Political Life and the Social World: Cool Britannia
Queen Elizabeth is a constitutional monarch. Each of its
political decisions is made as a result of the work of a democratically elected
government, after a discussion with advisers, ministers, and the head of
government. On the one hand, being the head of state, many important political
functions close on her: the army swears allegiance to her, foreign ambassadors
present credentials to her, and she receives the heads of state and pays
official visits herself.
In her career, there were examples of direct involvement in
British political life. In 1963, Prime Minister Harold Macmillan had been
diagnosed with prostate cancer. It became clear that he would have to resign.
Conservative politician Alec Douglas-Home leaves the Prime
Minister's office in Downing Street after losing an election in October 1964.
Hume took office due to the illness of Harold Macmillan, but his prime ministership
was short - from 1963 to 1964 (a year without a day). He was Minister of
Foreign Affairs in the cabinet of Edward Heath.
But the problem was that the credibility of the Macmillan
government, even within the Conservative Party itself, was undermined by a
recent sex scandal: Secretary of Defense John Profumo was revealed to have been
in a relationship with 19-year-old masseuse Christine Keeler. And another
frequent visitor to the house of Profumo's mistress was Soviet intelligence
officer Yevgeny Ivanov, naval attachment at the Soviet embassy in London. The
Conservative Party has entered a clinch over who should now head the
government.
The appointment of the Prime Minister is a royal
prerogative; as a rule, the monarch appoints the leader of the party that won
the election as head of the government. But in this case, she had to intervene
and independently make a choice in favor of the member of the House of Lords, Alex
Douglas- Home The opponents called him "anachronism" and
"artifact", at first he worked without even being an elected member
of the House of Commons (by-elections were held later), and a group of
left-wing radicals even prepared plans to kidnap the prime Ministers imposed by
the monarch. But in 1964, the Conservatives successfully lost the elections,
the Labor Party came to power and the difficult situation was resolved by
itself.
The royal family and after that more than once found itself
at the center of real political life. In the 1960s and 1970s, at least two
conspiracies were being prepared against British Prime Minister Harold Wilson -
they involved representatives of the secret services (many of whom did not
trust Wilson, considering him a Soviet agent). The conspirators saw Lord
Mountbatten, the uncle of Prince Philip and the last Viceroy of India as their
possible leader He himself, however, refused such an honor. In those same
years, an assassination attempt on the Queen herself was also being prepared -
the Australian conspirators in 1970 wanted to kill her during their next visit,
but failed. But Lord Mountbatten was unlucky: in 1979, the Irish terrorists
blew him up while relaxing on a yacht.
Examples of Elizabeth's direct contributions to politics can
be found in very recent times. In the summer of 2019, shortly after Boris
Johnson became Prime Minister, pressure began on the Queen to support the idea
of early elections - Johnson got a parliament with an almost disappearing
majority, in addition, he led the government only. as a result of a party vote,
not nationwide. In order to fulfill all the promises, he needed greater
legitimacy and a powerful majority in the House of Commons. Negotiations with
the Queen were successful: she supported Johnson's plan, and early elections in
December ended in an incredibly convincing victory for the Conservatives.
But still, each of these situations, when the crown
interfered in politics, became only possible as a result of a grandiose excess,
an emergency in which action was required from a supra-partisan actor who
enjoys great confidence in the population - which is the queen. Otherwise,
Elizabeth, as a monarch, managed to find her new role in changing circumstances
– something that was given with such difficulty to the whole country as a
whole.
Elizabeth started as an extremely young monarch and
brought with her a lot of new and progressive. The first "Elizabethan
era" entered the history books as a time of creators and decided people:
it was a time when bright talents - from Shakespeare to Francis Drake - found
support at court. Elizabeth II, in terms of supporting everything modern,
probably even outdid her predecessor.
And the point is not only that under her, but the
monarchy also tried to keep up with the times: the coronation of Elizabeth in
1953 was broadcast on television, and the queen addressed the subjects of the
Commonwealth with a television and radio address, with a Christmas address, and
Buckingham Palace started to actively use social networks. Under Elizabeth, the
monarchy, losing influence on political life, started to interact more actively
with representatives of secular life. The Beatles and Bono, Bob Geldof and Tom
Jones, Rod Stewart and Mick Jagger, Elton John and Annie Lennox, David Beckham
and Ralph Lauren, Benedict Cumberbatch and Adele, Joan Rowling and Keira
Knightley - this is not a full list of those celebrities who received from the
hands of the Queen, the Order of the British Empire or was knighted.
Liberal changes have taken place under Elizabeth in
public life as well. For decades, she has spoken out in support of women's
rights. And these statements were not empty words under Elizabeth II, women
received more and more opportunities and rights: abortions and divorces,
greater protection of labor rights, and political representation. The same is
true of minority rights: in Britain under Elizabeth, the LGBT community went
from the pariahs (as they were back in the 1950s and 1960s) to equal members of
society with the right to marriage and open public life. And the constant flux
of migrants has forced Britain to become more multicultural, tolerant, and
inclusive.
Mass culture flourished in the country during the second
half of the 20th century. The Elizabethan era was the heyday of rock and roll
and punk, film and classical music, corporate architecture and science, and
entrepreneurship in Britain. A lot of talented people have created a whole new
culture, never seen before in Britain. Can this process be directly associated
with the name of Elizabeth II, as was done and is being done, for instance, in
relation to the Victorian era? Everyone can answer this question for
themselves. But, perhaps, if the times when a huge historical period is named
after one person are a thing of the past, then at least Elizabeth II did not
interfere with this flourishing - and even tried to support it. She succeeded.
Queen Elizabeth II and her sister Princess Margaret at the races in Gloucestershire, England, April 1957
Royal family: more openness, but
closed doors remain in place
Elizabeth II was not fortunate enough to become a monarch
in a time of change and transformation. The country was transforming from a
global superpower to a country with more local influence. The social
institutions and habitual way of life went through constant changes. The rules
of political life have changed, the old diplomatic alliances collapsed, and
they were replaced by something completely unprecedented.
And if we can talk about other merits of Elizabeth with a
certain degree of doubt, then we can say with certainty that the preservation
of the monarchy as an institution is in many ways precisely her merit. Her
daily work is to be a monarch, to observe the traditions (and invent new ones -
royal PR and image makers work on this), and, changing in small ways, preserve
the main thing.
Her "correctness", adherence to traditions, and
rigor for decades have helped her win the popularity of the population. She is
popular incredibly as a political figure—her personal support rating has barely
changed since she entered the ministry in 1952. Even less popular members of
the family, such as the Queen's son Prince Charles, have a support that far
exceeds the popularity of any British politician - in spite of the fact that
she has been assassinated more than once.
Elizabeth managed to achieve such approval, in spite of
all the problems that have shaken the royal family all these years. At first,
Elizabeth's sister, Princess Margaret, created many problems for the image of
the monarchy - she adored social life and was a frequenter of nightclubs,
restaurants, and chic parties. Then the family had to endure the problems
associated with the personal life of Prince Charles: he dreamed for years of
marrying Camilla Shand, but the family did not give him such an opportunity.
Marriage to Diana Spencer, on the other hand, was the most painful personal
story for Elizabeth during his entire reign. And the crisis that ruptured after
the death of Princess Diana became almost the most serious challenge for the
British monarchy under Elizabeth - the public reacted extremely negatively to
the Queen's slow and dry reaction to the death of the people's favorite.
Princess Diana of Wales and Queen Elizabeth II at the opening ceremony of the session of Parliament in London, November 1982
The very end of
the second decade of the 21st century has also turned out to be restless for
the royal family. First, the son of Elizabeth, Prince Andrew, got into the
scandal - he was admitted to being close friends with the billionaire and
pedophile Epstein, as well as attending his parties for influential and
powerful people. The queen had removed Andrew from all powers related to the
representation of the royal family. And then, at the very beginning of 2020, a
new bomb went off: long-standing conflict between Prince Harry's wife Meghan
Markle, and British society (and the rumored royal family as well) ended with
Harry and Meghan nipping their departure from the royal family and a decision
to start a new life which they would be self-supporting. The story of Harry and
Megan recalled many analysts of the abdication of Elizabeth's uncle, King
Edward, because of which, in many respects, Elizabeth became the heir to the
throne, and then the queen.
And yet, in spite of all these upheavals, Elizabeth
managed to lead the family through all the problems and enter the third decade
of the 21st century as the head of a huge and respected family. The authority
of the monarchy is higher than ever, and the republican views remain marginal in
Britain. The basis of the legitimacy of any monarchical power is a secret,
secret, and the following traditions. Elizabeth manages to make the royal
family more open without destroying the veil of mystery she managed to preserve
the ancient traditions without abandoning innovations. Obviously, it is this
ability to adapt to change without destroying what came before you that will
become the main legacy for Britain in the future. Whatever the future she
chooses.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
Post a Comment