The Case for the Queen
Sir: The article by Mr Robert Blake entitled "The Case for the Queen" (June 12) I read with interest and general approval. However, I felt that he was perhaps guilty at one point of the common fault today of apologising indirectly for the existence of a class structure in our society, I am quite convinced not only that a class structure in our society. I am anyway, but also that it is beneficial. We have become so accustomed to unreasoning attack on this issue from the political Left that we slip all too easily into a defensive position. And yet it is interesting to note that those societies which have come out of socialist revolution are more fiercely class-structured than our own ever was, while at the same time they maintain the pretence that they do not believe in class.
The existence of a class structure, if properly set up, has enormous value in many ways. Its most obvious advantage is that it gives an incentive to the individual to strive and so to better his station. This assumes, of course, that movement between classes is possible. But that has been the case in Britain for a very long time, else where would your new nobility and knightage have come from, not to mention the continuous supply of lesser gentry? It is an inexpensive and highly effective system.
Another advantage of a class system is that it greatly aids a proper respect for authority. All this modern egalitarian " mateyness " simply does not work in practical situations. Essentially the traditional British class system engendered the respect and courtesy of inferiors towards superiors, but also most significantly of course there were improprieties on both sides, but that does not in itself invalidate the system. Oddly enough, those who have brought the system most into disrepute were not the nobility and gentry, but the upstart plebeians — as ever the most intolerant of their fellows when the chance comes. True nobility is more than simply a fine genealogy. It is a matter of persoanl excellence. It demands great self-discipline to achieve the qualities of a gentleman — stability of character, honesty, forebearance and courtesy to every man, whatever his relative station. The mistake of the upstart plebeian was not that he had risen — this in itself is good — but that he failed to take to his own person the responsibility of his new station along with his acquired power. He thought that money could buy him gentility.
Equality is, in any case, an unattainable myth. Why, even two men standing beside each other can be distinguished at a glance. They are not even superficially equal. It is thus absurd to attempt to stamp out the differences which exist — far better to recognise these differences and put them to use in a properly ordered class structure. One might add that it also makes life much more interesting! Let us therefore proudly proclaim a class structure, not apologise for it. And let us see a few more noble houses of the hereditary sort established.
M. G. Stanton Speirshill, Dunino, St Andrews, Fife.
Previous page
