Alfred Dawes | Queen Elizabeth’s legacy – mainstream vs social media

The death of the Queen has created another outlet for varying opinions concerning the significance of the British monarchy in the modern world. Across the world in the former colonies, people are in a celebratory mood as they jeer the media’s coverage of the Queen’s passing. Others have questioned the utility of celebrating the death of a fellow human who had families, friends and loved ones who are hurting.

The discussions have come to surround what the queen represents. For some it is a legacy of exploitation, genocide, and colonisation. They take offence that they are being told that they cannot register their disquiet about what the monarchy represents, and for refusing to mourn the passing of she who represented an institution that caused so much hurt and anguish for their ancestors. For others, the queen was a beloved ruler who modernized the monarchy and was a patron and benefactor to many.

The media have saturated our airwaves with obituaries and updates on Operation London Bridge, the operational plan put in action following the death of the Her Majesty. Social media on the other hand, has filled our feed with memes mocking the queen, and stories highlighting the brutality of the institution that she represents. There is a glaring disconnect between what the mainstream media is reporting and what ordinary people are sharing on their own equally powerful platforms. The media wants us to mourn the death of a beloved leader, while social media has made it clear that we do not mourn the death of a colonizer. Not only is there a resurrection and rewriting of the official narrative about the greatness of Britain, but there are loud calls for reparations across the Commonwealth.

There are renewed demands for the return of the Koh-i-Noor diamond, part of the crown jewels and estimated to be worth around US$$400 million,, received as a “gift” from conquered territories in [the northern Indian state of] Punjab. Across Africa, a new wave of nationalism has been ignited that may lead to frosty relations with the UK concerning at the very least, the return of artefacts in the British Museum. So far, negotiations have resulted in the British Museum lending artefacts to countries from which they were initially claimed as prizes of conquest. This compromise will not hold for long given the noise in the marketplace. Here in Jamaica the comments under stories published by media houses border on outright disrespect. Some consider it laughable that we should be observing 12 days of mourning for the beneficiary of our ancestors’ blood and tears over 400 years of slavery and colonialisation. Others are just there to share the creative memes.

HISTORY LESSONS

Social media sites are suddenly filled with history lessons that cover every dirty secret that has been whitewashed by mainstream media. From the brutality of the slave trade, dominated by the British who now proclaim self-righteously that they were responsible for its ending, to the bloody Mau Mau Rebellion that occurred under the rule of Queen Elizabeth II. The death of the queen is akin to the lifting of a veil on the brutality and greed of the British Empire, as if her presence on the throne over the last 70 years was a shroud that concealed its obscenities. Queen Elizabeth was the last ruler of the British Empire in its true form. She transitioned to being one of a handful of British monarchs who had to engage with former subjects, who, outside of the Western-dominated capitalist system, determined their own destinies as newly independent nations. Her ancestor, George III, went mad after failing to hold on to the 13 colonies during the American Revolution. Her Majesty, however, was much more resilient in the face of a crumbling empire.

The graciousness of the queen is perhaps what has kept the royal family relevant. Even now, the new British prime minister honours her memory by conveniently forgetting that she was one of the loudest voices calling for the abolition of the monarchy. It is that quiet decorum that has made railing against the monarchy and the relics of colonialism unfit for polite society up to now. King Charles III will not have that luxury. It is ironic that the name he chose was shared with the king who was beheaded at the conclusion of the second English civil war, that saw the abolition of the monarchy, and the establishment of a period of republican rule. Now another King Charles may just oversee the definitive end of one of the oldest and now most controversial institutions in the world.

The House of Windsor may now be entering its twilight. Correction, the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, or more accurately, the House of Mountbatten, may be entering its twilight. Scratch that. It is not Mountbatten; it is really the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg that may be seeing its end in Britain.

Whatever side of the debate you may espouse, one thing is certain, we are entering a new era in which the monarchy will be viewed far more negatively than under the reign of Queen Elizabeth. Her death has ushered in a new wave of anticolonial sentiment that, along with the economic fallout from Brexit and the war in Ukraine, may see the sun finally setting on the once mighty British Empire.

When that day arrives, we will once more be caught in the tug of war for control of our minds between the oligopoly that is mainstream media, and the wild west of controversial, antiestablishment that is the smorgasbord of social media.

- Dr Alfred Dawes is a fellow of the American College of Surgeons, and CEO of Windsor Wellness Centre. Follow him on Twitter @dr_aldawes. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and adawes@ilapmedical.com.