Sayonara #6

Royal Incubators


Amitakh Stanford

22nd June 2011

Three incredibly active Commonwealth countries, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, are always at the forefront supporting the Queen's wars and projects. Whilst all three nations seem to be independent of Great Britain, all have Elizabeth II as their Head of State. Hence, all three are subject nations of the United Kingdom. It is almost inevitable that if Britain goes to war, these three nations will invariably follow their leader. Undoubtedly, the United States tags along for British wars, even though it is usually made to appear that America is the instigator and front-runner of these wars.

Until 1776, the Hanover Electors, then headed by George III, ruled the American colonies. The colonies united, declared independence from Great Britain, and prevailed in their war of independence from England. Henceforth, the United States and Great Britain were occasionally antagonistic towards one another until after the War of 1812. Britain sided with the South in the American Civil War, and was very close to going to war against the Union. This would have suited President Abraham Lincoln, who had learned that Britain was behind the South's secession from the Union. Today, many believe that Britain was both the instigator and sponsor of that war. The British meddling was obvious in the War Between the States. Britain built warships for the Confederate States, including the CSS Sumter, CSS Florida, CSS Georgia and CSS Alabama. This affront led to the British being forced to pay reparations of over $15 million after the war. Although America won her independence from Great Britain, she has been so infiltrated by British sympathisers that she acts very much like a subject nation of England.

Looking as an outsider, it is glaringly apparent that the United States once de facto national anthem, “America – My Country Tis of Thee,” uses the same melody as the British national anthem, “God Save the Queen,” the latter of which was first performed in 1745 during the reign of the Hanover/British King George II as “God Save the King”. It is very strange and ironic that a country would battle and sacrifice so much to win independence from the notorious tyrant, George III, only to adopt the melody of the British national anthem for the de facto American national anthem. This is absurd. What a smack in the face! The insult becomes even greater when one considers the lyrics:

America – My Country Tis of Thee

My country tis of thee,
Sweet land of liberty,
Of thee I sing.
Land where my fathers died!
Land of the Pilgrim's pride!
From every mountain's side,
Let freedom ring!

My native country, thee,
Land of the noble free,
Thy name I love.
I love thy rocks and rills,
Thy woods and templed hills;
My heart with rapture fills
Like that above.

Let music swell the breeze,
And ring from all the trees
Sweet freedom's song.
Let mortal tongues awake;
Let all that breathe partake;
Let rocks their silence break,
The sound prolong.

Our father's God, to Thee,
Author of liberty,
To Thee we sing.
Long may our land be bright
With freedom's holy light;
Protect us by Thy might,
Great God, our King!

Overall, it is a poetic tribute to God for saving them from George III's tyranny. The joining of the poem to the melody of the British national anthem is shockingly contradictory to its heart-felt patriotic stanzas. Even today, “My Country Tis of Thee” is an American patriotic song that is still performed to the tune of “God Save the Queen” on American Independence Day, the 4th of July. This is akin to Americans flying Union Jacks on the 4th of July. How strange! Moreover, this is also a church hymn, honouring God, but the music being tied to “God Save the Queen” effectively transforms a tribute to God into a tribute to the British monarch! Some would call this blasphemy.

To add salt to the wound, the second line of the second stanza is, “Land of the noble free.” This affirms that there is no aristocracy in America. It is also confirmed in the American Constitution, which immigrants and most other Americans know:

No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: – And no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.

To adopt the melody of the British national anthem (“God Save the Queen”) is really an insult to the spirit of liberty and the essence of the poem. This manner of British influence continues in America's current national anthem, the “Star Spangled Banner,” which lyrics were written during the War of 1812 against Britain, but whose music is an English drinking song. Again, the lyrics are counteracted and undermined by the music to which they have been linked. It shows that the British infiltration continues to subtly infest American thoughts at the deepest patriotic levels. Although legally free of Britain, America is tied to her in so many ways as to be subtly controlled by her, especially today.

Presently, Elizabeth II remains the Queen of 16 countries. She is still involved with all 54 Commonwealth nations. It is claimed that she is only a figurehead, but is that true? If she were only a figurehead, then all the extravagance, pomp and ceremony surrounding the British monarchy would only be fanciful play acting, similar to that involved in Medieval reality games. The monarchy is supposed to be symbolic. If that be the case, the world has been drawn into a mass delusion that the royals are the mascots of many nations. Further, the whole world is facilitating the monarch's fantasy in a grand hallucination. All those who participate and support such a royal fantasy are giving licence and approval to the idea that class distinction and aristocracy are important and necessary to uphold. If the monarchy is just an arrogant, costly, pompous lark being acted out as an enormous fantasy game, it is nothing short of mass insanity. But, it would only be insanity if the Queen were just a figurehead.

The royal presence creates an artificial atmosphere of awe amongst the commoners, who will push and shove just to get a glimpse of a member of the royal family. The award ceremonies, gala events and seasonal garden parties for selected public guests result in more accolades for the Queen, and more support for the royals, because those involved have developed vested interests in expanding the prestige of their constitutional monarchy. How can Britain criticise and condemn other nations for not being democratic when they themselves support and maintain a monarchy that rules by succession, and has power to dictate to other countries, regardless of what the latter's people want or decide?

In reality, the Queen is no figurehead, and the monarchy is not symbolic. It wields power. All British soldiers swear allegiance to the Queen. Trooping the Colours shows the close bond between the Sovereign and the armed forces. There is a Royal Army, a Royal Navy, a Royal Air Force, Royal Guards, a Royal Train and what not. The Queen has governor-generals to represent her directly in all realms where she is Queen. She can negate legislation and effect the removal of prime ministers and dissolve parliaments. She also has the power to lead certain Commonwealth armies and navies. Contrary to the claim that she avoids politics, she is intently involved in world affairs, and has a strong agenda to pursue and implement emissions trading schemes and towards placing a price on carbon, amongst other global matters she addresses.

Every year the Queen gives out numerous awards and titles. If she were only a symbolic figure, every one of these awards and titles would be laughable and worthless, yet, the recipients of such awards and titles are not only respected, but admired. The sundry titles reinforce commoners' inferiority to the royals and aristocrats. If America had not banned titles within its government, one can just imagine newly-appointed lords and ladies parading around the White House and appearing in the media. Certainly, many of the Presidents would have been knighted, as would many Members of Congress and Supreme Court Justices. Before long, people would believe that America is actually led by the Queen.

Many in Britain claim that the monarchy is a way of holding onto 500-year-old traditions, and is therefore important to keep in place. If the five-centuries-old traditions are so vital, then they must be proud of their last 500 years. Public floggings, slavery and placing people in stocks were also part of that tradition. Does that mean that these things should also be preserved? The last five centuries are full of bloodshed, savagery, conquests, betrayals and plunder. The British monarchy was striving for world conquest and established a huge empire, which they are still earnestly pursing, although far more subtly than they did in the nineteenth century.

In the eighteenth century, Thomas Paine was a severe critic of the British monarchy. If the 500-year-old traditions are so important to observe and keep, then Paine's comments warning the world against monarchies in general, and the British monarchy in particular, are still pertinent. Paine observed that royals have a propensity to engage in wars that engulf the world. In The Crisis, he said: “Britain, for centuries past, has been nearly fifty years out of every hundred at war with some power or other.” He stated in Common Sense that: “In short, monarchy and succession have laid (not this or that kingdom only) but the world in blood and ashes.” Also in the same pamphlet was a severe warning against arrogant aristocrats: “For all men being originally equals, no one by birth could have a right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to all others for ever.” If the royals maintained a semblance of decency, they would be too embarrassed to allow other human beings to bow down to them or to be addressed as, “Your Royal Highness” or “Your Majesty.”

The monarchs have long held contempt for Americans. As Paine said in The Crisis: “It was the determination of the British court to have nothing to do with America but to conquer her fully and absolutely.” When King George III failed to conquer by force, he set many plans in motion that were followed by his successors. Paine also warned about George III, stating: “He may accomplish by craft and subtilty in the long run, what he cannot do by force and violence in the short one.” The situation today is reminiscent of Paine's time. Through cunningness and subtleties, the Queen and her ancestors have persuaded the United States to fight many wars for them.

Presently, there are many wars; many soldiers have fallen. Their families are told the soldiers have not died in vain, that they have died for their country, for freedom, and for democracy. They are told that the price of freedom is dear. Are these just cheap words? How many rulers really care? These days, most soldiers do not die for freedom; they die for conquest, and they leave a void in their families. Many of the surviving soldiers of the wars are maimed or otherwise permanently scarred. Who takes care of them and their families?

Those who promote and love wars should be on the front lines and also send their own children to the front lines. Since the monarchy has a long and bloody history of engaging and promoting wars, the world's princes should be on the front lines, not for show, but for the duration of the battles, to be real leaders and soldiers on the battlefield. If all the world's monarchs' children were on the front lines for the duration of the wars, including Prince William and Prince Harry, you can be assured that wars would be shorter and less frequent.

Since the ruling elite have invested so much into the monarchies, they are assisting them in carrying out their agendas. Regardless of their appearances, the royals are not innocuous. In this day and age, to have such an anachronism as monarchies indicates that humankind is still sadly enslaved to the master-slave mentality. All monarchies, especially those with a succession of heirs, whether East, West, North or South, are plain wrong, and indecent affronts to humanity.

Since many royals maintain perpetual status by succession, they have fallen prey to a shocking other-worldly agenda. Whether willing or otherwise, the royals will be used as consciousness incubators and energy parasites. The process has already begun.

© 2011 Amitakh Stanford