Quoting Michael Winner, a multimillionaire conservative, probably isn't your best line of argument :)
But seriously, these are both personal opinions, and the first one even seems to be working against your original assertion that the honour is meaningless.
All things considered, if you have an issue with the monarchy and the "aristocratic" government (not quite accurate, but there's a point there), that's completely valid. Rallying against an almost entirely unrelated honours system is way off-target, and I would imagine that abolishing it would do more harm than good.
I was asked - "why on earth shouldn't he accept the acknowledgement?" My reply is an attempt to provide a partial answer to that question, and is unrelated to the rest of the discussion. :)
But seriously, these are both personal opinions, and the first one even seems to be working against your original assertion that the honour is meaningless.
All things considered, if you have an issue with the monarchy and the "aristocratic" government (not quite accurate, but there's a point there), that's completely valid. Rallying against an almost entirely unrelated honours system is way off-target, and I would imagine that abolishing it would do more harm than good.