The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) is the oldest and largest animal protection charity in the world, with their mission “to prevent cruelty, promote kindness, and to alleviate the suffering of animals”.
It’s a noble and worthy cause to fight for, which is precisely why there has been incandescent fury that the RSPCA has announced they’re “immensely honoured” to have King Charles as their new patron. The British Royal family has a centuries-long history of killing animals for fun, but even by their low standards Charles has been particularly bloodthirsty when it comes to British wildlife.
A bloodsport fanatic
Any decent person’s stomach should turn at the sight of a traditional British fox hunt, in which ridiculously dressed rich people trample their way through the country in pursuit of a terrified fox, which is then torn apart by dogs (summarized perfectly by Oscar Wilde: “the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable”).
British public sentiment is so opposed to this bloodsport that it was banned in 2005, but the supposedly “animal-loving” Charles pressured then-Prime Minister Tony Blair to turn a blind eye because he thought it was “romantic”. Charles loved fox-hunting so much he dragged the young William and Harry to “cubbing” events, in which a hunt trains its dogs by allowing them to tear apart fox cubs. Real father of the year material.
Charles is also a big fan of shooting parties, with his Sandringham Estate promoting itself as the best place to blast fleeing birds with a shotgun. Though obviously cruel to the birds, the practise also has a hugely negative ecological impact, ranging from lack of biodiversity (i.e. killing off endangered predators that prey on the target bird) to firing billions of poisonous lead pellets into the countryside.
The badger must die
Charles is supposed to stay non-political, but on issues he particularly cares about he’s willing to break that rule. So, what noble cause would lead Charles to break with Royal custom and risk the disapproval of the Queen? Well, Charles demanded that Britain’s badgers absolutely positively must die, and he did everything in his power to see the countryside littered with their adorable corpses.
In letters to the Prime Minister in 2005 he urged the government to have “a proper cull of badgers” in order to protect cattle from disease and dismissed arguments against this position as “intellectually dishonest.”
Charles’ bloodlust for badgers may now be sated, as to date around 210,000 of them have been killed by the government. But uh, more recent research indicates that it actually wasn’t badgers spreading disease but farmers, via contaminated pastures and dung. In fact, studies of badgers indicated that in over 65,000 observations, a badger only got within 10m of a cow once, with the badger cull now considered “a monstrous waste of time and money.”
“Intellectually dishonest” to push back against this wildly ill-conceived badger slaughter huh? Something of an oopsie from Charlie there.
Blood on their hands
Doubtless the RSPCA are happy to have the King as their patron for financial reasons, though it’s massively hypocritical for an animal welfare charity to be headed by someone who has spent his entire life getting kicks from watching animals be blown to bits, torn apart by dogs, or poisoned for literally no reason.
We’re going to go with British campaign ground Protect the Wild on this, who conclude that:
“No animal welfare organisation should ever be endorsed by a man who takes sick pleasure in murdering wildlife, and whose vast estates are causing untold ecological damage.”
Couldn’t have said it better myself – and let’s face it, the new portrait of Charles staring out of a sea of blood was very accurate. If you want to read more about the horrible things the King has done over his life then please see here, as it’s not just animals he’s abused.