[ad_1]
At a time when a stubborn virus has made many lives impossible, Barbadians have reminded us that it is still possible for us to dance.
As the new year approaches, a weary world faces a familiar litany of sad and hard challenges, combining hope and joy to empty even beyond the distant horizon of the present.
But a small, sunny island in the eastern Caribbean, with a population of just 285,000, has ruled out pessimism, choosing to celebrate a resurrection that has broken the lasting darkness as part of the much-needed optimism.
On the evening of November 30, a time full of silent dignity and historical significance, the Barbadians realized the power of the imagination and the inspiring commitment to self-determination and realized a long-held dream.
Decades after independence in 1966, Prime Minister Mia Mottley vowed last year to fulfill her commitment to Prime Minister Errol Barrow, who told a visiting British minister that Barbados would one day “not be allowed to walk on colonial property”.
And so, at midnight, the Royal Standard slowly descended, declaring that Barbados had arrived as a parliamentary republic, finally freeing itself from the last symbolic ties of the British monarchy that it had imposed over the centuries — with cruel force and intimidation. foreign customs and traditions and caused such harm and harm.
As a 21-gun salute rang out in the warm night air, Dame Sandra Mason, the last governor-general, was sworn in as president – replacing Queen Elizabeth II as head of state – and sworn allegiance to the high judge. to the newly liberated country.
The white, rich, and English-speaking invaders who once plundered a free nation and plundered a distant island, turned the white, rich, and English-speaking invaders into a savage slavery site for hundreds of years, began to fade away in memory.
However, another white and wealthy Englishman, Prince Charles, saw firsthand that he was proud to have passed from the colony of Barbados to the full republic. For many, his presence was not welcome because he embodied everything the Barbadians decided to leave out.
In an act of late pardon, the heir to a defunct and insignificant throne, Prince Charles acknowledged “the horrific cruelty of slavery that tarnishes our history forever” and acknowledged that “the creation of this republic offers a new beginning.”
Barbados author and poet Winston Farrell recounted the depth of this “new beginning” in a bitter verse.
“Stop this colonial page,” Farrell said in a crowded crowd in Bridgetown’s Heroes Square. “Some have grown up stupid under Union Jack, lost in their superficial castle.”
“It’s all about us, rising from the cane fields, reclaiming our history,” he said. “Everything that means is over.”
Barbados has done Canada and Australia – which the queen continues to marry with the absurd idea of a mystical link between constancy and distant peoples – to grow up and leave the “home”.
Instead, like angry children clinging to their aprons for comfort and safety, these shy members of the Commonwealth, who pledge a firm allegiance to a kindly aged queen, prefer sentimentality to maturity.
The British monarchy is a useless farce, full of wealthy pedestrian celebrities, some of whom have been excommunicated for showing polite interviewers that they would rather run away from the “fairy tale” deposit than continue living choreographed lies.
A “prince”, in particular, exhibits the artifacts from Atik Z to the depraved nature of a proud, exhausted institution, which is predicted to protect a pampered delinquent in his protective, velvety cousin.
Today, Prince Andrew, like his gilded kinsman, is said to have devoted himself to selfless public service, mostly in the equivalent of the protection of witness protection. A smiling Prince Andrew, however, was pictured riding with his mother’s Windsor Castle at his mother’s house at his mother’s house this week.
The prince’s secrecy has remained comfortable before his eyes as he confronts the tough legal action filed by Virginia Giuffre, who at the age of 17 was a “sex slave” during 2001 for Prince Andrew and other privileged amateurs and trusted Americans of the deceased. Jeffrey Epstein, a pimp turned financial financier.
Prince Andrew’s “people” have sharply portrayed his persuasive accusation as a bride who takes away money that is suing the queen’s son “to get another salary at his own expense”.
This is, I think, proof of Prince Andrew’s solidarity with the #MeToo movement – for daring to challenge a brave woman to challenge the omnipotent power of the kingdom – and apparently supporting the king-queen (that kind and old lady).
Unless the victim is prosecuted, Prince Andrew’s lawyers now say that the New York law on which Ms. Giuffre based her lawsuit is now unconstitutional because she was 17 years old because she was old enough to give permission, and so she could. not, at the time, the state considered minor.
I would like to think that the ill-fated defense of Prince Andrew would pause for the monarchist senses to consider his lack of character, but also to question the queen’s terrible decision in the midst of the surrounding scandal and sordidness. extension, Buckingham Palace.
Blinded by the stupid fantasies that hold the royal powers and circumstances, they will continue to look the other way, arguably against the truth about a monarchy that is deepening in fame and futility.
The traveling circus, known as “The Firm”, survives with the help of the nostalgic and rancid British press and the slightly softer TV and film producers, who are trying to pat the whole of the pretty façade into a patina. weight.
Long ago, Barbadian scholars understood that it was and still is a mirage of white men. In time, they decided to move away from an archaic and wealthy family, whose ancestors had built their wealth, in part, by enslaving their beloved homeland by conquering it.
Last month, Barbados kindly told the Queen and her princes and princesses to take a well-deserved walk, of course.
If Canada and Australia, among many star-studded nations, had the will and wisdom to follow their model.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial attitude of Al Jazeera.
[ad_2]
Source link
