How then does what she sublimated look like? Let's hope that it will not turn against her over time, because a strong impulse has claimed the word, the "sublimation" of which is already seeping through.
It's great that you found a place on Substack. It is a rare island of positive deviance in this gossipy world.
The issue that I address is not the rights and wrongs of the past. I have written numerous books that explore the oppressive and exploitative features of the British Empire. The issue at stake is the campaign to pathologise Britishness in the contemporary era and the project of rendering it toxic. I also address the dishonest manner in which contemporary Britain is depicted by sections of the American media. In passing it is worth noting - that contrary to what Neville states - the article does not focus on 'the greatness of the Empire'. Neville might wish to check out my books on Kenya and other colonies.
Of course not, Mr. Neville. That will happen, but give those who at least respect Britain's role in world history a chance to pay that respect to their history . You know that there will be an abundance of time to write other versions of the past. American networks are already giving the world that perspective.
This is a very strange article indeed. It melds together a vituperative attack on the American critics of the symbiotic relationship between our imperial and monarchical systems with a broader attack on the usual 'culture warriors' you target in the UK. You call the US criticism 'propaganda' with no regard whatever for the obvious truth of its basic tenet - Britain was the beating heart of an empire created and maintained by extreme force, and the monarchs who sat at its head were all complicit in that for a centuries. This includes Elizabeth 2nd, who became Queen while on a visit to Kenya at the beginnings of a huge Kenyan revolt which is never mentioned in the extremely frequent use of the clips of her tree house stay when the tragic news of her father's death was given her. . Kenyans had rebelled again and again since 1895 against the British, who had crushed these revolts with the normalised use of extreme imperial force . The imperial possession of Kenya, where being white was the prerequisite for power and vast land ownership, was then the site of brutal and murderous colonial repression once again from 1952 to 1960. This was happening during the first eight years of the 'New Elizabethan Age', a glaringly obvious propaganda branding. You airbrush away the actual history in the interests of your 'presentism' thesis. You complain about the violent language directed by Americans against the Queen and British history but neglect to mention the extreme racist language used by Britons in Kenya, who were pensioned off and awarded imperial honours during over 50 years of unrelentingly murderous violence. That well known woke warrior colonial undersecretary Winston Churchill was moved to comment on one such blood bath: ''One hundred and sixty Gusii have now been killed outright without any further casualties on our side.…Surely it cannot be necessary to go on killing these defenceless people on such an enormous scale'' According to you those who try to reframe our history with a higher level of truth and a lower level of imperial propaganda like to contrast their views with those of simple minded plebian xenophobes. This is nonsense. It is of course the still very active apologists of empire who are the real antagonists in this struggle for truth
Only the bigoted left write such things. The majority of Americans celebrate the Queen's life and mourn with our friends, the British, for her passing.
How then does what she sublimated look like? Let's hope that it will not turn against her over time, because a strong impulse has claimed the word, the "sublimation" of which is already seeping through.
It's great that you found a place on Substack. It is a rare island of positive deviance in this gossipy world.
The issue that I address is not the rights and wrongs of the past. I have written numerous books that explore the oppressive and exploitative features of the British Empire. The issue at stake is the campaign to pathologise Britishness in the contemporary era and the project of rendering it toxic. I also address the dishonest manner in which contemporary Britain is depicted by sections of the American media. In passing it is worth noting - that contrary to what Neville states - the article does not focus on 'the greatness of the Empire'. Neville might wish to check out my books on Kenya and other colonies.
Of course not, Mr. Neville. That will happen, but give those who at least respect Britain's role in world history a chance to pay that respect to their history . You know that there will be an abundance of time to write other versions of the past. American networks are already giving the world that perspective.
This is a very strange article indeed. It melds together a vituperative attack on the American critics of the symbiotic relationship between our imperial and monarchical systems with a broader attack on the usual 'culture warriors' you target in the UK. You call the US criticism 'propaganda' with no regard whatever for the obvious truth of its basic tenet - Britain was the beating heart of an empire created and maintained by extreme force, and the monarchs who sat at its head were all complicit in that for a centuries. This includes Elizabeth 2nd, who became Queen while on a visit to Kenya at the beginnings of a huge Kenyan revolt which is never mentioned in the extremely frequent use of the clips of her tree house stay when the tragic news of her father's death was given her. . Kenyans had rebelled again and again since 1895 against the British, who had crushed these revolts with the normalised use of extreme imperial force . The imperial possession of Kenya, where being white was the prerequisite for power and vast land ownership, was then the site of brutal and murderous colonial repression once again from 1952 to 1960. This was happening during the first eight years of the 'New Elizabethan Age', a glaringly obvious propaganda branding. You airbrush away the actual history in the interests of your 'presentism' thesis. You complain about the violent language directed by Americans against the Queen and British history but neglect to mention the extreme racist language used by Britons in Kenya, who were pensioned off and awarded imperial honours during over 50 years of unrelentingly murderous violence. That well known woke warrior colonial undersecretary Winston Churchill was moved to comment on one such blood bath: ''One hundred and sixty Gusii have now been killed outright without any further casualties on our side.…Surely it cannot be necessary to go on killing these defenceless people on such an enormous scale'' According to you those who try to reframe our history with a higher level of truth and a lower level of imperial propaganda like to contrast their views with those of simple minded plebian xenophobes. This is nonsense. It is of course the still very active apologists of empire who are the real antagonists in this struggle for truth
Only the bigoted left write such things. The majority of Americans celebrate the Queen's life and mourn with our friends, the British, for her passing.