Prime Minister Tony Blair was finally awarded a Knighthood by Her Majesty in the New Year honours list. No sooner was the news released and all hell broke loose with attacks on the new ‘Sir Tony Blair’ (or to give him his full title: Sir Anthony Charles Lynton Blair KG) from social media activists, leading commentators, politicians and even members of the Labour Party.
I was quite surprised with this outpouring of anti-Blair sentiments. People even took to set up a petition to demand Her Majesty to rescind the Knighthood. As I write, the petition had passed 1000000 signatories. The petition states: ‘He (Blair) was personally responsible for causing the death of countless innocent, civilian lives and servicemen in various conflicts. For this alone he should be held accountable for war crimes’. Which is quite ironic. After all, people are angry that he has been given a knighthood for doing exactly what knights of the past have always done – kill people.
If you look at the history of knights, it’s clear there is a direct relationship between being knighted and the role one played in armed conflict to protect the throne (nation). There have been many types of knights over the centuries, from those that did the bidding of the Church to those who did the killing for the monarch.
So for Tony Blair to be given a knighthood seems to be in keeping with precedence. After all, the accusers make him personally responsible for the death of tens of thousands of people post 9/11 and the subsequent ‘war on terror’. Blair seems to have fulfilled the very definition of being a true knight! In fact, he might even be the greatest knight given the devastation of nations and people left across the middle east and Afghanistan in his wake.
For me, this brings into question the very essence of honours. The British honours have been created over time to reward those who helped the monarch and/or the state in the subjugation of people and the looting of nations across the world. Honours by their very definition are not honourable. They represent the supremacy of the white Christian of their dominion over people who did not look like them.
I am all in favour of awarding national recognition to those who have served the nation and its people with true honour. Those who have gone beyond the call of duty to support the very fabric of our society. However, to continue to use the old morally and the ethically bankrupt honours system is no longer tenable.
Recently I wrote a piece titled, ‘Truth Commission: The British Raj and India’ in which I propose that it is in the interest of Her Majesty (and PM Johnson) to take the opportunity, whilst it still exists, to set up a proper Royal Commission to investigate the true history of the British Empire. For it is by acknowledging the truth that one can begin to consider the first steps towards reconciliation. And part and parcel of reconciliation also demand some form of reparation. As long as Britain hides from the truth, and champions an honours system that is so steeped in the blood of the innocent, how can we ever move forward? How would we feel if the Germans had an award named after Hitler?
It is pathetic that some 1000000 people signed a petition to vent anger against the most successful Labour Prime Mister in history. Yet, where is the national outcry for the genocide and ethnocide of people and nations committed in the name of Queen and country?
Arise Sir Malfeasance says it all I guess.
