Queen Elizabeth was no Cuddly Old Dear – Obituary

The last time a British monarch died the BBC prohibited all comedy for a set period. The BBC will do this again for a fortnight. I have to say, the thought of a respite from Jack Whitehall and Michael McIntyre does almost seem worth it, but the Royals should never be spared being the target of jokes, even in death. 1 million bouquets were dedicated to Princess Diana and people queued for over 10 hours, who knows what levels of servility and masochism we will now have to endure with the Queen’s death, but we should challenge the mainstream narrative that she is anything but a villain.

It’s a difficult job, portraying the Royals as endearing. I’m choosing the infinitely easier task of showing her as she really is. We’ve heard of ‘warts and all’ accounts; this is ‘nothing but warts’. Elizabeth II is given undeserved respect elsewhere. Like everything in her life, really, undeserved wealth, undeserved power, she has earned none of it. She has received all this because she was born from a particular womb, remember. In our meritocratic society, where the cream rises to the top, Her Lowness the Queen, Elizabeth the Last created nothing, achieved nothing, earned nothing, endured and suffered nothing on her own merits. Too ‘busy’, even, to care for her own children.

Peter Morgan, creator of hit TV show The Crown, had this to say: ‘I wouldn’t have guessed there would be anything more to say about this countryside woman of limited intelligence who would have much preferred looking after her dogs and breeding horses to being queen.’ Though, by ‘looking after her dogs and breeding horses’, he probably meant ‘having her dogs looked after and having horses bred’.

Note that Morgan didn’t say ‘would have much preferred looking after her children’. When her son Charles was 5 she left the country for 6 months. Upon her return she waited almost a week, including having a day at the races, before seeing the little boy, who then had to wait in line to greet his mother, who then shook his hand instead of showing even an iota of affection for him. On the alien planet the Royals inhabit, the value of children is as PR stunts and as packmules for their precious genes, nothing more. Philip expressed the Royal view on parenting thus: ‘Holidays are curious things, aren’t they? You send children to school to get them out of your hair. Then they come back and make life difficult for parents. That is why holidays are set so they are just about the limit of your endurance’.

The Queen herself was abandoned for months on end while her parents carried out their Royal duties. When she was a toddler they spent 6 months in Australia and barely recognised her upon their return. As Anthony Jay, who scripted the documentary Elizabeth R, explains: ‘She’s one of those people who is deeply unemotional. For people who are emotionally detached in that way, institutions become more important than families. The Queen’s children were handed over to nannies, and a kind of emotional cauterisation took place.’ This is not a warm, cuddly old grandma character. These people are trained out of any basic, natural empathy. They need to be cold and calculating because they inhabit a ruthless environment that revolves around money, absurd symbols of prestige, and death – younger Royals are simply waiting around for older ones to die off. Douglas Hurd, former foreign secretary, states that ‘she has almost trained feelings out of herself’. Her own mother would apparently see her children for only an hour a day, having them chant: ‘we are not supposed to be normal, we are not supposed to be normal’.

I suppose chanting such things helps keep all their strange family traditions going, like inbreeding: Elizabeth married her own cousin, Philip Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg.  Five out of six other monarchies in Europe are cousins of Queen Elizabeth, by the way. The tentacles spread far and wide.

Another odd thing Elizabeth was taught as a child was to do Nazi salutes. Not so odd when you remember that pretty much her whole family sympathised with the Nazis. They all had a soft spot for Hitler, her mother, her father, her husband-to-be, her uncle and auntie. Her father’s cousin, with whom he was on intimate terms, was an Obergruppenfuhrer in the Nazi party. Three of Philip’s sisters married high-ranking Nazis and in 2006 he was still banging on about how ‘attractive’ Nazism had been. Her mother admitted to having ‘reservations about Jews’ and a journalist who knew her (Paul Callan) added a further euphemism that ‘she was not fond of black folk’: she wholeheartedly supported apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia. I suppose you may well have sympathies for Nazis when the country you are head of (Britain) pioneered pretty much every facet of the Nazi programme: land grabs, concentration camps, genocide, slavery, race science, eugenics, and colonisation.

The Queen herself point blank refused to apologise for her institution’s pivotal role in Transatlantic Slavery, denying that it was a ‘crime against humanity’. Needless to say, she opposed any kind of reparations as well. We should all be aware of her husband’s explicit racism, towards South Asians, black people, Aborigines and Chinese. Coming from a family of Nazi sympathisers whose wealth was built on slavery, genocide and land theft, and whose entire reason for being rests on genetics, it should come as no shock if the Queen holds prejudices towards people of colour. Furthermore, the Crown allegedly threatened to veto race equality legislation in the ’60s unless the Palace was made exempt and then refused to have people of colour working at Buckingham Palace till the ’90s, except as servants. The family’s first racially-oppressed member – Meghan – was driven to suicidal thoughts by her treatment, which included the family’s ‘concern’ about the skin colour of her child. Meanwhile, she has persistently defended and protected Andrew who stood accused of sexually assaulting a teenager. She even helped pay off his £12 million settlement and legal bills.

Far from being a cuddly, sweet, caring old lady, like your Nan, she was an arrogant, cold-hearted, aloof, old prune. She was known to lose her temper at guards for eating snacks left out in bowls in the palace – people who are trained to put themselves in the way of a bullet for her sake.

The Queen is often portrayed as merely a figurehead, with only symbolic power. This is categorically untrue. The Queen has inordinate power, including ‘Royal Consent’, which is basically a power of veto on any law which is deemed to affect her personally. As a major landlord, the Queen gained exemption from the pandemic eviction ban, and proceeded to evict one tenant for using a communal plug to charge their car – even after they apologised and offered to pay the £32 bill. She further used her power of Royal Consent to ensure exemption from climate laws – despite the family’s green rhetoric and posturing. And worst of all, she used her power of Royal Consent to ban ‘coloured immigrants or foreigners’ from serving in the royal household except as domestic servants until possibly the 1990s (a royal journalist, Andrew Morton, reported in 1990 that senior ranks of courtiers were exclusively white, and the palace admitted in 1997 that it did not abide by an equal opportunities policy). She made herself exempt from applying laws of equality and diversity and so denying women and minorities from their employment rights against discrimination.

To give an insight into the petty squabbles that go on in the Royal Family – pettiness that the Queen was at the centre of – listen to the drama surrounding the Order of Precedence: There is a protocol about who defers to whom, a strict hierarchy determined by genetics (the very foundation of both monarchy and white supremacism). When Prince William got married to Kate Middleton, the Queen personally updated the protocols, so that when Kate does not accompany her husband, she must curtsy to the Princess Royal, Princess Alexandra, and Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie – because of their ‘special’ blood. When William is with her, she does not need to curtsy to the princesses, but she must still defer to Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall. The protocols had caused controversy previously when Charles married for the second time, the Countess of Wessex reportedly ‘didn’t like it one bit’ that she was now required to curtsy to Camilla. She’d been the second-highest ranking woman in court. The Queen ensured that neither Princess Anne nor Princess Alexandra (daughter of George V) would have to curtsy to Camilla when Charles was absent. The Order of Precedence is not only about curtsying and bowing, it’s about the order they arrive at an event. So, for example, at an event in 2006 Camilla had to wait outside a chapel in order to enter after Princess Anne, because Charles was not there. The utter, utter weirdos. They even follow these ridiculous rules in private – bowing and curtsying to their own parents, brothers, sisters. No wonder they breed sociopaths. The Royals are obsessed with bloodlines and believe this determines a person’s worth.

The Queen’s arrogance and sense of superiority is structurally determined: This is a person whose first words were headline news. Members of the public, the great unwashed, must not touch the Queen. There was an outcry in the sycophantic British press when Canada’s Governor General put his hand on her arm ‘to ensure the Queen did not slip’ – not exactly the most heinous motive I’ve ever heard. Anyone dining with the Queen had to follow her every move, including not eating after she finished, apparently. Does this sound like a modest, woman of the people to you? I’ve always thought celebrating your own birthday was a sign of narcissism in adults, the fact that the Queen has 2 tells me I’m onto something there. Being surrounded from birth with lackeys produces small-minded, talentless no-marks – selfish, self-centred, narcissists without a shred of empathy for anyone else.

Being almost a millennium old, the British monarchy (itself an absurd hangover from feudal times) has carried with it some embarrassing traditions into the 21st Century: The Queen holds dominion over all unmarked swans in open waters, and all sturgeon, whales and dolphins within 3 miles of the British coast. In 2004 a Welsh fisherman was investigated by police after catching a 10-foot sturgeon.

The Queen was supposedly apolitical, but that didn’t stop her from expressing unadulterated praise for Britain’s hired killers and henchmen in the military that jaunt around the world destroying foreign countries and paving the way for British capitalists (including her own family) to make a pretty penny. For example, in 2017 she unveiled a memorial to such hired killers that helped devastate the nations of Iraq and Afghanistan – saying they were honoured with ‘pride’ and making the ludicrously insulting claim that they brought ‘peace and stability’. She might as well have added that her corgis brought peace and stability to the luxury steaks they’re fed each day.

Elizabeth reigned over the British Empire as head of the armed forces who cut off hands, ears and heads of rebelling Malays, helped the US commit genocide in Korea and Iraq, imprisoned 1.5 million in concentration camps in Kenya where thousands were tortured and murdered, tortured children in Cyprus, and shot dead dozens of Irish children during the ‘Troubles’. She honours, protects and rewards these torturers, rapists and murderers and is their official leader. She is a war criminal, plain and simple.

The Queen was on friendly terms with and regularly hosted Britain and America’s puppet dictators of the Arab gulf. The King of Bahrain was an honoured guest at her 90th birthday celebrations, sitting next to her in the Royal box at Windsor Horse Show. I imagine they swapped stories of democracy and equality.

Needless to say, the Queen is fabulously wealthy. Both in her formal capacity as monarch and personally. Forbes estimates her personal fortune at £420M, I daresay this is conservative in the extreme, but the secrecy and legal barriers surrounding the family are so formidable it’s difficult to say with any precision. The riches that are lavished upon the Royals’ lifestyle is simply breathtaking. Her corgis are fed fillet steak cooked by a proper chef. The meals are delivered by a footman on a silver platter. And yet, despite this personal wealth (hundreds of millions), access to institutional wealth (tens of billions), she receives tens of millions from the ordinary taxpayer. She confiscates the assets of those dying intestate (when people die without designating an heir) within her Duchies. She has been allowed to continue reaping huge profits from her vast property empire and business investments (in such wholesome industries as weapons, booze, and notoriously exploitative corporations like BrightHouse). While the rest of us have to declare every hard-earned penny, for the Queen and Prince Charles, it’s voluntary. Even then they have millions invested in offshore tax havens.

And despite all this. Layer upon layer of undeserved acquisition of frankly unbelievable amounts of wealth, the Queen, with breathtaking gall, had the effrontery to ask for a further contribution from the government’s cold weather pot, set up to help poverty-stricken pensioners with rising fuel costs, …to help heat her bloody palaces! This level of entitlement and sense of superiority is almost impossible to describe adequately. You wouldn’t do that sort of thing unless you considered yourself, a billionaire, to be a priority over people who may freeze to death for lack of heating. Queen Elizabeth was no cuddly old dear, she was a non-fiction, nonagenarian female version of King Joffrey…

4.4 78 votes
Article Rating

Post Author: Pitchfork Cosmonaut

Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Syd Smith
Syd Smith
6 months ago


6 months ago

Very good. Why does it say 3Mar?

6 months ago

Great thanks for the reply. Have shared with like minded friends.

Ahmed Balim
Ahmed Balim
6 months ago

Brilliant, to the point, refreshing. God save the Queen? Rather, God save us from the Queen!


[…] those who think this is insensitive – it’s infinitely more insensitive to eulogise a malevolent (remember the nonce-guarding) and murderous (head of an armed forces responsible for 70 years-worth […]