In a pub just west of the Kingsway and south of Queen Square, they're plotting to overthrow the monarchy.
“It is only medieval societies that tolerate kings,” says Stephen Haseler, a professor at London Metropolitan University and a leading thinker of the British anti-monarchist group Republic. His listeners put down their pint glasses long enough to bellow, “Here, here!”
There are about 40 of them gathered – young and old, men and women – and they are united in a common cause: They might not want the Queen's head on a platter, but they would very much like it removed from their money and their constitution.
You might think that these are dark times for British republicans, with the upcoming nuptials of the shiny-maned Kate Middleton to her Prince Charming. As the country prepares to feast and then fall over sated with goodwill, who wants to listen to bolshie talk about the undemocratic nature of a monarchy?
But the republicans, bolstered by their comrades in other Commonwealth countries such as Canada, view the royal bridal-
palooza as a historical opportunity: They say their number is growing – even Colin Firthwas recently outed as a closet republican. And when the international spotlight shines on the Royal Family, the republicans hope, a flawed system will be laid bare.
“Our biggest problem isn't people who love the monarchy,” says Republic's campaign manager, Graham Smith. “Our biggest problem is people who don't care.”
In the front room of the pub (their original meeting room upstairs has been taken over by a chess club called The Drunken Knights), they discuss strategy. A “Love Republic” party will be held on the wedding day, April 29, as a counterbalance to the official hoopla. More seriously, they plan to demonstrate outside Buckingham Palace against new government legislation that effectively removes the Royal Family from freedom-of-information requests. (One consequence is that the extent of Prince Charles's political lobbying will be lost from public view.)
There is grumbling about the BBC's coverage of the Royal Family (fawning!) and the fact that when the Queen goes, another unelected head of state will take her place (scandalous!). “When David Beckham lost the England captaincy,” says one man, “did they immediately give the job to little Brooklyn?”
Another speaks up: “I'm angry, you're angry, the wedding is about to happen. What can we do? We can't bring it down.”
Prof. Haseler, a constitutional expert working on a book about Queen Elizabeth II's reign called Inglorious, counsels patience: It's only 10 years since discussing such ideas was legally removed from the realm of treason.
“It will happen,” says his colleague, Mr. Smith, “sooner than we think.” In fact, tonight's meeting launches Republic 2025, a campaign to abolish the monarchy – or at least have a referendum on the issue – in the next 14 years. They're seeking an elected head of state such as a president, and to strip the Royal Family of its constitutional role.
Powers and privileges
But why bother? There's a nice, hard-working monarch on the throne, tourists like to gawp at trooping the colour and it's all a bit of splash and ceremony. Isn't it trivial to worry?
Republicans argue that it's anything but – that the monarchy is unaccountable and unrepresentative, a drain on public resources that makes a joke of democracy: Only half of Britain's parliament is elected, and the head of state never can be.
Far from being powerless, they claim, the Crown maintains all kinds of privileges and powers. This week, for example, Moammar Gadhafi's British assets were frozen not by Parliament, but by three members of the Privy Council – politicians who are also royal advisers – who gathered at Windsor Castle for a meeting presided over by the Queen.
Republic argues that the Royal Family cost British taxpayers £180-million (about $285-million) through payments, deferred taxes and security costs – a far higher estimate than the Royal Family's own accounting of £40-million ($63-million) a year.
