Many people say that Queen Elizabeth II has done the best she can in the face of a rapidly changing world to preserve something of the old standards. Her family is more of a problem but she has held fast to tradition and not capitulated to modernism; not, at least, any more than has been necessary.
I'm not so sure. Certainly she herself appears to have stuck to her traditional guns in most respects and she has, no doubt, been constrained by the fact that she is not supposed to be political in any way. But, as far as I can see, she has never spoken out against anything, and she has watched in silence as Albion is bit by bit dismantled and her inheritance, for which she is responsible, basically trashed. Of course, she is powerless but she has never said anything.
She is a sincere church-going Christian and, it appears, a genuine believer but, once again, she seems to have stood by as the Church of England becomes little more than a secular bureaucracy focused almost entirely on affairs of this world. Perhaps she has no real beliefs other than simply preserving the institution of the monarchy but, if she does, she might have expressed them and tried to stem the tide. I realise her position is almost impossible in a modern democracy and I am not actually condemning her at all since heroism, which is what the course I am regretting she has not taken would have required, is a high calling open only for the few. However, I do believe history will show that she presided over catastrophic national decline and was ineffective in doing anything to avert it. What do others think?
(Having just posted this I see it follows on in a certain way from Bruce Charlton's last post on the absence of real leadership in the modern world. This is just what the current queen has never really shown in a position that surely demands it, even in its present much reduced form.)