On Accountability and Queen Elizabeth II’s Legacy [as a Coloniser]
cover image from: the new york times
Rhodesia gained independence from Great Britain on April 18th, 1980. At the time, my father and mother were 7 and 6 respectively. It would later be renamed Zimbabwe by its people. 19 years after that, I would be born.
Colonisation is not a problem of the past. Whilst some countries have gained their independence from the British Empire, there are still a staggering amount that to this day remain British Territories. Australia is one of them. Life experience provides the context through which we see the world. Evidently, as a child of a colonised nation, my views of the monarchy are coloured by such experiences. To me, their jewels are a visual reminder of the wealth our nations lost when they were pillaged. Their figureheads, from Elizabeth to Charles to William are not just ceremonial figures, they are symbols of a system that has and will never have my people's best interests at heart. For that reason and many more, the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II didn't hit me the same way it might have others around me.
This disclaimer shouldn't be necessary but I know how you all love to jump to conclusions so let me take a moment to say – I am sympathetic to her family members and others who loved her. I cannot even begin to fathom how heartbreaking such a loss would be. But I cannot mourn her myself. Many palm-coloured individuals have expressed discomfort and at times outright anger at how the Black, Indigenous and Irish sides of Twitter reacted to the news of the Queen's passing. You might not be in a place to make jokes or laugh, but for some of us, this is how we cope. I think we as a society need to put away this idea that our experiences with people are universal. You might have loved the Queen, but you cannot and should not expect the same of me and others like me.
I've heard many come to her defence saying that she was born into a crooked system or that she was just a figurehead and so we cannot expect her to have righted any wrongs or undone the crimes of the past. With all due disrespect, that is some incredibly flawed reasoning. Consider for a moment, how we expect celebrities and influencers to make a stance on topical issues. They possess no power to pass laws and usually, they have no governmental positions and yet we in that context, can wrap our heads around the concept of influence/ platform as a tangible form of power. Riddle me this, who has a greater platform: the Head of the Church of England and the Queen of the United Kingdom or that one actress from a popular television series? Are you honestly trying to tell me that if she wanted to she could not have returned some of those stolen riches or stolen artifacts to the nations from which they were stolen? Not even artifacts, how about returning the remains of deceased First Nations people to their families? Are you saying if she had wanted to apply pressure, it would have been ignored? Do you hear how stupid that sounds?
In one of her Instagram stories, a friend of mine [Kudzai or @ku.dzai] said "Some white people have the mentality of 'good' slave owners when it comes to race issues…If you like the comfortable position white supremacy bought you, just say that." The wealth and prestige the crimes of her forefathers bought her outweighed the urge to right any wrongs. So she didn't bother. I could finish this post here, but I won't.
On August 27, Euphoria's Sydney Sweeney shared some pictures from her mother's 60th birthday celebration. The posts included a male guest in a blue lives matter shirt and other partygoers in MAGA-esque red baseball caps.* In response to completely justified questions and accusations, she tweeted,
"You guys this is wild. An innocent celebration for my mom's milestone 60th birthday has turned into an absurd political statement, which was not the intention. Please stop making assumptions. Much love to everyone, and Happy Birthday, Mom!"
Now, I know you don't get to choose your family members and I know that you probably wouldn't get to choose the guest list for someone else's birthday celebrations, however, this is definitely the moment to acknowledge the privilege involved in “not getting political”. As a straight, cis-gendered, white woman Sweeney doesn't have to confront the problematic views of her family or acquaintances because none of them endangers her life personally. Let me say that again; she can be complacent regarding the prejudice of those around her because the hatred is not directed at her. In 2020, Sydney shared many #BLM-themed posts and links, once again proving that most people's social media activism is purely performative.
*it was revealed that the caps in those pictures said 'make sixty great again' but there are multiple photos of Sweeney's family members in actual MAGA gear including one of a baby outside the White House
In a new interview with Vogue, my archery queen Jennifer Lawrence opened up about her decision to distance herself from her Republican family members. *gasp* She revealed that the 2016 Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump election triggered a rift between her and her relatives – including her father. Lawrence admitted to having tried to 'get-over' their political differences, for the sake of her unborn son and to preserve unity however, she also said that the situation in the United States is "too dire" to be able to agree to disagree. Some of you should be taking notes because this is the kind of reasoning we should all be able to get to.
"I just worked so hard in the last five years to forgive my dad and my family and try to understand: It's different. The information they are getting is different. Their life is different," she told Vogue.
"I've tried to get over it and I really can't. I can't," she went on. "I'm sorry I'm just unleashing, but I can't fuck with people who aren't political anymore. You live in the United States of America. You have to be political. It's too dire. Politics are killing people."
There it is folks. The heart of my feelings on Sydney Sweeney and Queen Elizabeth II. Asking for action from either is not being too political when those politics have and continue to end many lives. The stakes are too great to be ambivalent on issues of prejudice and race and the long-lasting impacts of colonisation. Elizabeth had 70 years on the throne to do or say something and yet she didn't. The way allyship works, she could have done one thing, and we would have praised her for it. But she didn't. Every monarch has the opportunity to make some changes and establish themselves yet Elizabeth very much stuck to what her forefathers had done. I expect no less from her successor King Charles because whether they want to admit it or not, they are too fond of the luxuries and comfort that past atrocities bought them to speak against them. Making a stand is costly and for members of the royal family [apart from my babies Meghan and Harry], that is a price they just aren't willing to pay.
Desmond Tutu said, "If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor."
Whilst it could be argued that the late monarch was a product of her environment and her situation. She arguably had access to more education and opportunities than most of us could dream of. I do not hold children responsible for their political views. However, grown adults with access to the internet and education can and need to do better. In the 1960's government ministers sought the introduction of laws that would make it illegal to refuse employment to an individual on the grounds of their race or ethnicity. The Queen was personally exempted from those equality laws for more than 4 decades meaning that it was impossible for anyone working in her household to complain against the courts if they believed that they had been discriminated against. As an educated person with vast amounts of wealth, Queen Elizabeth does not have any valid excuses for banning 'coloured immigrants or foreigners' from serving in clerical roles in her staff until the late 1960s. Buckingham palace records show staffers of colour [outside domestic servant roles] being employed in the 1990s and no sooner. It's not just that she did not do anything to right past wrongs, she also perpetuated some wrongs herself.
Is it any surprise then, that when the Duchess of Sussex joined the Royal Family, courtiers and officials opted for a "we don't see colour' approach instead of identifying how Meghan's ethnicity and race played a major part in how terribly she was treated in the family, by the staff and of course, by the British Media. I don't like to fight, but if I ever meet Piers Morgan, all bets are off.
The factor in all this that fuels my anger the strongest is that; the general public is not offended by the fact that the royal family was racist or complicit in acts of racism and white supremacy. Their anger is at us, the people of colour who dare to speak of it. I forget who it was but I remember hearing someone say something along the lines of, to some people, the worst thing is not to be racist but instead to be called one.
In one of her Patreon videos, Bobo Matjila of Bobo's Void spoke about how evil is banal.
banal /bəˈnɑːl,bəˈnal/ - adjective - so lacking in originality as to be obvious and boring.
Evil is not in grand gestures, outlandish actions or once-in-a-lifetime occurrences. It's commonplace, it's overused, it's so mundane as to be evident in our everyday actions. It's in the things you let pass because you're used to them, and how you treat those around you. Queen Elizabeth II will be remembered as a coloniser because of the jewels she wore and claimed day after day. The treatment of people of colour she let pass because it wasn't new and she was used to it. All those royal tours in stolen lands because that's how it had always been done. Her everyday actions as the United Kingdom's longest-serving monarch are why for some of us, her passing presented the opportunity to joke. To simplify a complicated situation; some of us can not mourn her death the way others of you would want. As Trevor Noah said on the Daily Show; "You can't expect people to show respect for something that never respected them."
No matter how many times she coordinated her hats, bags and shoes to her outfits. Or how many jokes she cracked during official speeches. Regardless of how cute that video of her seeing cows is. One of the main things I will remember about Queen Elizabeth IIs reign is that she never spoke out about the racist treatment of her granddaughter-in-law Meghan Markle. Not to the press, not to staffers and not to her family. Her grandson had to distance himself from the family that wasn't willing to provide security to his wife and unborn children even in the face of escalated threats. She was willing to let those things slide. She would much rather cash in all her chips to publicly defend her favourite from allegations that he was involved in acts of sex trafficking and paedophilia. No matter how many witnesses came forward or how much existed. To her, that was the battle worth fighting. And to me, that's all I need to know.
some real gems;
Wikipedia | History of Zimbabwe
Wikipedia | British Overseas Territories
Wikipedia | Elizabeth II
the Nerd Stash | Sydney Sweeney Addresses Controversy On Mom’s Birthday Post
Vanity Fair | Sydney Sweeney Defends “Innocent Celebration” of Mother's Birthday, Says Pics Are Not Political
POP BUZZ | Jennifer Lawrence says she "worked so hard" to forgive her dad for being a republican
INSIDER | the British royal family has turned a blind eye to its racist past
fredtjoseph on insta: Let’s be honest about who Queen Elizabeth II and the archaic monarchy.
