Skip to main content

Shove the 'royal' wedding

“Labour leader Ed Miliband has said he is "appalled" by the idea of trade unions planning strikes to disrupt royal wedding celebrations. He told the BBC such a plan of action would be "absolutely the wrong thing to do" and a "sign of failure"” - bbc

And this guy is ‘Labour’s’ leader?


I think this fella spells ‘Labour’ with a C-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-v-e. He’s maintaining the right of the unrightfully-privileged to lavishly laud their status over the people, and at a time of economic crisis even - 'economic crisis' means the rich not making as much as they are used to, and the rest not making enough whilst being used. Someone kick this guy out of 'labour' please. And he’s even named ‘ed’. Damn.

So people are losing jobs, suffering pay freezes, have to pay so much more for a bottle of chilli sauce purchased at Tesco’s, and we have to fork out for Will and Kate’s grand wedding?
That’s the problem with a nation which has turned privilege into an institution. I’ve often said that Elizabeth and her ‘royal’ family should be put on the council housing list and given a ticket to the job centre. I'm even willing to pay for their taxi rides to the centre. When we turn privilege into an institution and culture, we stand the risk of being treasonous when we question it. And via the maintenance of such ill-justified privilege - i.e. royal family in the UK, celebrities in the US - privilege garnered via other means - such as being an exploitative capitalist ba***** - doesn’t require much justification for it to be respected - ‘my great grandfather took the risk and started up a business and I now have the right to make millions out of the labour of others.’

If you didn’t get that point, i’ll put it another way. If i can maintain something as right without reason - like supporting the existence of the royal family simply because they are descendants of this or that powerful fella in the past - then i’m not going to have to make much effort in justifying a class system where i can say that this or that gal or guy have the right to exploit you because s/he takes the trouble to come in to work everyday and read the financial times and do the crossword.

So people are losing jobs, suffering pay freezes, have to pay so much more for a fish fillet purchased at Tesco’s, and we have to fork out for Will and Kate’s grand wedding? Is he going to fork out for yours? Or subsidise your purchase of a bag of potatoes? Nope.

So if the people are thinking of going on strike on this twit’s wedding day, they should again. Starvation and suffering doesn’t cease just because some privileged ponce is getting hitched, and especially if our subsidising his privileged existence and wedding is contributing to our suffering.


ed

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is singapore a tyranny, or are people to dumbed down to feel it?

The following is a consideration of the perspective posted at the site, 'article14'. The site, in discussing the so-called 'Black Sunday movement' whose members wear black and congregate at Starbucks - perhaps they have an unstated desire to boost Starbucks sales of overpriced beverages, or perhaps Starbucks is paying for their black garments...silly people - to express their support for the freedom of expression - brought up certain points that seem to be commonly held by the 'singaporeans' of today.

Manifesto Against Same-Sex Marriages and Homo-Promotion

My stand against homosexuality is based on the following.  It is a logical, rather than a personal, decision.

Under the slogan, 'the freedom to love', it in principle justifies incestuous, group, etc, marriages.  All it requires is 'consenting adults', without an inquiry into what it means to be an 'adult' in intelligent, moral, and introspective terms.

This in turn encourages a ‘go with your feel’ tendency, which in itself gives rise a myriad of tendencies that go unquestioned.  Right and wrong ceases to matter, and even if something is illegal, one can still view it as society just having its own bias against it, just as it once had a ‘bias’ against homosexuality.

‘Nothing is natural.  Everything is just a matter of preference.’  That is the basic thrust of this unfortunate situation.  In fact, having a preference is in itself seen as evidence of one’s intelligence.  No attention needs to be paid to intellectuals, thinkers, philosophers, sages, religious te…