THE BREXIT, AND H.M. ELIZABETH II...

THE BREXIT, AND H.M. ELIZABETH II…

After yesterday's blog about President Barack Obama's planned summit with Argentine President Mauricio Marci in San Carlos de Bariloche, I'll bet you thought things couldn't possibly get any stranger in an increasing strange political world. Add to that the fact that Russia has warned - in no uncertain terms - North Korea to "calm down, cool it, and mind your tongue or else face the consequences," and the world couldn't possibly become more upside down. Unfortunately, you'd be wrong, and I found this article, shared by Mr. G.L., another testament that we "live in interesting times":

Revealed: Queen backs Brexit as alleged EU bust-up with ex-Deputy PM emerges

The focus here is that H.M. Elizabeth II apparently let her clear feelings on the European Union, and the possibility of Britain's exit from the same - the so-called
"brexit" - be known to Britain's Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg:

THE Queen has been hailed as a backer of Brexit tonight after details emerged of an extraordinary alleged bust-up between her and Nick Clegg over Europe.

Her Majesty let rip at the then Deputy PM during a lunch at Windsor Castle, The Sun has been told.

The 89-year-old monarch firmly told passionate pro-European Mr Clegg that she believed the EU was heading in the wrong direction.

Her stinging reprimand went on for “quite a while”, leaving other guests around the table stunned.
Not only this, Elizabeth, now 89 years old, apparently let her thoughts be known in no uncertain terms to various MPs during a visit:
The monarch is also said to have revealed her Eurosceptic feelings during a separate conversation with MPs at a Buckingham Palace reception.

One of a group of Parliamentarians in a circle with her at the time asked Her Majesty for her thoughts on Brussels.

The Queen is said to have snapped back angrily: “I don’t understand Europe”

A parliamentary source, who relayed the remark to The Sun, said: “It was said with quite some venom and emotion. I shall never forget it”.

Now, amid all of this, we have the usual reassurances that Britain really isn't a monarchy, and that the monarchs have "traditionally stayed out of politics," the bottom line of which is, "Nothing of significance here, don't worry, she's just old and out of sorts, move along:"

A Buckingham Palace spokesman said: “The Queen remains politically neutral, as she has for 63 years. We would never comment on spurious, anonymously sourced claims.

But we would do well to remember that the British royal family is one of the richest in the world, and where there is wealth, there is, of course, power, and the monarchy sits atop that quinessential fact of British politics: it sits atop a very old, and very entrenched, oligarchy. One need only think of "Bertie". Thus, when the Palace calls and invites you to come around for tea, or dinner, and a private "chat," you go, and you listen... And that tradition of remaining neutral in politics? Well, since when exactly? Since Charles I? Charles II? William? or, in more recent times, Edward VII, an egregious case of a monarch who reigned publicly, and ruled privately?

There's something else noteworthy in this article, and it gave me pause. Consider the implications of these statements:

Anti-EU campaigner and Tory MP Jacob Rees Mogg said: “I’d be delighted if this was true and Her Majesty is a Brexiter.

“The reason we all sing God Save The Queen so heartily is because we always believe she is there to protect us from European encroachment.”

Another leading Tory Eurosceptic, MP Steve Baker, said: “This is a happy day for those of us who have sworn allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen, her heirs and successors.

“I would be delighted to welcome Her Majesty to our cause.

“I’ve insisted the government must not to drag the monarchy into this debate, but I may have to make an exception to my high principles on this occasion.”

This is a strong signal that there are deep divisions within the Tory party and the wider British body politic, and how it plays out is anyone's guess. But it does remind me of a certain British play, where a monarch, after decades of "traditional non-involvement" in politics, suddenly exercises one of the few remaining powers of the Crown, and refuses to sign a Bill of Parliament into law. Will it happen? Probably not. But there is that other tradition of the British monarchy that every now and then raises its head, when monarchs realize that in order to reign, they must occasionally and under extraordinary circumstances, also rule.

See you on the flip side...

13 thoughts on “THE BREXIT, AND H.M. ELIZABETH II…”

  1. johnycomelately

    Realistically the British were never going to be subservient to the ‘Huns’, it seems their temporary inclusion was simply to lend credence to the entire adventure.

    In a world of globalised regional federations Albion will adopt the Viennese solution, a special exemption, after all she is the heir to the throne of David….

  2. Of late there have been a number of reports of things H.M. the Queen is supposed to have said. Most have been indeed spurious, but the story of her cleaning Clegg’s clock spread widely and quickly in such a way as to indicate to me the spread of genuine gossip rather than an orchestrated effort that could be reduced to certain media outlets as the spigots of engineered tales and memes.

    Since I was not there, I cannot say with any certainty what was said. But Clegg does have a way of putting his foot into his mouth when not scripted, and after saying something he should not have said at lunch all that the Queen would need to say is ‘Not so.’ for it to be regarded as a stinging rebuke.

    Regarding the Conservatives: The PM is merely a suit of clothes without a real person abiding in the suit of flesh underneath. The Tories are always divided and remain deeply divided on the subject of Europe — although opportunists abound and will swing whichever way the winds are beginning to blow. Scratch a Tory deep enough and one finds someone who sincerely wishes that the UK had never joined in with the rabble across the Channel.

  3. just my own cheap opinion but any royal family (according to reports) on this planet supporting a re-distribution of their wealth (like give to the poor- gosh!- what a concept) is completely bogus-

    the Windsor family (real name: Battenberg- ‘Kingky’ George V changed the name during WW1 in 1917, if I recall date correctly)- interbreeding takes its toll-

    and if anyone has really observed QE2’s body language she behaves slightly, more elegantly (her programming) above the movements of an advanced amoeba…

    but my point is: all European/world royals are above the law (and we live in democracies?- give us a break) so I hardly think any change in any on-the books financial system would affect their monetary/power status-

    be well all-

    Larry in Germany

  4. So the old girl spat her dummy out, just what is it that Lizzy doesn’t like about the EU ???
    With strong ties, albeit hidden to most everybody, to Germany, one wonders has she found out something about future plans for the UK in advance ??
    Or she just doesn’t like the UK being told what to do by unelected Brussels wombats. What ever she doesn’t like, you can bet her comments have been talked about in the halls of the “City of London”.

  5. Apparently, the EU is toast. The Royals want to cut bait and flee with their ill-gotten bankster gains and start anew. However, please remember, Europe is the dress rehearsal for the U.S. My best guess is, Europe will be ablaze with chaos thanks to the Soros sponsored illegal invasion. How that same phenom will affect the U.S. has yet to be seen.

  6. Milton Zentmyer

    This is interesting in light of Prince Charles’ statement regarding Islam; the history of Islam and Christianity, the need for Islamic governments to stop educating their populations with religious violence and the “immigrants” flooding into Europe need to respect the culture that they are coming into.

    Looks like the Queen and the Royals might be looking at their demise if England continues on the path of “cultural enrichment” that is being promoted by the European Union. Do you think that the Queen will still be Queen if England is 70 to 80 percent Islamic in the near future???

    Another dot that Dr. Farrell blogged on was the historic meeting between the Vatican and the leader of the Eastern Orthodox church, wherein they made a statement of upholding the faith and that Christians have the right of self defense in the middle east. And if the spring and summer unfolds as police agencies in Europe are bracing for, it also means self defense in Europe as well.

    This is major push back from some of the historic power bases of the West. I’m glad to see it. We have yet another wave of “immigrants” into the US, who are not vetted and plans for Mosques being built at the expense of the US Taxpayer. What if it were the reverse? What do you think Islamic countries do in that regard? We come in with Christian churches, demanding that western law is instituted, demanding housing, education, medical care and demanding that their culture must change because we are there. What would THEY DO? Come, let us reason together, what would they do?????

  7. Robert Barricklow

    All secret trade deals are bad for human rights, The TPP/TTIP spell a dystopian future in which corporations rather than $elected governments call the shot$.
    Yes, all the choices are lies; pick your poison.

    Or, change the system.

    Decentralize the currencies with crypto block chains, and use them in political arenas as well.

  8. If the European Union was the brainchild of Nazis for the post-WWII world, and they’ve seen their work come to fruition, then how are they going to view these statements by the queen? Was Britain part of their original plan or was that just an added bonus when she joined? I’ll be interested in watching Germany’s reaction to this.

  9. Question what does the Queen knows about the European Union when did she know it. What machinations in Brussels is turning her off and what secret information about them is the court privy to stay tune this not over until the fat lady sings.

  10. What is needed is a serious study on the POLITICAL role of the contemporary British monarchy…

Comments are closed.