It’s hard to know where to start with the Royal Wedding. So much of the commentary  surrounding it almost goes beyond parody – take this mental ‘satirical’ (?) rant from Richard Littlejohn about the bride being forced to wear a “designer burka from the Kate Moss Intifada Collection at Topshop”, or this horrendously fawning circle-jerk by bigoted unionist knobhead David Starkey.

Criticism has been wiped out from the mainstream media. Few are willing to raise their heads above the parapet and question the nature of, let alone criticise, the ‘wedding of the century‘, in a manner which bears huge similarities to the ‘poppy fascism’ that we wrote about last week, where subservience to a supposedly apolitical  ’national institution’ becomes mandatory.

Which makes it all the more surprising, and brilliant, when the first major criticism of the wedding to be splashed across the national media comes from someone who is, in theory, under the direct authority of the Monarchy. Yep, far from a ‘usual suspect’, the man who’s managed to outrage the Daily Mail, the Tories and the Church hierarchy is, believe it or not, a Church of England bishop, Pete Broadbent. Writing on his twitter and facebook page, Bishop Broadment has attacked the wedding as ‘nauseauting tosh’, and said that ‘I don’t care about the royals, I’m a republican. Talent isn’t passed on through peoples’ bloodstock, the hereditary principle is corrupt and sexist.’

In something which has particularly outraged right-wing sensibilities, he also added: ‘As with most shallow celebrities, they will be set up to fail by the gutter press. I give the marriage seven years.’

Legend.

Republican hero Bishop Broadbent also commented, “I managed to avoid the last disaster in slow motion between Big Ears and the Porcelain Doll, and I hope to avoid this one too… I think we need a party in Calais for all good republicans who can’t stand the nauseating tosh that surrounds this event.”

We’ve got a better idea. The wedding is reportedly to be on Thursday 28 April, at Westminster Abbey. David Cameron is even giving us proles a day off to celebrate. Let’s go and join them? After all, International Workers Day slash May Day pagan-fest  is only a couple of days later.

I’ll bring the wickerman.

As the government has decided to decided to make cuts of 25%  to many essential services, new research by SSY has suggested  that at least £220 million could be saved by cutting the monarchy.  Why should we have to suffer so that a few select people can live in luxury?

Not only is she living in luxury she is living a more expensive lifestyle than the other monarchies in Europe.

Why does she need £41.5 million, I MEAN  MATE! Thats what she cost last year, Come on, thats a little bit greedy isn’t it? And that doesn’t include security, their properties, the cost of the army marching by them for random reasons and Prince Charles’ posh biscuits.

The Danish and Swedish monarchs cost four times less than ours. Why does our queen need so much more, surely they are expensive enough, as they are clearly not poverty stricken.

Luxembourg and Spain pay less six times less for their monarchs. Think about how it could be put to better use….. Then again I guess it’s a great idea to pay a very large fortune for a woman to stay in a very fancy house, it wouldn’t go to better use on education or health. Which would be something everyone can enjoy

SSY’s team of analysts have come up with some other ways we could have spent this money more effectively

It would be more than enough to pay for free school meals for all children in Scotland for four years. There would still be a nice wee sum left over.

It would go half way to pay for free public transport in Scotland.

For the cost of just one Queen we could the basic state pension for 13141 less expensive pensioners.

We could buy 58,000,000,000 bags of Wethers originals and subscribe to the peoples friend for 22,000 years.

Or 22,000,000,000 penny sweets.

The Queen wants to take this nice old man's sweeties

And  most importantly we could pay for my cigarettes and alcohol for 1 month.

I think it’s clear we need to ban the monarchy as we have so many better options for spending this colossal sum of money.

Since we last reported on Thailand, the unelected Thai government has completed its brutal crackdown on the protest camp in the heart of Bangkok’s business and shopping district.

Showing that they valued the property of the area, and their own power, more than human life, the government of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajjiva ordered troops to violently clear the site. In the process, at least 88 people were killed by army snipers and assault tanks. Over 1000 were injured.

Thailand’s 20th century history is littered with the intervention of the army to protect the aristocratic and business elite’s power against the majority of Thais who live in poverty. Now once again, Thais are living under a military curfew, with mass censorship of the media and internet and hundreds of political prisoners facing long sentences or possible execution.

Among the many prisoners facing trial is a British man, Jeff Savage, who lives in Thailand and was part of the protests.

But despite their short term retaking of the streets, the government has solved nothing by using violence against the overwhelmingly poor and working class Red Shirt protesters. The huge economic and class inequality in Thailand remains, and the poor are demanding democracy in order to try and get a government that will do something about it.

In parliament itself, opposition politicians have voiced their anger about the way the government has conducted itself, calling for Eton educated Abhisit to be impeached.

“Up until now, almost 100 people have died. Can you continue reading the budget and balance sheets like that? Do you have any feelings?” said Surapong Tovichakchaikul, an opposition member from Chiang Mai, a northern city where support is strong for the Red Shirts. Regional inequalities are also an important factor in the division of Thailand. The Red Shirts are particularly strong among the peasants and small farmers of the Thai north and northeast, which are ethnically and linguistically different from both central and southern Thailand. The peoples of these regions have been bounded to the rest of the country by borders established in the times of western colonialism.

Further evidence that Thailand is riven by discontent was the news that two bombs exploded in the south of the country this week, set by Islamic insurgents who want an independent south. The south of Thailand was an autonomous Islamic enclave before being annexed by Thailand in the early 20th century.

School contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson Abhisit Vejjajjiva

Fundamentally, the conflict in Thailand is about the desire of the traditional nobility and business elite to hold on to power. They were threatened when, for the first time in Thai history, the 1997 constitution allowed both houses of parliament to be directly elected. This led to the rise of billionaire tycoon Thaksin Shinawatra, who was able to fill the vacuum on the left of Thai politics once filled by the Communist Party.

In the absence of a credible left alternative, Thaksin established policies like the first universal healthcare scheme and economic support for small farmers that won him huge support among the Thai poor. Ousted by a military coup in 2006, he now lives in exile and the current Thai regime is seeking his arrest through Interpol.

The demand for democracy by the mass of Thai people is, therefore, a demand to be allowed to vote in a government that will represent their interests. They are frustrated in this by the so-called ‘Human Rights’ organisations and NGOs, who support the monarchy and anti-democracy, middle class Yellow Shirt movement, which has used violence and intimidation. The National Human Rights Commission is now actively taking part in the prosecution of Red Shirts.

The complicity of the monarchy in the current crisis has for virtually the first time in Thai history brought out open criticism of the institution, and the radicalisation that is likely to follow the government crackdown can only increase this. The current King Bhumibol has been on the throne for 55 years, and is ailing in health. He still retains widespread support, especially concentrated in the more well off. Check out this scene from the national Thai TV awards, where an audience of the entertainment elite applaud a pro-monarchy statement by one of those winning an award. Such total shows of total submission to the monarchy are common among the Thai elite. (The term “Father” refers to the King.)

However, his son and heir apparent, Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn, is held in much less esteem by most people. As a military officer, he participated directly in crackdowns against the Communist Party in the 70s. And his personal life has drawn a lot of criticism: he has been married several times, abandoning different wives and children. In Thailand, laws that prevent offences against the monarchy have been used to silence republican opposition. That’s why Thai socialist Giles ji Ungpakorn, who we’ve linked to before, lives in exile in Britain: he faces charges for criticising the monarchy at home. However, the Crown Prince has gone even further than that. In divorce proceedings, he accused a former wife of being totally responsible for the breakdown of their relationship, and she couldn’t answer back for fear of contravening the law!

It’s virtually certain that although crushed militarily for now the Red Shirt movement will re-emerge, quite possible greatly radicalised by this show of state violence. The fact of the matter is that the crackdown is a hollow victory for the Thai elite, for instead of taking any steps to resolve the contradictions at the heart of Thai society, their actions have only heightened them. The future of Thailand as a country is highly uncertain.

As Britain is gearing up for the most important election in decades, it’s also the most closely fought. Successive opinion polls have shown that it is unlikely any party will have an overall majority to govern – that either means working as a minority Government, or one in coalition. This has an obvious disadvantage, that at the time when the ruling class in the UK needs a strong Government to enforce public sector cuts, take on the trade unions and face down community campaigns against cuts to their services they may in fact have the weakest Government in decades; a Government that can be undermined by appealing to the opposition or coalition partners with cold feet.

This scenario has caused considerable and obvious disquiet to Britain’s bankers and potential investors. In order to quash this concern, the British state is, according to at least one press report prepared to rely on undemocratic and ancient rules to enforce stability at the price of democracy; that is, the use of Crown Powers.

The Daily Mail reports that none other than The Queen has been approached by leading civil servants to discuss using her powers as a Monarch in relation to a hung Parliament. It outlines a scenario in which no party has a majority, and the Parliament is a hung one. The minority Government could approach the Queen to request another general election to secure a stable majority Government. Leading civil servants are worried this would cause instability in the UK, and are discussing with the Queen the possibility of her using her Crown Powers to deny a request for a second General Election.

This would be designed to force the political parties to form a stable coalition Government, able to make the cuts necessary to make the UK profitable for capitalism again. Such use of Crown Power in the UK would be shocking and controversial, and it may not be necessary but it is far from impossible. Crown Powers have already been used in people’s lifetime – the Governor General in Australia dismissed a left-leaning Government in Australia using Crown Powers. These powers have also been used to overrule a High Court ruling which said the expulsion of Diego Garcia’s indigenous population to make way for a US military base was illegal.

The reality is the Crown still has plenty of power in the UK, if not to be used on the whim of the monarch itself but in the interests of Britain’s ruling establishment of MP’s, civil servants, bankers etc. It is still used in the Privy Council, whose prerogative powers were used to deny justice to the islanders of Diego Garcia and to ban GCHQ workers from being allowed to join a union. And there is of course the undemocratic House of Lords, whose peers are allowed to block laws voted on democratically in Westminster.

All these hang ons from the medieval ages are kept as an insurance policy in case any Government – in the past a feared “ultra-left” Labour one – would go too far, and for any Government to use as an extension of it’s powers beyond the relative transparency of Parliament. Remember that the next time the Monarchy comes up in a debate – tourists they may attract, but Mickey Mouse does not have the power to deny elections to the Senate in the United States!

The Queens Diamond Jubillee will be held in 2012, with public holidays on the 4th and 5th of June to celebrate her glorious reign. The SSP won’t be attending however – and will organise a demonstration for an Independent Republic, like we did at Calton Hill in 2004. We’ll be protesting so that the Queen and all the undemocratic hangovers of the middle ages have no role in politics, and Scotland is a modern, 21st century democratic Republic without inherited privilege or power.

Peter White, who is standing to be elected as a Labour councillor next year, has shocked the world when he told the truth on Facebook earlier this week.

Regarding the Queen’s upcoming Diamond Jubilee in 2012, he stated:

What is the point of celebrating the Diamond Jubilee of someone who is born into a position of privilege, she is a parasite and milks this country for everything she can. She has more front than Margate asking for extra money from the civil list. Maybe she should sell a couple of her properties. Maybe if she wants Buckingham Palace to be maintained from public funds she should open it to the public. Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with a public holiday but let’s have one that means something, rather than celebrating vermin.

Meanwhile, Leftfield were undertaking some investigative journalism, and discovered this shocking undercover picture of Her Majesty rehearsing for her next Queen’s Speech.