The national anthem, the honours system, a queen and all that – it’s not surprising that the furthest left of politicians deplore this type of patriotism. And if the queen we are supposed to save was, like other kings and queens in the olden days, given to throwing her enemies into gaols or laying down appalling laws to keep the poor in their place, then refusing to sing the national anthem because it mentions the current monarch would seem to have some sense to it.
But it’s quite a long time now since royals were allowed to behave like dictators. And insofar as the people can choose who reigns over them, it is highly unlikely that the star of one party would get songs of approval from the opposite benches. Chances are that the ruler’s enemies would sit there, their teeth grinding too loudly to sing.
The modern or Scandinavian style of royalty seems more useful: its purpose is to provide a figurehead or a system of honour that’s an alternative rating to everything being assessed only for its sex appeal or its financial usefulness. The royal family – or perhaps we should say families now – can be a model of respectability; something which was not required of any royals in the olden days.
And as was said at the time of the royal wedding, it’s good that royalty, when correctly controlled, can give us a family to watch which is neither that of Kim Kardashian nor Homer Simpson. So sing out of relief for that, if nothing else.
What do you think? Have your say below
