Of queens and capitalism

What an anachronism it is that, in this modern age of exploring the moon and the depths of the largest oceans, the mass media in the United States should be mourning the death of Queen Elizabeth of Britain. Adulation of the British monarchy oozes from the so-called free press in the United States. 

Forgotten, it seems, is the revolutionary war of 1776, in which thousands died to secure the independence of the 13 American colonies from Britain. But the ruling class in the United States, now arguably the richest in the world, has more in common with the monarchy in Britain than it does with the millions of people, all over the world, who still suffer under British colonial rule in one form or another.

At its height in 1921, the British Empire ruled over one-quarter of all the lands on Earth. Plundering its colonies made the British ruling class one of the richest in the world. It also inspired rebellions against the colonizers, which were crushed without mercy.

Two world wars between competing blocs of imperialist rivals cost dearly. Millions died in these struggles for world domination. The Anglo-U.S. bloc won both times, and by 1952, when Elizabeth took over the throne, the British Empire ruled over some 70 countries.

The U.S. ruling class prides itself over its revolutionary origins in the overthrow of British rule and makes the Fourth of July an occasion for self-congratulation. This has had no impact on the alliance between the ruling classes of the U.S. and Britain. They are class allies with the shared objective to reap superprofits from the labor of the workers in both countries and around the world.

Capitalism is an economic system based on the exploitation of the working class. The result is untold wealth for a few, even as millions struggle to survive. This is inherently unstable, regardless of whether it is managed by a president or a monarch.