My own sad feelings about Queen Elizabeth, re: WWII

[Thtwudbeme]

I was born in 1964- in Virginia. A volatile time for the Civil Rights movement. My folks were both Dems, and that was unpopular then.

All of my grandparents were alive and well, as were their brothers and sisters (lots of great aunts and uncles for me). Several of my great grandparents were alive, and would live long enough for me to get to spend time with them and know them well.

There were many stories- I very well knew folks that knew my famiily members that fought (yep- on the wrong side) of the Civil War. My stories of those people are only second hand.

But! All four of my grandparents that lived/ served during WWII lived until I was in my thirties. My last grandfather- who had a Purple Heart- died several years ago at the age of 101. My parents are in their mid-eighties- they remember WWII as children.

Through all of this- the ONE public Head of State and Church was Queen Elizabeth (for me- my folks remember her father). She was a public touchstone for me of that era that was so important to my family memories.

So, now I am watching and waiting for people to die. My folks are the oldest left in my family, and they are not doing well. Queen Elizabeth and Prince Phillip are gone. That's a real loss historically no matter how you feel about monarchies.

I hate the idea of monarchies. Philisophically and politically, they rub me the wrong way. But, I didn't realize how much it meant to me that Elizabeth was out walking her corgi's- and listening to bagpipes- until she died.

I HOPE the British monarchy ends with William. I hope I live long enough to watch it. Their family will be fine- although I suspect the grandchildren of William and Harry and the others will be pretty upper middle class for a couple of generations. I hope it ends gently- just like I hope my own ending is gentle and quiet.

I hope we start worrying more about climate change and poverty- and less about Buckingham Palace. I hope we go quietly and confidantly into the next era.

[Easterncedar]

1. Beautifully said

And wise. Thanks.

[Thtwudbeme]

2. I should have added racism, but did not know how.

My parents left VA when I was three months old- and that's why I grew up in NC. They left because of conservatives. I'll write that story someday soon.

Elizabeth presided over some of the worst of the worst Civil Rights attrocities- and by ignoring them. Over the next decade as the Brits decide whether to keep the monarchy alive, this WILL come up. It needs to.

I am not blind to that.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

9. Nor should we be blind to that shameful conduct.

Last edited Sun Sep 11, 2022, 09:14 AM - Edit history (1)

[Thtwudbeme]

12. Absolutely

Sometimes, when I am musing about such things- I wonder if it appears history is "moving faster" due to technology.

We have photos of the atrocities now- there is a real power in that.

[padah513]

3. I agree

[Thtwudbeme]

5. It cannot be ignored.

Many folks are going to wax poetic over her death- just as I have. But one cannot study history without studying of it.

She was one of the longest reigning Monarchs- but she oversaw some of the most brutal attrocities in modern history. Let us not forget that, and send her to the Vault of History as a sweet little old lady that wore sensible shoes and walked Corgis and loved horses.

[mgardener]

4. And yet

25 March 1807, King George III signed into law the Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, banning trading in enslaved people in the British Empire.

They were certainly ahead of us.

[Thtwudbeme]

6. Slavery was not the only atrocity against our brothers and sisters. That's a pretty

easy target when we are looking at a death.

months after Elizabeth II learned of her father’s death from treetops in Kenya and became queen, British colonial authorities in Kenya suppressed a rebellion against the colonial regime known as Mau Mau, which, according to the New York Times, “led to the establishment of a vast system of detention camps and the torture, rape, castration and killing of tens of thousands of people”. The British government eventually paid £20m in a lawsuit by Kenyan survivors.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/sep/10/queen-death-colonies-atrocities-british-empire

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

10. So many atrocities some are quick to forget.

[Thtwudbeme]

11. What is "quick" anymore?

The people that remember that (besides history majors) are all in their seventies and eighties.

That generation is not that prominent on social media. So how do we define "quick to forget" anymore?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

15. Fair point.

[Thtwudbeme]

7. I prefer this thread stick to QE, obviously her ancestors were

overseeing other things- slavery, the American Revolution. I prefer to stick to her contemporary life.

[paleotn]

18. Not really. There were rumblings and failed legislation....

in several colonial legislative bodies to slow and even ban the importation of slaves since the mid 1700's. Even in Virginia and Maryland. However, London, and their appointed colonial governors would have none of it. It was far too profitable for the empire and the crown. But, remove the North American leg of colonial trade (fall out from our revolution), and slave importation became less lucrative on the whole for Westminster. Add to that a growing moral indignation in the UK about slavery in general and you have the Act you mentioned.

Much of that was reflected in the American colonies, thus the attempts to slow or ban slave importation into New York, New Jersey, Maryland and Virginia to name a few. Only the far southern colonies of South Carolina, Georgia and to a degree, North Carolina weren't on board. Some of the reasons for a ban were economic, but many were based on moral grounds. And not just Jefferson. It's a theme noted throughout the writings and speeches of the Virginia radicals, but also some centrist and conservative Burgesses from the Tidewater. Simply put, the importation and keeping of slaves was completely incompatible with the Enlightenment thinking these men subscribed to. A moral, economic and philosophical conundrum they struggled with all of their lives. Easy for me to pass judgement from this perspective, but I wonder how we would have reacted if we'd been in their shoes?

https://allthingsliberty.com/2020/09/the-first-efforts-to-limit-the-african-slave-trade-arise-in-the-american-revolution-part-2-of-3-the-middle-and-southern-colonies/

The Brits did ban slavery outright in 1833 and didn't need a bloody war to do it. I'll certainly grant them that.

[Joinfortmill]

8. Amen, fellow traveler

[bronxiteforever]

13. Warmly written. The last lines is where I live

we must do what we can concerning climate change, poverty and our wars and nuclear bombs and our civil rights.

[Escurumbele]

14. England's Monarchy is representative, and the British like it, its full of traditions

it is the soul of the country, whether you like it or not, England without its Monarchy will loose too much, and forget about the money that it costs to maintain it, they have been doing it for years, and people still love their monarchs. As I said on a different post, England needs to be more worried about the people they elect to the real power in Parliament, we so what happened with Boris Johnson, those are the ones who make or destroy the country, not the Monarchy. Lets see how it goes with the new Margaret Thatcher.

This video from Jonathan Pie makes the point without defending the monarchy that it is the politicians England needs to be aware of:

[link:

|

[calimary]

16. Kicking so I can find this later.

[paleotn]

19. Sorry, but monarchy and all it represents, figurehead or not....

is morally and philosophically corrosive. It's the antithesis of Enlightenment thinking and modern concepts of equality. Might that set of despicable traditions (in my mind) be a reason the majority of Brits vote Tory so damn often? To their own detriment.

[DownriverDem]

17. Well said

I hope tfg goes away ASAP.

[paleotn]

20. Overall a decent and commendable person, QE2, ...

who spent most of her life in a position that's way, way past its expiration date. And yes, that goes for The Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Demark, Spain and anyone else who carries on this ridiculous charade. Buy them all off and send them on their way.

[Elessar Zappa]

21. It's up to the individuals in the

aforementioned countries though. If they’re ok with their monarchy then who am I to say that they should abolish it? I wouldn’t want a monarchy in our country of course. And keep in mind that many of the countries you mentioned do better than the US in many categories related to quality of life so it seems that their monarchies aren’t really holding them back. But if they ever want to get rid of their royals, I would support it, not that my support or lack thereof means a damn.

[paleotn]

22. Many are better, UK being an exception, despite the hypocrisy.

Some have pushed it so far back in the closet that many young citizens don't even realize they have a monarchy. Regardless, it's a throwback to an evil, unequal time, akin to the US having Confederate monuments in my mind. A history and tradition we'd rather not memorialize.

Forgot Belgium on my list of hypocrites. How could I forget the "exploits" of THAT family (Leopold II and Congo to name a few). The current Belgian monarch is from that line, but also the great, great, great grandson of Charlotte of Wales, George IV's daughter and grand daughter of George Cubed, the infamous George in American history.