of course, I am not stupid and I am aware that it’s because they know the parliament would block Brexit. They are certain a majority of MPs regardless of party affiliation are against it and that’s exactly why that woman legally challenged the value of the referendum to begin with.

She basically pulled a Donald Trump. Even if her intentions are deemed more positive. She did not challenge the government or Cameron on the legal weight of his promise and actual proceedings of the referendum when it happened. Although she had months to do it. Months to show and prove that it would be irrelevant in any and every way, that the Commons would have the final say whatever. But because there was a chance things would go her way, she did not. She waited for the results of a perfectly legal, well-conducted democratic process to displease her to finally mount a legal challenge.

The problem is that far from preventing anything, it has instead triggered an absolute political nightmare. I am not talking about political minefield but proper battleground. Yes, MPs are a majority to believe remaining is the right solution but does that mean they are going to vote according to what they believe to be good or what their constituents believe to be good? The High Court decision does not dictate how the Commons should vote, nor does it dismiss the results. It’s saying that the democratic process has spoken and it’s up to the Commons, the legislative branch, and not the government, the executive, to act upon it. It’s not saving the UK of Brexit rather is purely testing its relationship between the people and the elite. The results in the long term may get way uglier than Brexit.

As an MP, you are elected by a people majority to then serve every single person regardless of differences of any kind, so I reckon, and most people who believe in democracy will agree, that the right to do is to check what the outcome of the referendum was in your constituency and vote as such. In that case, the legal challenge is ridiculous because the result would be the same. 52% of the English people voted “Out”, if the MPs are indeed doing their job as expected by proper and respectful democratic process, it should 52% “Out” in the parliament as well, for they are supposed to be the voice of their constituents.

Therefore, the challenge that “selfless, philanthropist” paid for out of her own money (the media seem to think it’s important to point that out) would be remembered as nothing but time wasted, money wasted, more dithering, more restlessness from all sides and more divisions within the country when the effort should be to stand strong and united, not resentfully fighting against something only after it happened.

Or, as Remainers obviously expect, the MPs will disregard the actual voice of their own constituents and vote according to their own agenda, beliefs and fears. Then that legal challenge will be remembered as the moment the parliament, the political and financial elite (the one who can afford to mount such a challenge without going bankrupt) officially and openly became completely detached from its own electorate, from the people who entrusted them to speak in their name and keep their promises to represent them.

That legal challenge is a Pandora’s Box putting MPs in a difficult position: either following the voice of the ones who voted for them or going against it at the risk of losing them altogether. To the far right, most likely.

So they could gamble and argue that many voted “Out” out of anger and spite and actually wanted “In”. They could argue that many did not cast a vote in the first place. They could argue that the current economic uncertainties and bad news have turned the tables. They could gamble and convince themselves that these aforementioned people are now hoping for the Commons to clean up the mess the people have made.

However this is all hypotheses, for the MPs also know that the one and only certainty is all this is that 52% of the people directly said “Out”. 52% from all parts of the political spectrum, all wealth, genders, places and races. 52% who will not take betrayal lightly after they were offered a chance to speak their mind. Some say they could call for a fresh general election to find out but unless they ask the question again, or remodel the whole of English politics into two new parties “In” vs “Out”, or the Labour and the Lib Dem party manage to multiply fish, I don’t see how it’s going to change any outcome.

Referenda are a tricky political move, challenging them is worst.

The Good Reads: Grace Dent on Dylan and the Nobel Prize

“You don’t get it. Dylan is God,” said my ex-boyfriend, and the boyfriend before him, and the one before that, and in fact all boyfriends ever since 1985. And I’ve tried to find Dylan godly, really tried, but to the unloving ear he sounds like a man with a bronchial infection arduously describing his favourite commute.

Click the quote for the full article.

When the Guardian turns into the Mirror…

13882636_10209851699311900_9036381420904555268_n

Really? “The worst idea ever?”…

The worst? Ever?! Really?

Worse that the war in Iraq or the referendum on Brexit or Donald Trump or any leader elected by the French since Mitterand left?

Really? It’s worse than that?