In case your usual pack of Durex isn’t quite cutting it in the sack, you can breathe a sigh of relief. Crown Jewels have come to your ‘rescue’, with a new Lavishly Lubed and Royally Ribbed product, designed to create “a better class of lovemaking” and allow the wearer “to live like a king for the day.” A box of three, regal condoms, to help you commemorate Wills and Kate’s big day.

Seriously, if there is one thing I DO NOT want to be thinking of in the heat of the moment, Kate and Wills are definitely up there. Closely followed by my Maw and my Gran.

This classy as fuck product apparently

Combines the strength of a Prince with the yielding sensitivity of a Princess-to-be, Crown Jewels condoms promise a royal union of pleasure. Truly a King amongst Condoms.

Now, if that’s not enough to make you spit your tea all over your computer screen or vom a little in your mouth, then honestly, I don’t know what will. Maybe, the fact that these are still in production whilst commemorative tea towels have been banned because “[They] want items that are permanent and significant.”

Perhaps I’m being a little bit too harsh? I mean, at least the Royals are promoting safe sex, right? WRONG. The fucking things don’t even work!!!

‎’They are of course welcome to enjoy the supple latex and gliding lubrication of our products, but we are required to advise that they are not suitable to prevent STDs or pregnancy.’

So what the fuck are they for then? An ornament for my Grans mantle piece or a posh boy wank?

I suggest if you are still wanting to spend your hard earned pennies on any royal tat this year, you should spend it on something a little more useful. Like this:

'Dragon's Den were champing at the bit.'

Every now and again, the British tabloid press manages to excel itself with a story so bonkers, so artificial, and contrived it threatens to put the Daily Mash writing team out of business. Previous winners of this award go to “Radioactive Paedo on the run”, followed by “Asylum Seekers eat royal swans” and finally “Grand Theft Auto Rothbury”, the (nonexistent) video game about Raoul Moat’s massacre in the midlands.

Recently SSY has noticed another candidate for this award – a story circulating the press that the trade union ASLEF is planning a strike on the day of the royal wedding, jeopardising the newlywed’s celebration. Even though it’s unlikely Kate and Prince William will be getting the tube on their special day, this story has managed to tick several boxes for Daily Mail readers – Trade Unions = evil, Royal Family = national treasures.

London’s Mayor Boris Johnson called for members of the public to bombard the union wi messages asking them to cancel their strike on the big day. New Labour leader “Red” Ed Miliband said he was “appalled” at the thought of a wedding day strike – so much for his “trade union paymasters”.

The reality behind the cleverly orchestrated anti-trade union and royalist spin was that ASLEF’s executive hadn’t even discussed the possibility of striking on the Royal Wedding. Given that the Wedding day is a national holiday it makes little sense for drivers to strike – there’s a lot less disruption than if they struck on a working day.

The smears that were directed against ASLEF were made for three reasons – the first was to divert public anger from the Tories capitulation to the bankers on the issue of their outrageous bonuses. Boris Johnson and David Cameron wrote in the Sun about how unions were holding the country to ransom – aren’t they getting unions confused with bankers?

The second reason was to justify a tightening of the UK’s already restrictive trade union laws. Thatcherite laws have made the UK the hardest place in the EU to be a trade unionist, but the CBI and the Tories think it’s not hard enough. They want to make strikes illegal unless over 50% of union members take part in the vote and vote to strike.

As it stands now, for a strike to be legal all it needs is a majority of members who vote – so you can have strikes where only 50% of the unions members vote, and of that 50% a majority are in favour of strike action. The bottom line is that when a trade union calls a strike it does so based on whether or not it thinks it will have enough support among the membership – if very few members take part in a ballot it’s not a good omen for a strike, but ultimately it should be up to the union if it wants to call a strike even if it’s members don’t seem enthusiastic about it.

If the Tories introduced the principle that a majority of the electorate have to vote in Westminster elections for MP’s to be considered legitimate there would be almost no MP’s elected. It’s the same con as the first devolution referendum in 1979 – a majority of those who voted did so in favour of setting up a Scottish Parliament, but their vote was ignored because the turnout wasn’t high enough.

The third reason the strikes have been slandered is one that there’s not been as much coverage of in the press – it’s because of the sickening idea that the Royals are somehow better than us, and everyone in the UK should join in celebration at how fantastic their lifestyle is, as if they’re some kind of impartial national ambassadors who only want what’s best for us.

When one guy wrote to his MP making the legitimate point about how much these benefit junkies are taking from the taxpayer for his wedding, his MP told him to “get a life” – when it comes to the Royals MP’s clearly just throw their artificial, sterile, pre-packaged nicey nicey responses out the window and just hit back wi rudeness and spite. Maybe it’s because the Royals themselves are basically MP’s on a massive scale – unaccountable wi an expenses cheque and second (and third and fourth) homes dotted all over the country.

expect lots more Royal tat like this

And like MP’s, the Royals are very reluctant to let the plebs see what they get up to – they’ve been granted special exemption from the freedom of information act, so we know even less about what they do wi our money. The Independent covered some of the things they didn’t want us to know,

*In 2004 the Queen asked ministers for a poverty handout to help heat her palaces but was rebuffed because they feared it would be a public relations disaster. Royal aides were told that the £60m worth of energy-saving grants were aimed at families on low incomes and if the money was given to Buckingham Palace instead of housing associations or hospitals it could lead to “adverse publicity” for the Queen and the government.

*A “financial memorandum” formalising the relationship between the sovereign and ministers set out tough terms on how the Queen can spend the £38.2m handed over by Parliament each year to pay for her staff and occupied palaces.

*The Queen requested more public money to pay for the upkeep of her crumbling palaces while allowing minor royals and courtiers to live in rent-free accommodation.

*As early as 2004 Sir Alan Reid, the Keeper of the Privy Purse, had unsuccessfully put the case to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport for a substantial increase in the £15m-a-year grant to maintain royal buildings.

*The Palace planned to go ahead with refurbishing and renting the apartment of Diana, Princess of Wales at Kensington Palace after it had lain empty since her death in 1997.

*A letter exchange revealed a tussle over who has control of £2.5m gained from the sale of Kensington Palace land. Ministers said it belonged to the state, while Buckingham Palace said it belonged to the Queen.

Whilst the rest of society is facing cuts, there’s no such demand placed on the monarchy – while they will face a cut in civil list payments for their upkeep, in return they will be funded from the Crown Estate, which is worth £6 billion. This will make Prince Charles the richest King in the history of the UK when he takes on the job.

The Royal Family are a bunch of overpaid parasites who only exist because their Crown Powers make it very handy for various British Governments to bypass parliament. Enough parts of society are tailored for their own private interests – ie Freedom of Information exemptions and the handover of the Crown Estates. Even though the story was a sham, trade unions shouldn’t be bullied or made to feel ashamed for discussing strike action on the Royal Wedding – we aren’t all in it together with the Tory Cabinet and we’re certainly not all in it together with the monarchy.

by Squeak

Ever since the news began creeping out -- on rolling news coverage and, for a lot of us, jubilant facebook status updates -- about the VICIOUS ATTACK on the car carrying HRH The Prince Charles Philip Arthur George, Prince of Wales, Knight of the Garter, Knight of the Thistle, Knight Grand Cross of the Order of Bath, Member of the Order of Merit, Knight of the Order of Australia, Companion of the Queen’s Service Order, Privy Counsellor, Aide-de-Camp, Earl of Chester, Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland (to give him his full title, respectfully) and his wife Camilla, the reaction from the press, police and now the government has been nothing less than hysterical,  terrifying and downright fuckin’ hilarious in equal measure.

In fairness, it has been a good few centuries since an heir to the throne in Britain has had to contend with a a baying mob brandishing sticks and chanting “off with their heads”. Mad rioting outside Parliament on Thursday was,  to some degree, expected; indeed, BBC journalists felt the need to remind us every five minutes that “anarchists from the Whitechapel Anarchist Group and the Wombles” were there with the intention of causing trouble. Nevermind that the Wombles disbanded in 2006 and that WAG are, with all due respect, probably about ten men and a dog, the media nonetheless needed some sort of “label” to attach to any disorder, unable to comprehend that maybe, just maybe, ‘normal’ students are pretty angry and like smashing shit up as well.

What definitely wasn’t expected on Thursday was the window of a toff-carrying Rolls Royce getting punted in on its way to a concert in honour of those sitting in its back seat. Three days later, the story continues to dominate the headlines. It’s led to an outpouring of right-wing vitriol about violent hooligans attacking “our royal family”, desecrating a statue of “anti-fascist hero” Winston Churchill and “attacking” the police. Apparently the future Queen may have even been hit with a stick -- or as the Daily Star put it ‘CAMILLA POKED BY RIOT THUGS’. I mean, honestly, haven’t you guys heard of Gandhi?

The tabloid’s moral faux-outrage was all too predictable. More worrying, however, has been the response from the establishment -- it’s added fuel to the fire for reactionary demands that policing isn’t tough enough and needs to be “stepped up” at future demonstrations. Today, it’s revealed that Theresa May, the Home Secretary, is looking at introducing water-cannons for public order policing.

The irony couldn’t be greater when we look at what happened on Thursday, when the tooled-up riot cops successively kettled, horse-charged and brutally attacked demonstrations widely reported in the media as good-natured and peaceful. It’s left one 20 year old student, Alfie Meadows, requiring brain surgery after being bludgeoned by a police baton. And now we’re being told that this wasn’t enough, and that protesters should be getting a “good soaking” as well.

In Glasgow, fortunately, no one required hospital treatment as a result of the police actions on Thursday. However, the treatment of peaceful demonstrators still (as the video below shows) verged well into the territory of brutal assaults on protesters, the pushing around of school children, and flagrant political policing. In a continuation of the harassment and intimidation of political activists that has been ongoing over the past few months, two demonstrators were picked out from a crowd of hundreds and arrested on trumped up charges. These include assaulting and obstructing police officers and attempting to rescue or assist the escape of a person in custody; both are bailed (one with the now customary city-centre banning order) and will appear in court in January.  Their full statement, and call for witnesses, can be read here.

What’s becoming clear is that as the radicalisation of broad sections of society and opposition to austerity and cutbacks grow, the police are stepping up the victimisation of activists and attempting to limit protest though whatever means possible. We need to be prepared to resist this and stand up for the rights of everyone to resist the Coalition’s attacks on the working class -- which, far removed from two aristocrats facing the minor distress of encountering a few of their subjects -- are set to rip apart communities and the lives of millions of people.

Prince William and his lovely lady friend Kate Middleton are to marry at Westminster Abbey on Friday 29th April 2011 – which has been declared a bank holiday in celebration.

Prime Minister David Cameron said:

The wedding of Kate and William will be a happy and momentous occasion. We want to mark the day as one of national celebration. A public holiday will ensure the most people possible will have a chance to celebrate on the day.

Public holidays are a devolved issue, though… but thankfully, First Minister Alex Salmond has reinforced his allegiance to the royal family and granted us the holiday, too – “so all of Scotland has the opportunity to enjoy the celebrations.” Great.

Bizarre anti-royalist group Republic have criticised the extra holiday, saying it’s “absurd” that the whole of the UK would get a day off for something “most people are not interested in”.

Whilst we at SSY are not remotely interested in a pair of posh weirdos making their patriarchal family line official in the eyes of God and the law – we do positively welcome having two four-day weekends in a row.

Mike Trim: he's well angry.

However, it’s not all good news, as Mike Trim, the head of Exeter City Council’s cleaning services told his local paper:

…the date for next year’s royal wedding has left the council with a major headache…

It means that some city residents may not have their rubbish picked up for four weeks.

I just don’t think William and Kate took waste collections into consideration when they were sorting through dates for their nuptials.

Arseholes.

But regardless of Wills and Kate’s totally inconsiderateness, if you can find it in your heart to forgive them… please do join SSY as we take a rare pilgrimage down to London to *ahem* celebrate the royal wedding. Megabuses are bookable eight weeks in advance, meaning that tickets down to arrive on the morning of the day in question will become available on Monday 7th March, for as little as £5.  You coming?

It’s hard to know where to start with the Royal Wedding. So much of the commentary  surrounding it almost goes beyond parody – take this mental ‘satirical’ (?) rant from Richard Littlejohn about the bride being forced to wear a “designer burka from the Kate Moss Intifada Collection at Topshop”, or this horrendously fawning circle-jerk by bigoted unionist knobhead David Starkey.

Criticism has been wiped out from the mainstream media. Few are willing to raise their heads above the parapet and question the nature of, let alone criticise, the ‘wedding of the century‘, in a manner which bears huge similarities to the ‘poppy fascism’ that we wrote about last week, where subservience to a supposedly apolitical  ’national institution’ becomes mandatory.

Which makes it all the more surprising, and brilliant, when the first major criticism of the wedding to be splashed across the national media comes from someone who is, in theory, under the direct authority of the Monarchy. Yep, far from a ‘usual suspect’, the man who’s managed to outrage the Daily Mail, the Tories and the Church hierarchy is, believe it or not, a Church of England bishop, Pete Broadbent. Writing on his twitter and facebook page, Bishop Broadment has attacked the wedding as ‘nauseauting tosh’, and said that ‘I don’t care about the royals, I’m a republican. Talent isn’t passed on through peoples’ bloodstock, the hereditary principle is corrupt and sexist.’

In something which has particularly outraged right-wing sensibilities, he also added: ‘As with most shallow celebrities, they will be set up to fail by the gutter press. I give the marriage seven years.’

Legend.

Republican hero Bishop Broadbent also commented, “I managed to avoid the last disaster in slow motion between Big Ears and the Porcelain Doll, and I hope to avoid this one too… I think we need a party in Calais for all good republicans who can’t stand the nauseating tosh that surrounds this event.”

We’ve got a better idea. The wedding is reportedly to be on Thursday 28 April, at Westminster Abbey. David Cameron is even giving us proles a day off to celebrate. Let’s go and join them? After all, International Workers Day slash May Day pagan-fest  is only a couple of days later.

I’ll bring the wickerman.

As the government has decided to decided to make cuts of 25%  to many essential services, new research by SSY has suggested  that at least £220 million could be saved by cutting the monarchy.  Why should we have to suffer so that a few select people can live in luxury?

Not only is she living in luxury she is living a more expensive lifestyle than the other monarchies in Europe.

Why does she need £41.5 million, I MEAN  MATE! Thats what she cost last year, Come on, thats a little bit greedy isn’t it? And that doesn’t include security, their properties, the cost of the army marching by them for random reasons and Prince Charles’ posh biscuits.

The Danish and Swedish monarchs cost four times less than ours. Why does our queen need so much more, surely they are expensive enough, as they are clearly not poverty stricken.

Luxembourg and Spain pay less six times less for their monarchs. Think about how it could be put to better use….. Then again I guess it’s a great idea to pay a very large fortune for a woman to stay in a very fancy house, it wouldn’t go to better use on education or health. Which would be something everyone can enjoy

SSY’s team of analysts have come up with some other ways we could have spent this money more effectively

It would be more than enough to pay for free school meals for all children in Scotland for four years. There would still be a nice wee sum left over.

It would go half way to pay for free public transport in Scotland.

For the cost of just one Queen we could the basic state pension for 13141 less expensive pensioners.

We could buy 58,000,000,000 bags of Wethers originals and subscribe to the peoples friend for 22,000 years.

Or 22,000,000,000 penny sweets.

The Queen wants to take this nice old man's sweeties

And  most importantly we could pay for my cigarettes and alcohol for 1 month.

I think it’s clear we need to ban the monarchy as we have so many better options for spending this colossal sum of money.

Since we last reported on Thailand, the unelected Thai government has completed its brutal crackdown on the protest camp in the heart of Bangkok’s business and shopping district.

Showing that they valued the property of the area, and their own power, more than human life, the government of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajjiva ordered troops to violently clear the site. In the process, at least 88 people were killed by army snipers and assault tanks. Over 1000 were injured.

Thailand’s 20th century history is littered with the intervention of the army to protect the aristocratic and business elite’s power against the majority of Thais who live in poverty. Now once again, Thais are living under a military curfew, with mass censorship of the media and internet and hundreds of political prisoners facing long sentences or possible execution.

Among the many prisoners facing trial is a British man, Jeff Savage, who lives in Thailand and was part of the protests.

But despite their short term retaking of the streets, the government has solved nothing by using violence against the overwhelmingly poor and working class Red Shirt protesters. The huge economic and class inequality in Thailand remains, and the poor are demanding democracy in order to try and get a government that will do something about it.

In parliament itself, opposition politicians have voiced their anger about the way the government has conducted itself, calling for Eton educated Abhisit to be impeached.

“Up until now, almost 100 people have died. Can you continue reading the budget and balance sheets like that? Do you have any feelings?” said Surapong Tovichakchaikul, an opposition member from Chiang Mai, a northern city where support is strong for the Red Shirts. Regional inequalities are also an important factor in the division of Thailand. The Red Shirts are particularly strong among the peasants and small farmers of the Thai north and northeast, which are ethnically and linguistically different from both central and southern Thailand. The peoples of these regions have been bounded to the rest of the country by borders established in the times of western colonialism.

Further evidence that Thailand is riven by discontent was the news that two bombs exploded in the south of the country this week, set by Islamic insurgents who want an independent south. The south of Thailand was an autonomous Islamic enclave before being annexed by Thailand in the early 20th century.

School contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson Abhisit Vejjajjiva

Fundamentally, the conflict in Thailand is about the desire of the traditional nobility and business elite to hold on to power. They were threatened when, for the first time in Thai history, the 1997 constitution allowed both houses of parliament to be directly elected. This led to the rise of billionaire tycoon Thaksin Shinawatra, who was able to fill the vacuum on the left of Thai politics once filled by the Communist Party.

In the absence of a credible left alternative, Thaksin established policies like the first universal healthcare scheme and economic support for small farmers that won him huge support among the Thai poor. Ousted by a military coup in 2006, he now lives in exile and the current Thai regime is seeking his arrest through Interpol.

The demand for democracy by the mass of Thai people is, therefore, a demand to be allowed to vote in a government that will represent their interests. They are frustrated in this by the so-called ‘Human Rights’ organisations and NGOs, who support the monarchy and anti-democracy, middle class Yellow Shirt movement, which has used violence and intimidation. The National Human Rights Commission is now actively taking part in the prosecution of Red Shirts.

The complicity of the monarchy in the current crisis has for virtually the first time in Thai history brought out open criticism of the institution, and the radicalisation that is likely to follow the government crackdown can only increase this. The current King Bhumibol has been on the throne for 55 years, and is ailing in health. He still retains widespread support, especially concentrated in the more well off. Check out this scene from the national Thai TV awards, where an audience of the entertainment elite applaud a pro-monarchy statement by one of those winning an award. Such total shows of total submission to the monarchy are common among the Thai elite. (The term “Father” refers to the King.)

However, his son and heir apparent, Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn, is held in much less esteem by most people. As a military officer, he participated directly in crackdowns against the Communist Party in the 70s. And his personal life has drawn a lot of criticism: he has been married several times, abandoning different wives and children. In Thailand, laws that prevent offences against the monarchy have been used to silence republican opposition. That’s why Thai socialist Giles ji Ungpakorn, who we’ve linked to before, lives in exile in Britain: he faces charges for criticising the monarchy at home. However, the Crown Prince has gone even further than that. In divorce proceedings, he accused a former wife of being totally responsible for the breakdown of their relationship, and she couldn’t answer back for fear of contravening the law!

It’s virtually certain that although crushed militarily for now the Red Shirt movement will re-emerge, quite possible greatly radicalised by this show of state violence. The fact of the matter is that the crackdown is a hollow victory for the Thai elite, for instead of taking any steps to resolve the contradictions at the heart of Thai society, their actions have only heightened them. The future of Thailand as a country is highly uncertain.

As Britain is gearing up for the most important election in decades, it’s also the most closely fought. Successive opinion polls have shown that it is unlikely any party will have an overall majority to govern – that either means working as a minority Government, or one in coalition. This has an obvious disadvantage, that at the time when the ruling class in the UK needs a strong Government to enforce public sector cuts, take on the trade unions and face down community campaigns against cuts to their services they may in fact have the weakest Government in decades; a Government that can be undermined by appealing to the opposition or coalition partners with cold feet.

This scenario has caused considerable and obvious disquiet to Britain’s bankers and potential investors. In order to quash this concern, the British state is, according to at least one press report prepared to rely on undemocratic and ancient rules to enforce stability at the price of democracy; that is, the use of Crown Powers.

The Daily Mail reports that none other than The Queen has been approached by leading civil servants to discuss using her powers as a Monarch in relation to a hung Parliament. It outlines a scenario in which no party has a majority, and the Parliament is a hung one. The minority Government could approach the Queen to request another general election to secure a stable majority Government. Leading civil servants are worried this would cause instability in the UK, and are discussing with the Queen the possibility of her using her Crown Powers to deny a request for a second General Election.

This would be designed to force the political parties to form a stable coalition Government, able to make the cuts necessary to make the UK profitable for capitalism again. Such use of Crown Power in the UK would be shocking and controversial, and it may not be necessary but it is far from impossible. Crown Powers have already been used in people’s lifetime – the Governor General in Australia dismissed a left-leaning Government in Australia using Crown Powers. These powers have also been used to overrule a High Court ruling which said the expulsion of Diego Garcia’s indigenous population to make way for a US military base was illegal.

The reality is the Crown still has plenty of power in the UK, if not to be used on the whim of the monarch itself but in the interests of Britain’s ruling establishment of MP’s, civil servants, bankers etc. It is still used in the Privy Council, whose prerogative powers were used to deny justice to the islanders of Diego Garcia and to ban GCHQ workers from being allowed to join a union. And there is of course the undemocratic House of Lords, whose peers are allowed to block laws voted on democratically in Westminster.

All these hang ons from the medieval ages are kept as an insurance policy in case any Government – in the past a feared “ultra-left” Labour one – would go too far, and for any Government to use as an extension of it’s powers beyond the relative transparency of Parliament. Remember that the next time the Monarchy comes up in a debate – tourists they may attract, but Mickey Mouse does not have the power to deny elections to the Senate in the United States!

The Queens Diamond Jubillee will be held in 2012, with public holidays on the 4th and 5th of June to celebrate her glorious reign. The SSP won’t be attending however – and will organise a demonstration for an Independent Republic, like we did at Calton Hill in 2004. We’ll be protesting so that the Queen and all the undemocratic hangovers of the middle ages have no role in politics, and Scotland is a modern, 21st century democratic Republic without inherited privilege or power.

Peter White, who is standing to be elected as a Labour councillor next year, has shocked the world when he told the truth on Facebook earlier this week.

Regarding the Queen’s upcoming Diamond Jubilee in 2012, he stated:

What is the point of celebrating the Diamond Jubilee of someone who is born into a position of privilege, she is a parasite and milks this country for everything she can. She has more front than Margate asking for extra money from the civil list. Maybe she should sell a couple of her properties. Maybe if she wants Buckingham Palace to be maintained from public funds she should open it to the public. Don’t get me wrong, I have no problem with a public holiday but let’s have one that means something, rather than celebrating vermin.

Meanwhile, Leftfield were undertaking some investigative journalism, and discovered this shocking undercover picture of Her Majesty rehearsing for her next Queen’s Speech.