Today, the Germanic descended Queen of England is one of the last actual, practicing (if only ceremonially) monarchs in Europe. Most that have descended from blood lines such as hers are not practicing or are very visible in any sphere that has direct influence on a nation’s policy…such as the family in Monaco. Outside of Eurasia, there are remnants of royal blood lines in East Asia and Meritu (Afrika) that occupy a mostly ceremonial position, but have more nostalgic and emotional recognition than having any practical or political effect on a nation. The Queen of England occupies an interesting position, relative to any other remnants of monarchies around the globe. She today represents as a political gatekeeper or emotional caretaker of the last vestiges of the old guard imperialism that saw the Brutish Empire once ruled all that the sun allegedly set on. This once large empire, that still controls numerous lands titles in North America, South America, the Caribbean, Eurasia, Asia and Meritu (Afrika). In a country like Canada, Government owned land are called Crown land and set aside for the English caretaker to tax and collect on once per year. In fact any land tax or national income taxes are directly related to paying for the privileges of squatting on Royal Land
(real; from French royale, from Latin regalis, royal, regal, from combining form reg- (nominative rex), king, + adjective suffix –alis. estate; from Latin status, condition, state
The concept is derived from the feudal principle that in a monarchy, all land was considered the property of the king. Thus originally the term real estate was equivalent to “royal estate”, real originating from the French royale, as it was the French-speaking Normans who introduced feudalism to England in the 11th century and thus the English language; Similar to Spanish real.
Also in Maritime or Corporate law, the word real is additionally altered to mean that which is related to a thing (from Latin res/rei, thing), as distinguished from a person. Thus the corporate law-which controls our sleeping and waking hours under democracy (as opposed to natural law), broadly distinguishes between “real” property (land and anything affixed to it) and “personal” property (everything else, e.g., clothing, furniture, money). The conceptual difference was between immovable property, which would transfer title along with the land, and movable property, which a person would retain title to. (The word is not derived from the notion of land having historically been “royal” property. The word royal — and its Portuguese cognate real — come from the related Latin word rex-regis, meaning king.).
The Queen of England represents the true world power today…the international bankers…robber barons, thugs and pirates that have been ruthlessly efficient in achieving what the architect of their rise— baron mayer amschel rothschild —- envisioned. That is total domination over the peoples of the planet through the control of their economy, education, food, entertainment, governance and interpersonal relationship. Today there are no true practicing King or Queen. So unless one is a descendent of a bloodline…regardless of the ethnicity or culture, calling one’s self a King or Queen is equally or even more symbolic, wishful thinking, delusional or confused. There are many in the dark matter community, specifically the female, who like to self proclaim themselves queens…“because we were queens back in Afrika…”. Note they never said there WERE queens, they said WE were queens. It is unfortunate and sad that the people, who often promote themselves as Meritu (Afrikan) royalty, tend not to overstand the concept of what a queen or King is.
Definition of queen, noun
- the female ruler of an independent state, especially one who inherits the position by right of birth.
- (also Queen Consort) a king’s wife.
- a woman or thing regarded as the finest or most outstanding in a particular sphere or group.
- a woman or girl chosen to hold the most important position in a festival or event:she’s the official carnival queen
- (the Queen) dated (in the UK) the national anthem when there is a female sovereign.
- the most powerful chess piece that each player has, able to move in any direction along a rank, file, or diagonal on which it stands.
The definition of a king is similar, i.e. the male ruler of an independent state, especially one who inherits the position by right of birth. The most important chess piece that each player has, unable to move in any direction along a rank, file, or diagonal on which it stands, except for one space at a time. Once the King in a chess game is in check (captured of destroyed)…the game is over. I just mentioned how many proclaiming their Queenliness, do not act, look or think like a queen, yet demand royal treatment and that the male they cohabit with, perform the duties of Kings…whether or not they have the intellect or motivation to be one. You also have males who don’t know how to act their roles as MEN…masculine men as opposed to immature, emasculated and simp assed girly men, who praise these females without demanding accountability from them. Theses simps don’t do this because they don’t have accountability and thus if the females ever step up her game, then HE would be expected to step his up. Most of us in the dark matter community aim for the lowest denominator and standard and fail to, or refuse to raise the bar, not because they don’t know how, but because it requires work, consistency, progressiveness, integrity and self reflection. To be a Queen or for that matter a King requires the individual to be;
(a) A Servant to the people; to have a sense of the people’s need and seek to fulfill it, emotionally, physically and materially. Failure to do so is the cause of numerous anti-monarchist uprising and the change to governance were more than just one bloodline speaks for the people.
(b) Holding oneself to the highest standard of public behavior as an example of morality, virtue and conduct.
(c) To be the example and litmus test that their subjects would strive to emulate and or are willing to sacrifice for.
I would like to point out that a Queen does not wear another’s crown. Like so many self professed females do with their weaves and wigs and glued on stresses. She does not behave crass or low brow in public or in private because her positive image is a large part of her title. A queen is never antagonistic to her King, however if hers is the throne, she would make sure that the Queen’s consort is of relative position or level and one who comes with his own high status. A Queen also has advisors who will consult her as to the best way to approach her position, relative to the expectation of her title and public persona. History and ourstory is filled with narratives of royalties who have failed to overstand this and thus have been removed from their lofty positions by their subjects or by opposing armies from other groups, nations or cultures.
Another self proclaim title the females in our community like to give themselves is the title of goddess. Many, who don’t overstand metaphysics, use metaphysical explanation to call themselves goddesses or for that matter when the male calls himself a god. However, people need to stay in their lanes and practice the simplistic religion of Christianity, Islam or Judaism…or their off shoots, because metaphysics transcends these restrictive cultish ways of viewing the world. To call one’s self a god or goddess is to admit that you overstand the connection of man to the outer verse or universe, and the innerverse. From a metaphysical level we are all connected…yes even Yurugu, because from us came them. We are also connected to the animals, plants and rocks and the planet itself. This is why conscious and spiritual ancestors say that the creator is in all living things and give reverence to the creative qualities in the rock, water, sky, bird, crocodile, elephant, etc. The ignorant and insipidly disingenuous calls this animistic and idol worshiping, even while they themselves pray with their prayer beads, or symbolically eating the “body” and drinking the “blood” of a “son” of their god. We are all element of cosmic dust. The makeup of our body is composed of the same element in the soil, in the air and water (which incidentally makes up 70-80 percent of us). We are electrical entities, pure electric AND magnetic in our makeup, but became biologically and spiritually dense due to some earlier trauma that caused us to fall from divine oneness with the all to contending against nature in a violent way.
Definition of DIVINE
1 a: of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God or a god <divine love>
b: being a deity <the divine Savior>
c: directed to a deity <divine worship>
2 a: supremely good: superb <the pie was divine>
b: heavenly, godlike
Definition of GODDESS
1: a female god
2: a woman whose great charm or beauty arouses adoration.
In ancient traditions such as the Judaic narrative, which includes Islam and Christianity, a fallen angel or god/goddess (who are also commonly known as demons) work for evil purposes that lead to destruction in the world, in contrast to the good purposes of the missions that faithful angels fulfill. Judaism and Christianity are the two major religions that say that God originally created all angels to be holy, but according to this narrative, some rebelled and became fallen angels when they fell into sin. Religious cultists and believers stress the importance of people protecting themselves from fallen angels by staying close to God. But how does a goddess (and here I am assuming this title stresses a lesser deity than the creator), stay close to god, if they are not producing god like children? How can they stay close to god, when the defile their biological temple? How can they stay close to god, when they mar their original image, put poisons into their bodies, on their faces, on top of their heads and do all things manageable and possible to move as far away from their god given image as possible? Finally how can a goddess stay close to god, but cohabitating with donkeys and mules, ratchet knee-grows and homo-thugs?
I can hear my readers in their best Heath Ledger voice….”why so serious?” But why should I not be? Claiming to be Kings and Queens, gods and goddesses are just exercise in a failed attempt at self actualization. Which is similar to having simulated sex with your palms or your fingers. Nothing more than fruitless masturbation or consistent foreplay without the inevitable release one gets from a fifth play. You know what you are doing-by attributing divinity or royalty to yourself. You derive a certain pleasure doing it-the superficial and temporary high from this feel good act. However, the result is less than anticipated, because your reality is still the same. Unless we change our physical conditions, proclaiming divinity and royalty is a joke. Unless we change our emotional and spiritual state, proclaiming divinity and royalty is emotional dissonance and intellectual misguided. Gods do not abuse goddesses. Goddesses don’t abuse gods. The way knee-grows abuse each other. Deity figures look to the power within themselves to grow themselves, not to outside sources for validation and a sense of worth. Knee-grows loves their cultural and ethnic oppressors more than they love morality, integrity and that person in the mirror.
The ancient Meritu/Afrikan belief in the duality of nature and the creative energy is exemplified by the goddess icon so many embrace…Auset, consort to Ausar and the ideal inner image of the feminine god self. We need a new approach and that starts with us getting serious psychological help. This delusional grasp on Goddess and Queen status or titles, obscure how much we yearn for acceptance, yet we constantly seek it without the necessary responsibility inherent.
This is the divine-Queenly presence of the Meritu/Afrikan….
Notice how this speech embraces the concept of the duality of the two genders? Notice how the feminine principle identified in Auset’s speech supporting the male principle of Ausar? This is what queens do. But they must also be able to choose a King worthy of her submission to him. Otherwise these self proclamations without values are worthless.