ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Wednesday, January 23, 2019

Mailvox: Her Majesty's Brexit

Not being an expert in the unwritten British constitution, I have no idea if what this emailer writes is actually true or not, but it would certainly be a good thing if it were true that the Queen's apparent willingness to Refuse Assent to legislation if necessary has guaranteed no-deal Brexit despite the machinations of pro-Remain parliamentarians.

The Brexit ‘No Deal’ (a clean break from the EU) was cemented yesterday, but almost no one has noticed.

The existence of the monarchy is often simply considered to be a quaint tourist attraction, but it has real constitutional consequences. Sovereignty is often said to reside in Parliament, but that is intellectual laziness. The sovereignty of the United Kingdom resides in “the Crown in Parliament”.

There is not US-style separation of powers in Britain. The supreme judicial function used to reside with the Law Lords sitting on the wool sack, who would sit in the House of Lords alongside all the other hereditary and non-hereditary aristocracy. The analogous position would be for Roberts, Ginsberg, Kavanaugh et al to be sitting senators with a vote on legislation in addition to being judges ruling on cases brought before them regarding that legislation. The Law Lords were replaced with a Supreme Court by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, who also excluded the hereditary aristocracy.

The hereditary aristocracy functioned to represent interests in a similar way to US senators prior to the 17th amendment. By allowing only the non-hereditary aristocracy to vote in the House of Lords, Blair turned the chamber into a pension system for failed elected politicians and government flunkies that carried water for the establishment. Imagine Lord Eric Cantor, Lord John Boehner, Lord Paul Ryan, Lord Eric Holder, Lady Lois Lerner, and the future Lord Robert Mueller being appointed senators for life after they had been removed from their previous positions. Fortunately, the Parliament Act of 1949 precludes the House of Lords from preventing the passage of budget legislation and also enables the House of Commons to force the passage of legislation in support of the official manifesto upon which the governing party was elected.

There is no Marbury v. Madison (1803), so the UK Supreme Court cannot strike down primary legislation in judicial decisions. But they can declare primary legislation incompatible with the Human Rights Act of 1998. We have our own Ruth Bader Ginsburg – Lady Hale is the Chief Justice.

The British constitution worked much better in its traditional configuration: Law Lords on the wool sack, hereditary aristocracy voting on legislation, and generally with the way things worked prior to 1997. A huge amount of damage was done by Blair. It is worth noting that Blair’s landslide victories (1997, 2001, 2005) were achieved with less votes from the population than Kinnock’s defeats (1987, 1992). This is because Conservative voters simply stayed home because the party gave them nothing to vote for.

Remember that the Conservative party had replaced Thatcher with Major to enable the Maastricht treaty, but so close to the general election that the impact hadn’t sunk in yet and the Conservative voters were prepared to give Major the benefit of the doubt. Those voters came back in 2015 to ensure that Cameron couldn’t negotiate away his promise to hold a Brexit referendum. Also, this week, Donald Tusk confirmed my assertions last week that David Cameron only made the promise with the idea that he could dispense with it in coalition negotiations with the Liberal Democrats. We voters have played our hand very carefully. These are not accidents or momentary rushes of blood to the head.

Her Majesty’s Government controls the legislative agenda through the Leader of the House in conjunction with the Speaker of the House. The Leader of the House is a cabinet minister, currently Andrea Leadsom, a Brexiteer and Theresa May’s last rival for the leadership in 2016 after Cameron resigned because he lost the referendum. Theresa May won by default because Leadsom withdrew when journalists started door-stepping her relatives. The final two leadership candidates are supposed to be put to the ordinary party membership around the country for a vote, a membership which is overwhelmingly Brexiteer, and whose most favoured outcome is a tungsten-tipped Brexit.

There was much talk last week of Conservative Remain members of parliament, in particular former ministers Nick Boles (junior minister under Cameron) and Dominic Grieve (attorney general under Cameron) taking control of the legislative agenda despite the fact that the agenda is at the control of the Government under Royal Prerogative. This would be subverting the authority of the Crown by removing the right to set the agenda from the Leader of the House.

Seizing control of the legislative agenda, for the purposes of preventing a ‘no deal’ Brexit, would require the assent of the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow. When he was first elected to that position, he was described as Caligula’s Horse, and has lived down to that description throughout his tenure. Bercow is a Remain supporter.

On Monday, Sir Stephen Laws, the government’s retired head of constitutional law, warned that the usurpation of the legislative agenda from the Government of the Crown could necessitate the refusal of Royal Assent for the first time since the reign of Queen Anne, a time before the Act of Union with Scotland, more than 300 years ago. This is where you get the concept of a Presidential veto from. However, there is no parliamentary override vote. Having the warning issued by Sir Stephen was a discreet way of warning the Speaker, analogously to having a former Chief of the Defence Staff speak to the press to warn politicians of things that a serving military officer cannot say.

Because Monday’s warning was clearly insufficient to deter the Speaker from the proposed usurpation of the legislative agenda, it was repeated on Tuesday by a spokesman of Her Majesty’s Government. That seems to have had the effect, because all of the amendments presented to the Speaker by the members of parliament yesterday are amendments to motions, not amendments to legislation. In other words, they are merely opportunities for meaningless bloviating with no force of law. This avoids the Queen having to refuse Royal Assent to legislation.

If Parliament had attempted to hold an override vote, then it is likely that the troops that are normally seen by the tourists in full ceremonial uniforms would have been sent directly to the chamber of the Commons to arrest the speaker, seize the mace (the legal authority of parliament), and throw the offenders in the Tower of London (that’s what it’s there for). The Queen would then have prorogued parliament pending fresh elections. The last time such things happened, there was a civil war of Parliament against the King. The King lost his head in Whitehall, and Parliament made such a mess of things that his son was invited to restore the monarchy. Charles the First had been particularly feckless, which must have been surprising because his father, James the First had been one of our best monarchs.

It is worth noting that the Queen allowed herself to be caught on an open microphone during her robing in the Victoria Tower for the State Opening of Parliament, prior to the referendum, voicing her support for Brexit. That didn’t happen by accident. The Victoria Tower is where all the Acts of Parliament are all held on vellum scrolls.

So, the position now is that the House of Commons will not manage to pass any legislation to change the already legislated default position of ‘no deal’ with the EU. On the matter of Brexit, we have crushed our enemies, seen them driven before us, and what we are now hearing is the lamentation of their women.

What will happen now is that Theresa May will consult with absolutely everyone in an alleged effort to put together some type of workable deal. This is simply a displacement activity, like a hamster washing itself when threatened. The consultations will assume an ever more feverish intensity the closer we get to 29 March. But the fact is that the alignment of interests of all groups involved in Brexit is such that no coherent position can be established for a deal to be made. She is now, as some have alleged, simply running down the clock to ‘no deal’. But of course that this is now government policy must be denied to the last breath.

Labels: , , ,

71 Comments:

Blogger Shadowfax January 23, 2019 5:15 AM  

Hail Queen Elizabeth, my hero!!

Thanks for sharing these excellent news (just hope it's true).

Blogger steb January 23, 2019 5:37 AM  

Message to whoever wrote this email: please write a blog!
You probably wouldn't get a huge audience but it would be an appreciative one.

Blogger CoolHand January 23, 2019 5:39 AM  

My God...

And here I thought our gov't process was incomprehensible.

I've always assumed that such convolutions were a mandatory side effect of having a "long and storied history", but to see it all spelled out like that really shows just how convoluted gov't can become, given enough time for accretion.

We Americans, ever the overachievers, are attempting to accomplish the same several hundred years sooner.

If the US were to survive to the current age of Britain, the convolution of our own gov't by that time can scarcely be imagined.

Wish you folks the best, whether it comes to a peaceful Bon Voyage for the EU, or nooses and street lamps for your rulers. Godspeed, y'all.

Blogger tublecane January 23, 2019 5:52 AM  

Was Cameron auditioning for a non-hereditary lordship when in his resignation speech he avoided everything of interest and babbled on about homo rights?

Blogger tublecane January 23, 2019 6:02 AM  

Monarch of foreign blood better serving the national interest than democratically elected politicians? I can believe it.

Her job is of course not to defend the nation. Rather, she responsible for the realm and its subjects, the church, and her house. Often enough these things are the same. For long-term interests especially.

Unless she is in thrall with outside interests. (Ones apparently not interested in the E.U. as constituted.) I've had doubts.

Blogger rognuald January 23, 2019 6:15 AM  

Queen Elizabeth, not a Boomer.

Blogger Gettimothy January 23, 2019 6:18 AM  

"Lord Ryan"
"Lord Boehner"
"Lord Bush"



Good LORD! Terrible!

Blogger Jeremy Daw January 23, 2019 6:42 AM  

I heard about Sir Stephen Laws' intervention on Monday but wasn't aware about the reiteration by a government spokesman. This hasn't, as far as I'm aware, been picked up to any great degree by the British media, which means it's not only accurate but significant. The media, of course, cannot afford to acknowledge that the game is over at this point.

Parliament has disgraced itself in the last few months. Having voted for the implementation of Article 50 and being returned largely on manifestos of respecting the outcome of the referendum in the General Election in 2017, MPs have subsequently displayed themselves to have the grace, foresight and vision of the headless chickens they most closely resemble at the moment. It's almost as if they haven't been paying attention to the way the EU has dealt with Greece, Italy and Cyprus in the past. And they call us Leavers 'parochial'.

But, May... I don't know. I wrote a letter to the PM on Sunday, clearly explaining why I voted to leave the EU and politely urging her to resist calls to take 'No Deal' off the table. I don't think I needed to worry on that score. In Tim Shipman's 'All Out War' which gives a detailed account of the referendum campaign, an email from David Cameron during his negotiations with Brussels is cited: "Frankly, after a day and a half of talks with these people, even I want to leave the EU. I'm getting nowhere, I might have to walk away." In some respects, it's a shame that he didn't, but it wouldn't surprise me if May, having endured a 'negotation' far more bruising than Cameron's, now felt exactly the same. She was never an enthusiastic Remainer anyway. Her strategy is as clear as it is magnificent: run down the clock, putting the pressure on Brussels to come up with a better deal, and prepare for no deal as best she can in the meantime. Fair enough. The negotiation has become what it was always going to be - a game of chicken. For the first time in a long while, I feel reasonably confident that the UK will not blink first.

That said, I don't expect the EU to get its act together quickly enough. It's too sclerotic, too arrogant and its ability to respond to crises is legendarily ossified. (All of which are, by themselves, compelling reasons for wanting to leave it.) Despite the increasing alarm of German car manufacturers and French winemakers, I can easily see us leaving as the EU scrambles ineffectually to come up with an offer at the last minute and falls foul of its own labyrinthine decision-making mechanisms. Which would be fine by me and also pretty damn hilarious.

In other related news, a recent Survation poll puts No Deal as the most favoured option among the British public at 28% with a second referendum coming second at 24%. The country remains as divided as ever, but not equally so and the difference is enough for those politicians who are so inclined to interpret correctly.

Here's to an increasingly histrionic next two months!

Blogger Balkan Yankee January 23, 2019 6:43 AM  

"Blair turned the chamber into a pension system for failed elected politicians and government flunkies that carried water for the establishment."

And that, boys and girls, is how Tony Blair invented turd polish.

Blogger wreckage January 23, 2019 7:05 AM  

If the UK gets shafted by the EU, it might find close relations with its former colonies to be quite an acceptable substitute. British colonialism was always intended to provide a check on European imperialism; future historians might consider this moment to be just another instance of many over the last 200 years or so.

Blogger Skyler the Weird January 23, 2019 7:34 AM  

@10 Former colonies as in the Oceanics? The U.S., Canada, Australia, and New Zealand?

Blogger pyrrhus January 23, 2019 7:35 AM  

Hereditary monarchy finally doing its job, huzzah!

Blogger Teleros January 23, 2019 7:43 AM  

All this looks pretty accurate from what I know of the UK constitution, so thumbs up for accuracy. Withholding Royal Assent would certainly be entertaining, but I wouldn't put it past Treasonous May and her supporters to try and get some kind of 11th hour deal through. Praying that whoever wrote it is correct though, and that we're just running down the clock.

= = =

wreckage wrote:If the UK gets shafted by the EU, it might find close relations with its former colonies to be quite an acceptable substitute. British colonialism was always intended to provide a check on European imperialism; future historians might consider this moment to be just another instance of many over the last 200 years or so.

I wasn't around at the time, but reportedly the initial campaign to join the EU was full of lies along the lines of "don't worry you can keep buying New Zealand lamb just like now" etc. Of course then the EU tariffs came along but by then it was too late. So it's been a few decades, but from what I've seen, the old dominions at least are eager to work with an independent UK again.

Blogger DJT January 23, 2019 7:57 AM  

If the UK gets shafted by the EU, it might find close relations with its former colonies to be quite an acceptable substitute.

That was what the Commonwealth was always meant to be, but it has degenerated into little more than an international forum for soccer matches.

Hopefully with Brexit, Charles and William will make the Commonwealth great again.

Blogger rumpole5 January 23, 2019 8:11 AM  

It is time to form an "Anglosphere" establishment to promote and assist countries that share the English language and the English heritage. The USA should at least join the Commonwealth as an associate member.

Blogger Tank January 23, 2019 8:15 AM  

Well, I hope you're right, but won't believe it until it actually happens.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan January 23, 2019 8:31 AM  

"Anglosphere" I'm more for White Wakanda and our vibranium and let the rest of the world eat "whiteness" professors.

Blogger Paul M January 23, 2019 8:33 AM  

No deal is inevitable. The EU, by connivance, came into possession of Britain. They will accept no exit deal that doe not involve the exchange of something of equal value to the whole of Britain: perpetual debt service. The British would be mad to agree to this, and Her Majesty has seen enough history to understand the folly of it.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd January 23, 2019 8:34 AM  

@15, no, rumpole, no Anglosphere for us. We left for a reason.

An unofficial alignment would be wise, some very friendly trade agreements might be OK, but we aren't them, even though we are closer to them than to most. No more foreign entanglements.

At least we could buy baby formula from the Anglosphere without getting melamine in the mix. No more foreign entanglements, no more trade with China!

Blogger Jeremy Daw January 23, 2019 8:43 AM  

Charles is a pluralist buffoon, but William might be alright.

Blogger MendoScot January 23, 2019 8:53 AM  

There are a bunch of details in here - particularly WRT the House of Lords - of which I was unaware, but I concur with the gist of the analysis. The Remainers have been just a little too confident in their own cleverness and manipulations, in the belief - shared by the EU - that the UK would never go for a hard Brexit.

They are wrong.

The quiet panic in Germany would be echoed in France if they weren't so distracted by the gilets jaune.

I would add one observation - May really thought she could get her deal through. She came to power through endless manipulations and machinations, and thinks her deal will let her pull the same trick with the EU. She has no grand political vision, just the solipsism of someone who attributes their own success to their own brilliant insight into the nature of power. I imagine she still doesn't understand what went wrong.

Blogger Done with it all January 23, 2019 8:56 AM  

The Queen needs to have the royal food tasters working overtime. They also need to take the maintenance meds she is on.

Blogger dienw January 23, 2019 8:59 AM  

rumpole5 wrote:The USA should at least join the Commonwealth as an associate member.

No. England has bee attempting for nearly as long as we have been a country - and somewhat succeeding - to bring the United States back under its dominion; the CFR is the most egregious and probably longest enduring attempt.

Hell, I read a couple of days ago that the English and French had an invasion force ready to Invade the remnant states had the South won the Civil War.

Blogger Seeingsights January 23, 2019 9:18 AM  

So what the Remainers have been doing the past few weeks is "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Blogger Iron Spartan January 23, 2019 9:18 AM  

Maybe a monarch isn't so bad after all.

At least in a traditional Monarchy, corrupt and feckless nobility dying at the hands of their commoners was considered "natural causes."

Blogger Unknown January 23, 2019 9:25 AM  

I did read somewhere else that the Queen can suspend Parliament. If she does this, the lying and thieving politicians cannot work against the peoples instruction. We would crash out on 30.3.19 with no deal, which is what everyone I knows wants.
Bring it on.

Blogger Jack January 23, 2019 9:31 AM  

When deciding whether to give Royal Assent to legislation, the Queen is supposed to be guided by the advice of her ministers--not Parliment's will. Since th Government normally writes the legislation and has majority support in Parliment, the distinction does not come up much. As long as May does not recommend assent to anti-Brexit legislation, the Queen's refusal is almost certain.

Blogger 1LLoyd January 23, 2019 9:45 AM  

I love this blog. I learn things on at least a weekly basis. Today I learned a month's worth.

I would not be upset to see closer ties with Britain and the Commonwealth, drawn on our common traditions and fair to both sides. Culturally, this would help lead us back to valuing Western Civilization and Christianity.

As a history buff, I know many of the Founding Fathers were pro-British. Even right after independence.

@25. Hilarious, and true. Hmmm...

Blogger OGRE January 23, 2019 9:47 AM  

Very fascinating. Thanks to the emailer for sharing. God Bless the Queen.

Blogger johndoe03526 January 23, 2019 10:09 AM  

Thanks to the emailer.
No deal Brexit needs to happen. Then the EU will negotiate. I don't know the figures, but quite a lot of EU goods are sold in Britain. Trade is not a one way street.

Blogger Johnny January 23, 2019 10:16 AM  

Within a few years following the American Revolutionary War came the Jay treaty. We went right back to having Britain as our major trading partner and on terms that favored Britain. It was like the war never happened and George Washington took a political hammering for accepting it. But the thing is, Britain could have caused us a lot of grief in the western territories and her navy ruled the waves. The revolution didn't change the situation. Our sensible trading partner was still Britain.

Now we are the stronger party. If we got into the British Commonwealth we would dominate it. The Brits should be reluctant to let is in, not us reluctant to enter. In politics it is the power behind the parties, not the particulars of the deal that count.

Blogger Robin January 23, 2019 10:24 AM  

@15 there is no compelling reason for the US to join any sort of alliance except as the leader, or with special privileges. I’m Canadian so I wish that weren’t the case but it is. We benefit much more from association with the USA than vice versa. Joining the Commonwealth is antithetical to MAGA. Cooperation would be great though. Up here we have a cultural dumpster fire to deal with and we can use the help.

Blogger John Best. January 23, 2019 10:28 AM  

That was an enjoyable read, everything he says is correct. However we mustn't forget that the Monarchy (since the death of Queen Ann) must be given the consent of Parliament to become the Monarch. This has stopped many British/German Kings and Queens from limiting Parliament. The last one to try was Ernest Augustus with the great reform acts. So I don't believe the Queen would refuse Royal Ascent to Parliament because Parliament could refuse consent for her heir and pick its own. The end of the Stuart line basically means the Monarchy is no longer anointed by God, but given consent by Parliament. What's happening now is the government is threatening to tell the Queen not to agree to it, it isn't actually the Queen doing anything. The globalists efforts to stop Brexit were always doomed to fail, as soon as the DUP held the government in power and didn't back down under pressure from the globalist, Brexit was won at that point. The rest is the globalists playing for time before the British constitutional settlement is broken when we leave the EU.

Blogger Jonathon Davies January 23, 2019 10:30 AM  

The clock is indeed running down to a no deal Brexit, either by design (I doubt it) or incompetence (far more likely). There is no majority for any one outcome, plus only the Prime Minister can revoke Article 50, which so far she has shown no sign of doing. It would fatally split her party as Mogg and his eurosceptic group would rebel. Tories first and foremost look after their own party, always.

Add to this that all 27 EU members have to unilaterally agree to any extension of Article 50. There are EU elections in May. Previously the UK seats were dominated by UKIP. The EU are foreseeing a populist backlash from France, Poland, Hungary and Italy already. Tjey don't want to add the British votes to that. They want the UK out and gone before the elections. Chief Brexit overseer Guy Verhofstadt has already stated this openly on Twitter.

No deal support is growing, even among remainers. People are fed up and just want out, one way it another, and if it has to be no deal then so be it. My remain voting parents certainly feel this way. Polls are now reflecting the same. Bring on no deal.

Blogger Johnny January 23, 2019 10:33 AM  

In a negotiation, if you can play brinkmanship and the other side can't handle it, you win. Democracies have the problem that the leadership can not easily respond to brinkmanship because it upsets the public, and often the leadership itself isn't inclined to it. It appears to me that is what the EU is doing, playing brinkmanship and letting the Brits squirm with obvious weakness.

By my lights the solution for the Brits is to counter with the same stubbornness as the other side. That is Brexit. After that the EU folk will likely climb down off their high horse and do a deal. And if they don't you just have to live with it. The non Brexit deal is to make like a doormat and lose automatically.

Blogger camcleat January 23, 2019 10:33 AM  

Very Interesting. Thanks for this.

Blogger Pelican January 23, 2019 11:07 AM  

Fantastic piece! I knew that the Monarch held the whipmhand somehow but now this explains all. Thank you!

Blogger Twisted Root January 23, 2019 11:15 AM  

I have no idea whether the plot to seize the legislative agenda was real, but if it was it is no surprise to hear that the monarch intervened to protect her position regardless of her sentiment towards the EU.

Blogger John Best. January 23, 2019 11:21 AM  

@38 the plot was real, they globalists have been doing interviews about it for weeks now. The globalist have been split now, because of the DUP refusing to move for their no-deal with the EU position. So it was basically a plot to bypass the DUP in Parliament, however it would have failed regardless because the Loyalists would go to war with the British state. So this is preferable, but either the globalists would have been defeated. May has the best strategy which is buy time, try and keep the nationalist forces bogged down in Brexit as long as possible.

Blogger Daniele Grech Pereira January 23, 2019 11:31 AM  

Sometimes in Canada, I will make a toast to the Queen to remind my Italian and Portuguese family members, proud of deposing their monarchs, that we are now Her Majesty's subjects. They can't say anything about it because they've tried to convince me my whole life that we are 100% genuine Canuck hide. I think that's an example of effective rhetoric, but I often confuse that with me just being an asshole, effectively.

Blogger eclecticme January 23, 2019 11:42 AM  

I wonder if the British public will just get tired of all this and go for a no deal Brexit just to get it over with. "Rip the band aid off already."

Blogger camcleat January 23, 2019 11:45 AM  

" it is likely that the troops that are normally seen by the tourists in full ceremonial uniforms would have been sent directly to the chamber of the Commons to arrest the speaker, seize the mace (the legal authority of parliament), and throw the offenders in the Tower of London (that’s what it’s there for). "

Can Her Majesty the Queen issue such an order for Sadiq Khan?

One would be hard pressed to find a bigger traitor in Britain than "terrorism is who we are" Khaaaaaan.

Blogger Arcane Rhino January 23, 2019 12:53 PM  

Very fascinating reading. Thanks to the writer and Vox for posting this.

Blogger OneWingedShark January 23, 2019 1:19 PM  

Loyd Jenkins wrote:As a history buff, I know many of the Founding Fathers were pro-British. Even right after independence.
I believe the phrase "our kin/cousins across the sea" perfectly describes it. They are our family, extended though it may be, and the War for Independence was the US "moving out of the house" after being treated so badly (eg the Stamp Act).

Robin wrote:Joining the Commonwealth is antithetical to MAGA. Cooperation would be great though. Up here we have a cultural dumpster fire to deal with and we can use the help.
Exactly, and I would love to do so, but it should be the familial-love from the above relationship… not a treaty or codified formality.

As I understand it your elites are flooding you with foreigners [and giving them preference] just as ours are. Do you have any more/better insights to share about what's going on in Canada?

Blogger 1st Earl Hardwicke January 23, 2019 1:53 PM  

There's a British Constitution?!!!!

James I. Drooling unclean monster, who censured the Bible. If the UK was so good why leave?

Current House of Lords: Scumbags, claiming £350 per day for showing up. Technically illegal for non-Christians to sit.

The Queen: Reminds me of my Grandmother (same age), stubborn but she'll give to whoever is closest to her.

The 1st Earl of Hardwicke reformed the entire legal system. Thought it was interesting because he wasn't born into the Aristocracy, became regent as well. Too bad some later guy know as Champagne Charlie blew all the money.

Blogger Cloudbuster January 23, 2019 1:57 PM  

God save the Queen.

Blogger CS January 23, 2019 2:17 PM  

@ Aurelius Gomez
"The Queen needs to have the royal food tasters working overtime."

Quite right. I wouldn't trust King Chuck on Brexit.

Blogger weka January 23, 2019 2:47 PM  

Yes. We got wealthy feeding Britain and can do it again.

The EU.will destroy itself. The UN needs to precede it into History.

Anonymous Anonymous January 23, 2019 2:51 PM  

For the sake of Britain and the British peoples I hope he's right.

Sitting in my German language class this evening it did occur to me to wonder, not wholly OT I think, if there is any rhetorical mileage in this pithy phrase:

"Die Flüchtlinge braucht Lebensraum!"

(The refugees need living room)

Might it make good graffiti?

Blogger InformationMerchant January 23, 2019 3:13 PM  

The refusal of Royal Assent has been unthinkable for all of my life, I had considered it more unlikely than the American belief that the armed citizenry would stand against a tyrannical federal government.

Even excluding the part about throwing politicians in the Tower of London, it would be unbelievable. The chaos would be interesting to watch. The left would probably prefer it if some Conservatives were thrown in the Tower of London.

@25 It's not. Democracy: The God That Failed makes a decent case that it's better than Democracy.

@33 The Queen is good, Charles is incredibly leftist for a king. Although he got criticized for not just sitting there in the past, politicians would be stupid to reject a leftist king and open a national discussion on who should be king, especially as they wouldn't be able to appoint anyone as bad as Charles and they'd still get the ire right wing Christians feel towards the people responsible for the current pope.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash January 23, 2019 3:24 PM  

InformationMerchant wrote:Although he got criticized for not just sitting there in the past, politicians would be stupid to reject a leftist king and open a national discussion on who should be king, especially as they wouldn't be able to appoint anyone as bad as Charles and they'd still get the ire right wing Christians feel towards the people responsible for the current pope.
Couldn't they skip Charlie and go straight to William?
I'm more convinced every day that Elizabeth is only hanging on to make sure Charles is not crowned.

Blogger Haxo Angmark January 23, 2019 4:08 PM  

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Blogger Fozzy Bear January 23, 2019 4:08 PM  

the troops that are normally seen by the tourists in full ceremonial uniforms would have been sent directly to the chamber of the Commons to arrest the speaker, seize the mace (the legal authority of parliament), and throw the offenders in the Tower of London (that’s what it’s there for).
Once upon a time I would have believed this, but just last month a Labor MP seized the Mace, and the Sergeant-at-arms neither drew his weapon nor ended the day in the Tower. There is simply no reverence for the Constitution left anymore.

Blogger Yordan Yordanov January 23, 2019 4:09 PM  

@5

Looking at Lichtenstein, Morocco, The United Arab Emirates and Qatar, I am starting to see the benefits of landed aristocracy. Seems like they are much more willing to invest in the future, than "Government as a lootbox" democracies.

Blogger weka January 23, 2019 5:35 PM  

1. Never underestimate the reserve powers. They were last used in Australia to dispose of Whitlam.

2. God bless the Queen and maybshe continue as long as possible. For Charles is now 70 and we want a short reign.

3. It is not merely the UK but the dominions that have to be consulted. The precedent here is Edward VII.

4. The EU will end. Regardless.

Blogger Johnny January 23, 2019 6:33 PM  

>>I am starting to see the benefits of landed aristocracy.

I lack the interest necessary to look into it, but I am suspicious that the Brits started to lose their empire at about the same time the elite shifted from the ennobled to the educated. An attitude thing mainly.

Blogger tublecane January 23, 2019 6:42 PM  

@20- I know one good thing about Charles: he despises modernism in architecture and has fought to preserve traditional buildings. That's about it.

All I know about William aside from the basic tabloid stuff is that he picks wives better than his brother.

Blogger John Best. January 23, 2019 9:02 PM  

@56 there was a war between the industrialists and the Aristocracy in Britain for who would be in control of the state after the Napoleonic wars. You had the great reform acts in the late 1820's and early 1830's, after which the Conservative party was formed, in the 1850's an utter terrible decade, the Aristocracy were defeated and the Corn Laws repealed, after which the Liberals within the Conservative party and the Whig's formed an alliance called the Liberal party. Progressively since then the Aristocracy has been getting its land, wealth and position stolen from it by the Industrialist elite, which bought off the working class and turned them against the Aristocracy which loved them. Only the Loyalists in Northern Ireland remaining Loyal to the Aristocracy, the Orange Order actually attempted to stop Queen Victoria taking the throne and put Ernest Augustus in as King, he was a High Tory.

Blogger damaris.tighe January 23, 2019 9:42 PM  

The Queen actually dismissed the Prime Minister of Australia, Gough Whitlam, in Australia's constitutional crisis in the 1970's.


So she can play a role in resolving a constitutional crisis.

Blogger damaris.tighe January 23, 2019 10:05 PM  

Australia has also managed to survive and make trade deals with other countries.

Blogger Jack Amok January 23, 2019 10:54 PM  

No deal Brexit needs to happen. Then the EU will negotiate.

It's kinda like the government shutdown in the US. The lefties prophecy all manner of calamity, which doesn't happen, and then the lefties have to negotiate from a position of weakness.

I lack the interest necessary to look into it, but I am suspicious that the Brits started to lose their empire at about the same time the elite shifted from the ennobled to the educated. An attitude thing mainly.

I've always thought it was actually the empire itself that caused the downfall. When India became a money-printing machine for MPs who invested in the East India Company, government policy in the UK went into the toilet.

All I know about William aside from the basic tabloid stuff is that he picks wives better than his brother.

Don't you mean half-brother?

Blogger tublecane January 24, 2019 1:21 AM  

@51- I used to doubt Charles as Harry's father, but I've seen images of Prince Philip that give off a hint of Harry. Or maybe that's just me.

Blogger Martin Marprelate January 24, 2019 2:58 AM  

I have searched for confirmation of a lot of the things asserted in this email. I cannot find any evidence of it. Could be Google and Duckduckgo are hiding it. In particular I cannot find any info on the open mic recordings of the Queen. I think I would take this with a grain of salt.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash January 24, 2019 4:16 AM  

Martin Marprelate wrote:In particular I cannot find any info on the open mic recordings of the Queen.
This event was widely reported at the time, but all I can find currently are NewAge Earth Transformation/Conspiracy sites
As far as the rest of it, it's pretty conventional reporting.

Blogger Jonathon Davies January 24, 2019 5:16 AM  

@63 She asked whether anyone could give her a reason to remain in the EU. Queen is not supposed to comment on politics so it was hushed up.

Blogger Dirk Manly January 24, 2019 9:47 AM  

@14
"Hopefully with Brexit, Charles and William will make the Commonwealth great again."

Charles the homosexual Boomer????

William, maybe, but he's a Millenial. But at least he's served in combat, and as a helicopter pilot (noisy target) at that. Helo pilots in wartime, even AH (attack), but most especially UH (utility) types are some extremely brave men. Big noisy thing moving slowly, or hovering, acting as the biggest bullet-magnet in the grid square.

The UK had better pray that nothing happens to William such that Harry would take the throne in his place. Harry demonstrably has no sense.

@15

"It is time to form an "Anglosphere" establishment to promote and assist countries that share the English language and the English heritage. The USA should at least join the Commonwealth as an associate member."

Because Five Eyes has been so good for the common citizens of the UK/US/NZ/Canada/Australia.

Blogger justaguy January 24, 2019 11:09 AM  

Was William in combat? Something doesn't sound right about that. I thought that the spare went to theater and if memory serves, was outed. I envision something like with Al Gore Jr. where he stayed ona safe base and had an full time bodyguard soldier assigned to him. I don't think that is the same as combat but ymmv.

Blogger weka January 24, 2019 7:42 PM  

In the upper class the firstborn gets the estate, the second son had a commision boihht in the Army, the third the clergy, and the others went to the colonies.

The middle class went to the Navy, where promotion was on merit.

Since Victoria, all royals serve in the armed forces, but the heir is not sent to the front line. Charles and Andrew served in the navy but it was Andrew who put his life on the line in the falklands, and Harry similarly served in Afghanistan.

The exception is Edward, the youngest son of the Queen, who.failed selection to the Royal Marines... then became a television producer.

Blogger bagginz January 25, 2019 9:17 AM  

>William, maybe, but he's a Millenial. But at least he's served in combat, and as a helicopter pilot (noisy target) at that<

It was prince Andrew that served as a navy helicopter pilot At the sharp end too. On HMS Invincible during the Falklands war.

"Prince Andrew's place on board and the possibility of the Queen's son being killed in action made the British Government apprehensive, and the Cabinet desired that Prince Andrew be moved to a desk job for the duration of the conflict. The Queen, though, insisted that her son be allowed to remain with his ship. Prince Andrew remained on board Invincible to serve as a Sea King helicopter co-pilot, flying on missions that included anti-submarine warfare and anti-surface warfare, Exocet missile decoy, casualty evacuation, transport, and search and air rescue. He witnessed the Argentinian attack on the SS Atlantic Conveyor."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Andrew,_Duke_of_York#Falklands_War

Prince Harry saw active service as a forward air controller in Afghanistan - until the government decided the risk of him being captured and disaster that would create was too great, overrode Harry's choice and pulled him out. https://youtu.be/0kiA2brdF6I?t=121

Prince William graduated as an army officer, but his position as second-in-line to the throne made his likelihood of seeing active service remote. He went on to train and serve in the RAF and the Royal Navy.

People can say what they want about the British Royals, but they still have a visceral understanding of noblesse oblige, loyalty, duty and sacrifice.
They know that the price one pays to rule and command respect, is to have skin in the game.

Blogger Linda Fox January 25, 2019 10:12 AM  

As a descendant of British subjects (and more than a few Irish rebels), I applaud the Queen for asserting her authority. She did it deftly (no doubt with excellent counsel), and may join the First Elizabeth as a Ruler Who Fended Off Control By Those Damned Continentals!
Rule Brittania! is the song for today!

Blogger Robin January 25, 2019 2:52 PM  

I don’t but am trying to. Like a lot of Canadians most of my time is spent watching the US. Few people are interested in Canada—one of the reasons Deep State elements like to do sketchy things up here, e.g. CIA-MKUltra work in Montreal—so sources are harder to come by.

Our sense of nationhood has always been weak due to our colonial nature and unfortunate geography. There was a time of greater patriotism in the past but it was more as overseas British subjects. Our Constitution (the British North America Act, 1867) resided in London until 1982.

Besides that we have the people of French Canada to contend with, who aren’t a bad lot but whose religious and linguistic rights are enshrined into our constitution, making us civic nationalists at the core. And since we read Vox Popoli, we know how that goes...

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts