About me

Saturday 6 May 2023

So what does 'God Save the King' actually mean anyway?

 With the death of Elizabeth II and the ascension of Charles III, this is a phrase we're hearing increasingly, from all types of people. You hear it from ardent royalists. You hear it from ardent ANTI-royalists, changing it to phrases like 'God Save the Hungry' (such as the wonderful singer-songwriter Grace Petrie, whose song I will link below). It's the name of our national anthem and is almost a motto of the United Kingdom (the actual motto is 'Dieu et mon droit' which means 'God and my right', but I didn't realise that until I checked for the purposes of writing this blog! And that by itself refers essentially to a monarch's God-given right to rule.)

But very rarely does anyone question what the phrase means, since I doubt anyone imagines that our monarch has such a poor quality of life that we have to ask God to save him. The phrase is exceptionally old (older than the song) and is referenced numerous times within the King James Bible. I was curious, so I looked it up, and I found this fascinating explanation on Quora, from someone called Ernest W. Adams:

'This is an old-fashioned usage of the word save, when it meant preserve and protect. “God save the Queen” means, “May God protect the Queen.”

In ancient times, everyone was afraid of what might happen when the sovereign died. At the least, it meant a new monarch who would have a new coronation that had to be paid for. It might mean new taxes. The new king (they were mostly men) might be incompetent, a spendthrift, or a warmonger. Worst of all, the death of a king might trigger a civil war between rival claimants for the throne. In such wars, the common people always suffered the most.

Therefore, people devoutly hoped for long life and good health for the king.
'

Now, to be clear, I found this on Quora. I cannot vouch for its veracity, and I do not know who Ernest W. Adams is, or what his source for this fact was. But I think this explanation is very plausible, so for the purposes of argument let's assume that this is correct.

If so, the phrase doesn't call for God to save the King, aside from in a roundabout sense. What it calls for is for God to save the common person. It's a plea for everyone to live in peace, to not have to worry about additional financial, religious or conflict-driven burdens. Although it may not seem it, it's essentially an ancient times equivalent of a call to socialism. It may use the monarchy as an example, but at the time, when monarchs actually had some power, it's easy to see how a relatively stable one provides more comfort than the mysterious idea of what might come next.

And once you've considered that, it just becomes impossible to look at what that phrase is used to mean today and not feel slightly sick. It is definitely not a cry for social stability anymore. It's a cry for the opposite - a demand from the wealthy to keep the ordinary people in their place. The monarchy may be a bit more of a ceremonial role now and most people having slightly higher standards of life than they did in ancient times - but in other ways, things have got worse. The world is more corporate-driven than ever. We're facing a climate emergency in large part because of how corporate-driven the world is. And the price of monarchs having less power than they once did is that it doesn't really matter very much who the monarch is; the world carries on as normal, and it carries on badly, without much hope of improvement. In the olden days, the phrase 'God Save the King' meant a wish from the poor to carry on with the status quo out of genuine fear of what might replace it; it has now become a wish from the wealthy to perpetuate the status quo out of utter contempt for anyone trying to improve their quality of life.

Prior to today's coronation, the previous one was 70 years ago, in 1953. Although I generally hold the same opinion about the monarchy irrespective of the time period, it's somewhat easier to understand the role of that one in society. In the 1950s, you can see how 26-year-old Elizabeth II could be seen as something of a figurehead. It was less than a decade after the Second World War, we'd founded the welfare state and the NHS and I think generally, things were on the up. In the circumstances, a new young Queen could be seen as an opportunity for the country to come together and celebrate. That mood is not even about her really; it's about a collective optimism for a country to experience together.

Fast forward to 2023, it's not like that anymore. We have more people living on the streets than we've had in decades. Fascism is taking hold in the UK (anti-monarchists were arrested today despite not committing any crime, in a shocking attack on freedom to peacefully protest). We have a Government hell-bent on destroying our human rights. We have children who can't afford to eat. We have an opposition who barely wants to do anything to improve this system (I haven't even started on the local election results - maybe that will be the subject of a different blog, we'll see.) I find myself very stressed out about my finances a lot of the time, and I'm a person fortunate enough not to be in any immediate danger. In these circumstances, a 74-year-old man with a net worth of around $2 billion in a gold carriage is not something to celebrate (and certainly not something the taxpayer should be funding).

In 2023, we should be beyond the point where people have a right to rule purely because of their birth. But I actually think this coronation is about more than that. It's another extension of capitalism and corporatism. In my local Tesco's, there's a big sign - 'Celebrate the King's coronation!' So, in plain English, 'Buy more food than you normally would, even though the prices have gone up and you're earning less, to pay tribute to this man who has a lot more money than you.' That is the mentality of this country. And it saddens me that so many people think it's worth going along with this. Because believe you me, King Charles does not care about you. I don't actually believe he even has the emotional capacity to care about you. It's not his fault - he's been too heavily indoctrinated into the mentality of believing in these God-given rights. I actually feel sorry for him and the other Royals to some extent - but not as sorry as I feel for someone who has to choose between heating or eating (or doesn't have the power to even make that choice in the first place).

It doesn't have to be like this. We have the resources and the money to create a decent quality of life for everyone. It's just my opinion, but I think a lot of the time these celebrations are an attempt to forget how difficult all our lives are - to throw ourselves into believing that there's this wonderful wise family that are doing everything to bring us all together. Well, I don't feel brought together. I feel cheated and I feel angry. I was brought up to believe that no one is better than me and that I am not better than anyone else, and I hold that view dear. It's an important view to hold, if we're going to find any value in this old life.

Remember that song I told you I'd link you to? Here it is down below. I really recommend Grace Petrie's songs, she's a breath of fresh air in this cruel world. Enjoy!

And by the way - Prince Andrew still hasn't faced any charges.