I don’t Celebrate Death
Sorry if this entry is messy, I wanted to publish it before she hits the ground.
In the aftermath of Queen Elisabeth death’s and my story on Instagram, I received a few messages that I would define as complaints. The main message is that the ultimate symbol of white supremacy is dead, and we should not as victims of her regime, grieve or express any sort of feeling remotely close to sadness. And as much as I understand the relief that her passing might represent for many people, it is still not correct, according to me to enjoy the situation but I understand those who do.
First of all, I want to start by saying that I did and do not feel any particular kind of way about Lizzie, really, I just treat and regard her with basic human decency.
But maybe it’s exactly what this situation is about: respect. How and why should we, as victims, show the decency that was snatched away from us? I personally do not abide by that rule: my humanity is not dependent on how people treat me and my kin even if that treatment was and remains unacceptable.
Yet, I did not make any celebratory post about her passing. It might be hard to hear for some but she was a big person, an important person even and her absence after being there for so long -good and bad- is going to change a lot of things. Of course, death does not erase the past still present in people’s minds and lives. We can and should use the heightened attention given to that person to highlight certain issues. And while I believe there is a certain amount of responsibility that can be given to that age-old institution, I believe it is playing the game too easy.
When considering the crimes we accuse the Queen of, we mostly consider those happening ruffly from her proclamation in 1952 or even earlier from the start of her public engagements in 1942. She saw more than 15 prime ministers and even more governments. However, as head of state, she does not govern it. This sentence does not serve as her absolution, it is a mere precision.
It is far too easy to accuse a system that you do not choose, that you “simply” inherit, that remains in power by the grace and attention you give to it. A system represented and defined by its absence of political power.
What I am trying to say here is “Should we blame the inherited ruler or the 15 chosen ones?”
Of course, anything happening in the interest of the United Kingdom is for her interest and any act is ordered by her, if following decorum, not a surprising thing considering that she is still head of state. But I am still reflecting if her opinion is really required when deciding whether or not to suppress a rebellion or is the order in the hand of the pretty much universally elected individual serving as prime minister.
I rarely leave without an example or a thought experiment as I believe an argument without justification is as weak as my passwords according to Google.
First, what happened to France’s colonial position after the fall of the monarchy? If I recall well, most if not all of the colonial crimes attributed to the French regime happened when it was a republic.
Second, when Leopold the second of Belgium ceded the Congo to the Belgian state, after let’s call it “mistakes”, do you think these “mistakes” magically stopped?
What I am trying to say is that I won’t celebrate death as a principle but even less one that offers little to no gain.
