Our forefathers were mighty men. Let us remember that & hold fast to their spirit as we face the Muslim invasion & cleanse our European homelands of their evil ideology & blood.
My country was right to resist & fight the Nazis who had hijacked Germany & Prussia with it - but I am SO sorry it ended in the destruction of Prussia our former friend - one of the Great European civilisations.
Keiser Fritz was not only a Great King but an enlightened man & one of the Greatest Europeans.
@MaximusProteus Na, don't tell me, and the WTC was an "insider job" set up by Elvis, who is in hiding with Marlyn Monroe, working secretly for the CIA, to find out how Jimmy Hendrix is helping the aliens microwave your brain, right?
Let me tell you another, funny conspiracy "theory"... there was once a deal of three German monarchs which, with a help of sponsored agents inside, destroyed and divided a big European country without any organised resistance. Moreover, these agents just signed it in a parliment. Of course it`s just a theory ;)
Every nation has a right to be proud of something,Germany beat tons of nations with Fredrick the great ,but in turn got beaten by Napoleon.Britain had it´s glory by using Wellington and Nelson against Napoleon but in turn got beaten by natives at Iswandal.France beat nearly every nation in one conflict except Britain who defeated them at Waterloo.Every nation has something to be proud of.
Den gab es schon 1932 - hätte jeder Deutsche das gehört, verstanden und befolgt gäbe es noch heute Deutsch-Danzig und 20 Mio .
Im Kapitalismus gibt es NIE eine solidarische Gesellschaft - und wenn dann nur als Betrugsgrundlage ! Was nicht heißt, dass es keine solidarischen Menschen gäbe.
Hey guys, how can you be proud of Prussia, Napoléon took Berlin in 19 days in 1806 ... the battles of Iéna and auerstadt, Prussia lost so hard against France. Yes, you can say : " we beated you easily in WW2, nahnahnah", okay, but Prussia man !!
@Heybuddy06 if prussia's army in 1806 hadn't been outdated things would have gone a lot different.
plus prussia got it's revenge in the franco-prussian war . and at first germany was beating the allies so easily. the tide only turned in 1943 after stalingrad
0:19 a Polish King is granting a flag to his Prusian prince. A Polish King was his senior and Prussia was declered to be part of Poland. This shows 0:19. The Polish King has given him a standar of black eagel. So even Prussian falg was Polish invention;)) (I had just written it to provoke you to check history and read more, how deep are historical tights of Poland and Prussia. Most Germans dont even know it...
@SoSollEsSein1 "Reichsadler" (is this a historic name?) - you mean the black, two headed eagle, a simbol of a Catholic Emperor?
At 10 april 1525 in a ceremony of a vassal pledge in Kraków Albrecht Hohenzollern received this coat of arms from Sigismund Senex (the Old), King of Poland and a sovereign of Albrecht... The Order used Imperial Eagle as a PART of its arms.
@MaximusProteus The Reichsadler was introduced at 1170 by Kaiser Friedrich Barbarossa. The symbohl was overtaken from the roman empire as he became imperator of it. Every King or Duke who used a Eagle symolized with this, that he was a subservient and member of the German Empire and also accepted the authority and guaranteed loyalty to the Kaiser. The right to use a eagle could only be gifted by the Kaiser himself.
@Rick2010100 I`ve asked if that was a historic, or a contemporary name, do you know?
Correction, Conrad III was the first one to use it, the Roman Empire existed till 1453, the "Holy" Roman Empire is confusing. The so called "German Empire" was proclaimed in 1971, after the other so called "Empires" of these "enlighted" times. If you sugesst the Order state or the Duchy of Prussia was a member of the HRE ever, you`re wrong. Originally, every monarch had to be loyal to the Emperor and Pope.
@FightingforTRUE Yes sure, a black Eagle as a flag was invented by Polish, you are an idiot. Also Poland had nothing to do with Prussia. The only thing you did was inviting the Teutonic Order to beat the Pagan Prussians. Otherwise Prussia would have formed with or without Poland. The Order would of turned Prodastant and turned into Prussia. All you did was help Brandenburg marry the Prussian Princess inwhich added the land to Brandenburg.
@XIronChancellorX Duchy of Prussia was a Polish puppet for a longer time than it was independent... and it becomed such on a clear request of the German colonists, the Lizard Association and than Prussian Association, they even wanted just to be annexd into Poland. What princess? The last Grand Master of the Order was from the house of Hohenzollern, a nephew of a Polish King btw.
The order did NOT turned heretic, it exists till now in Vienna.
@MaximusProteus Yes as Prussia, but its whole history it was not a puppet. I forgot her name but it was how the Hoehnzollern got Prussia. They married her, I think Anna, and got Prussia and Julich areas. Also the Teutonic Order ended as a nation when they converted. I don't know why you call them heretics but ok.
@XIronChancellorX For most of it, it was. If you`ll remember, tell me.
As i`ve said, the Grand Master Albrecht Hohenzollern was granted that land, as a secular Duke, by the King of Poland (Grand Masters were vassals even before).
I tell you the Order didn`t ended, it`s still in Vienna, a Catholic order is hardly a "nation"... but ok.
@MaximusProteus In addition, the Hohenzollern were never Grand Masters of the Order. They come from souther Germany, if I am correct they come from Nerburg.
@MaximusProteus No, that simple. You got your facts wrong. The Hohensollern come from Nuerberg(ever how you spell it). They bought Brandenburg and then through marriage they got Prussia.
@XIronChancellorX I don`t care from where they camed. The pojnt is you failed to tell me which marriage that was, so i presume you just don`t know how it was and for some strange reson refuse to check that i`m right here...
@XIronChancellorX As real as his name was, a cousin whose line eventually died out and unfortunatelly Poland was so nice to allow the Brandenbourg line to sit there as its vassals.
@MaximusProteus Brandenburg, and later Prussia, was never Polish vassals. Infact The Hoenzollern helped get one of their friends(or family I cant find my book on Prussian history) on the Polish throne.
@XIronChancellorX Of course Duchy of Prussia was, or more precisely its Dukes were vassals, some of which were also Dukes of Brandenburg, as well as the Grand Masters of the Order were since Henry VI Reuss von Plauen. Find that book.
You mean the August III Wettin? Muscovites helped him, but the only time he spent in Poland was when his Saxony was occupied by Prussia. Poland was an elective monarchy, a republic, its Kings haven`t had even legislative power since 1505.
@MaximusProteus When I say Prussia I mean later Prussia. the one after Brandenburg annexed the Duchy of Prussia. Brandenburg under the Hohenzollern were not vassels of Poland. Maybe the rulers before may of been pro-Polish but when the Hohensollern bought Brandenburg for Hungarian gold they were no-ones vassel.
@XIronChancellorX And why to pick up some certain period out of the whole history?
Seems you don`t understand these times, Hohenzollerns were pledging thier vassalage as the Dukes of Prussia, not of the Brandenburg or any other land. They definetly weren`t "pro" Polish, they just had no other choice.
Sure they were, as the Dukes of HRE were the vassals of the Emperor, but Duchy of Prussia was never in the HRE.
@MaximusProteus No I do. That book also talks about pre-1600's. Mainly about the Hohensollerns. Hey man I am done with this debate. Football just kicked my ass and I just dont even feel like talking so see ya. Maybe another time.
Elector Joachim II married Princess Hedwig of Poland in 1535. In 1564 his wife's brother was on the Polish throne. He did that so he could aquire Prussia and make his two sons named as secondary heirs to the duchy. Joachim helped get his wife's brother on the throne.
This is from the book "Iron Kongdom: The Rise and Downfall of Prussia, 1600-1947"
Sorry to say, but Sigismund the "Old" died in 1548 and than Sigismund August was crowned. No idea how could some secondary German Duke influence the election of the Senate, especially if Sigismund August was the only male Jagiellon. I`m afraid your book is not very serious.
So which sons of them aquired that right if none was Joachim`s sucessor? Tell me about the original source, i mean a deal between Sigismund and Joachim (if that book has referrences).
@formeandyou83 ...Preussen war kein Staat der sich auf eine große Völkische Geschichte oder Territoriale Integrität berufen konnte. Es war im Grunde kein Staat mit einer Armee sondern eine Armee mit einem Staat. Und da der Militarismus und das Soldatentum die Grundpfeiler der preusischen Gesllschaft waren, so lieberal und fortschrittlich sie auch gewesen sein mag, wird man im Zusammenhang mit Preußen immer Bilder von Krieg und Soldaten sehen. Auserdem wurde dieser Marsch anlässlich des Sieges
@MrStefan83 Ihr bayern seid Kannibalen und Leichenficker! Ich hasse Euch! God bless America du alter Drecksack! Euer Inzucht-Gesocks wird in den naechsten zweihundert Jahren aussterben und von den Tuerken niedergefickt! Ich scheisse auf Euer Bayern und das ist noch zuviel der Ehre ...
@SpaceCowboy641 Einfache Frage, Du bist schon irgendwie ein kleiner Depp, oder???
Ich habe zu Deiner Mutter, dieser Nutte, immer weider gesagt, Dir soll Dir kein Haschisch in die Muttermilch mischen. Weiß man schon wer Dein Vater ist? Einer von den 3 Albaner´n, die 2 Russen, oder war es doch einer von Ihren Neggerfreunden. Gelegtnlich tippe ich nachwievor auf den Ochsen, weil Du Dich wie ein Rindviech benimmst.
Kleiner Typ
Schiess Dich selber auf den Mond, dann ist dieser auch bewohnt.
This is a terrific rendition. The tuba obligato makes it a masterpiece. Howard says that the 3d Brandenbergers marched to Verdun in '16 singing this. Does anyone know the words?
@nato1265 Ziitat aus Wiki: "Das Gebiet des Ordensstaat Preußens wurde durch den nicht anerkannten Zweiten Frieden von Thorn 1466 geteilt: in das der polnischen Krone direkt unterstehende Königliche Preußen ......"
@nato1265 Ziitat aus Wiki: "Das Gebiet des Ordensstaat Preußens wurde durch den nicht anerkannten Zweiten Frieden von Thorn 1466 geteilt: in das der polnischen Krone direkt unterstehende Königliche Preußen ......
Some of the murders by the German BND known to the public:
Uwe Barschel (politician), Jürgen Möllemann (politician), Heiner Gehring (author), Martina Pflock (political activist), Tron (internet activist), Karl Koch (political/internet activist), Bernd Seiffert (human rights activist), Kirsten Heisig (author/judge), Fritz Bauer (persecutor of the Frankfurt Auschwitz processes), Markus Bott (human rights activist).
Google the names and check out my channel and homepage.
Why? Because they kept serfdom until their Napoleonic defeat? Because they impressed not only their own people but also foreigners by the thousands? Because of their absolutism? Because Frederick II, by his own admission, started wars for the sake of war? You southern Germans in the Austrian sphere has traditionally been champions of republicanism and civic liberty (surprising since you're mostly Catholics), the first ones in Continental Europe.
@Faxe90Swe Why? Preussen hat Deutschland nach Jahrhunderten der Zersplitterung wieder vereint.Der katastrophale Westphälische Friede von 1648 wurde 1871 endlich überwunden.
Preussen begann zu beginn des 18 Jhr als kleines,armes Land seinen Aufstieg zur Grossmacht.Aufgrund
zweier herrvoragender Könige Friedrich Wilhelm I. und sein Sohn Friedrich II.
It's funny, cause it was the northern german states (Saxony, Brandenburg, etc..) the ones to blame for the "disastrous" Treaties of Westphalia and the following French conquests. Cause they were so butthurt with the Empire and the Habsburgs that they didn't have a problem betraying the Empire and selling out German lands to their masters the French, Swedes, wahtever, etc...
So long for the Prussian "saviours" LOL!! besides half of them were french huguenots....
0:18 - "Prussian Tribute" by Jan Matejko: Albrecht Hohenzolern on the knees made tribute for Polish king Zygmunt I Old in Krakau XD It was disgrace for Prussia, not "gloria".
Well, technically, it wasn't the modern Prussia. By modern I mean it wasn't the nation-state of Prussia, it was the duchy of Prussia in the feudal sense and homage was a natural part of vasallage. In a way, Poland created the Prussian state by setting up the Prussian duchy. My point is, Piefke was refering to the modern Prussia in his march, and so Matejko's painting is really out of place.
Because it's undemocratic. If there should be a union of nations with the authority to make important decisions affecting economic policy, immigration, the law and so forth then that body should be democratically elected by the people of those nations and not appointed by bureaucrats and politicians.
The founding of the republic of Rome, when a group of noblemen hunted down Superbus after his son raped a woman and then instituted a republic. But that wasnt what i asked, i asked if it is possible to make the EU more democratic and not to do so spontaneously. Do you think it is possible to make the EU more democratic?
PS: This is your last chance to give a correct and honest awnser, leftist.
That wasn't a "spontaneous" democratization. That was the culmination of many generations of despotism and growing dissatisfaction with the centralized power structure of the nobility. I'm not willing to let the EU prove how rotten it is over the course of decades or perhaps even centuries for the sake of the possibility of some vaguely democratic union in the far future.
And no I don't believe it's possible to make the EU democratic and history is on my side of the argument.
Again, you refuse to awnser my questions: I did not ask you if the EU can be made democratic, i asked you if it can be made ''more democratic'': Unless you want to claim that the EU is a full-out totalitarian system.
PS: Adding a second element in this discussion ''Can a democracy be establised without any historical ground for it'' goes outside of the bounds of this discussion.
I don't want the EU to be "more democratic". I want to be democratic outright. Whatever concessions are made that fall short of proper representational democracy are inconsequential. And the EU may not be completely totalitarian but that doesn't mean it's a good thing. The only way it could be rescued is to start over from scratch with ONE referendum per country and let the people of Europe decide.
I have every ounce of respect for what you want, i want to see a contintental European superstate that is both democratic, conservative and social-liberal at the same time: I am not seeing it.
But my question was: Can the EU be made more democratic, even if you wan't it to be completely democratic and even if it is only an inch or jab.
Well now you're provoking an entirely different question which concerns whether or not it is possible for there to exist a system which is "partly democratic". I don't believe that it's possible because the internal power struggles, mechanisms of exercising power, forms of political activity and so on force the political system either to accept public consent as its foundations or to reject it. Any attempt at merely having "more democracy" would be nothing more than permisiveness on
the part of the ruling powers. And as soon as a fundamentally important issue arises on which the people disagree with the powers they will have to be removed most likely by force or political upheaval or else accept that the will of the body politic is irrelevant and slip into a state of consenting servility. In light of this, it's clear to me that it can not be made more democratic in any meaningful sense unless it becomes fundamentally democratic.
So via the treaty of lisbon both Germany, France, UK and Italië have 29 seats in the council of Europe and the European council even though they have different population numbers; the European parliament on the other hand has MEP numbers more closely resembling population numbers but no exactly.
Is it your opinion that it is impossible for the EU to change only one, only one single MP seat in the European parliament to make the the devision more fair?
Fairness is not a system of determining who governs a country, democracy is. Fairness is completely separate concept dealing with the perceived justness, equity or logicality of something political or not. For example you may have a benign dictator who is completely fair in the way he governs his country, but nobody would say that by virtue of this his country's political system may be characterized as democratic.
I think you are mistaken: The change that i describe is both fair and democratic because it is intrinsically fair, and also makes the system more democratic.
It may be fair but that under no circumstances makes it more democratic. Democracy means the people are provided with a free choice to elect the administration of the state by means of a popular vote. So the only way to make the EU more democratic would be to initiate steps by which all important figures are elected by popular vote and not appointed by other politicians or bureaucrats.
But the first step is being made: The vote is divided more by population, making the vote; though only by an inch, more popular and therefor more democratic.
In my view this is an example of the permissiveness I was talking about earlier. I'll happily eat my humble pie if this ends up making an actual difference, but naturally it won't.
I simply don't like power being concentrated in the hands of unaccountable, unelected circles and believe every development that furthers that concentration of power is extremely corrosive to our democracy.
So we CAN vote people into parliament, but we CAN'T make it more democratic not even by an inch and the EU is totalitarian, but actually it has little power. It seems to me you are contradicting yourself.
It seems that way because you're confusing separate concepts with each other (like fairness and democracy). I never said that the EU has little power, but that the EU parliament has little power.
Do you mean to say, that making the amount of representation one country has in the EU correspond to its population is democratic? That the most populous countries should have more seats?
Exactly, the Americans realized it in 1787, so why shouldn't we. Each country shall have an equal vote, just as each individual within the country shall have. If not, we have majoritarian tyranny. The French idiots have already insulted my country by suggesting that they would share the Presidency of the CEU with us, as if we couldn't handle it. Well, we proved them quite wrong.
@croscream If we have a "democratic" democracy, instead of a "fair" democracy, it only boils down to two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat - majoritarian tyranny.
Could you please give a definition of democracy that would include both you idea of a ''democratic'' democracy and a ''fair' democracy: Because i believe the two concepts contradict eachother.
I think, within a nation, democracy should be direct, not representative. That's a democratic and fair democracy, worthy of its name. Representative democracy serves only to increase the ranks of depots, living on tax money. In the ideal democracy there are no politicians tied to the state apparatus, only administrative officials and clerks executing the direct will of the people.
So it is your opinion that the definition of democracy should always be a type of ''fair'' democracy and not the kind of ''populist'' democracy where everyone gets equal votes.
But since the EU parliament uses the ''fair'' democracy type and allows nations like Malta more seats in the parliament so that they can have more influence: The EU parliament is by your definition atleast a little bit democratic, which contradicts your previous claim that the EU is not at all democratic.
Direct democracy is, by all means, populist democracy, where everyone gets an equal vote. I don't really see how you were able to misunderstand me on that point.
The EU is not at all democratic when it comes to the peoples within countries - it is only democratic on the level of nations.
The point is that you contradict yourself: Clearly there is a democratic element within the EU, only if it is very small and you said before that there wasn't.
So you don't believe in anything that makes sense: By your opinion the EU is both democratic and not democractic. Am i right?
PS: If you think you can feel superior because you are able to think in contradicting terms you are making a big error: You are only capable of thinking in contradicting terms.
First, how have I insulted you? I on my part was quite insulted when you started talking about superiority pretending.
"Except for the hereditary part" was a direct continuation of my previous post. Hence I meant that the politicians in my country falls under the definition of aristocracy except for the hereditary part. I wasn't challenging your definition.
As for what you say about "fair" and "direct" democracy, you've lost me.
It's also a question of definitions. The general consensus is that the EU is democratic, and most dictionaries and scholars would also define it as such. By my standards, there have never been a democracy, only bad and less bad failures at democracy. But it also depends on what mood I'm in... one day I am all for populist democracy, the next I'm an ardent supporter for classical democracy. I haven't set any definite bearings on that issue, I'm of the pragmatic nature.
Good: By trying to appear disinterested i might stop taking you serious.
If there has never been a real democracy, then the democracy is a hollow word without substance, a form of idealist political rethoric like communism and anarchism. Does it bother you to use a common and accepted definition for democracy?
Have you taken me serious this whole time? And I who stopped taking you seriously at the second reply... sorry, we haven't been arguing on even terms, it seems.
And yes, I would very much agree that democracy is about as utopian as communism. And yes, the common definition bothers me, because all cases of modern democracy (and thus the modern application of the term "the people") boils down to an elected aristocracy - if they´re not aristocrats from the beginning... more
I am sorry: But the accepted definition of aristocrats is that it is a hereditary titel associated with land and a manor or great house. The real meaning you want is most likely plurocrats, technocrats or beurocrats.
Also your claim that you want a democracy without politician, contradicts your previous claim that you wanted a fair democracy: Clearly a direct democracy must always be a fair democracy.
My pickelaube make's me a män
PooperSoviete 1 week ago
mmh mia is langweilig
KiaraAlysonie133 1 month ago
naja meine brüste wachsen
NilsaKileyri371 1 month ago
Our forefathers were mighty men. Let us remember that & hold fast to their spirit as we face the Muslim invasion & cleanse our European homelands of their evil ideology & blood.
freeman8128 2 months ago
Why are people flaming about the Nazis here when this is a Prussian song?
chobit389 3 months ago 2
@chobit389 They can`t distinguish a Glory Episode and a bad one.
abab776 2 months ago
@chobit389 echt mal!!! viele sagen wenn sie die Preußen Fahne sehen , was ist das denn für eine nazi flagge , aber wieso???
jeffhardyjzu 2 months ago
My country was right to resist & fight the Nazis who had hijacked Germany & Prussia with it - but I am SO sorry it ended in the destruction of Prussia our former friend - one of the Great European civilisations.
Keiser Fritz was not only a Great King but an enlightened man & one of the Greatest Europeans.
freeman8128 4 months ago
@MrShadow794 Vielleicht hast Du recht,aber jede Generation hat seine Hochs und Tief !!
Bierfass70 4 months ago
lol ich bin blond
AnabelSudieim915 4 months ago
Is this kind of an anthem.it's wonderful!
jumill1000 4 months ago
C'est ça botter le cul aux français!
pierremanon2007 4 months ago
Wer hat diese Melodie komponiert?
hektor14A 5 months ago
@hektor14A Johann Gottfried Piefke in 1870
Rick2010100 5 months ago
@hektor14A Johann Gottfried Piefke, der Königgrätzer Marsch und der Düppeler Schanzen-Marsch ist ebenfalls von ihm.
Rick2010100 5 months ago
@Rick2010100 Thank you!
hektor14A 5 months ago
naja meine brüste wachsen
MaritaReabh163 5 months ago
sau prussen
barackscat 5 months ago
Deutsches Mädel über alles ;-)
kleuter15 6 months ago 3
hiya kuckt auf mich bin n hamster
BlanchNorenenj870 6 months ago
ähhhh das ist ein deutsches lied WARUM REDEN HIER ALLE ENGLISCH?!
ZockerSantana 6 months ago
@ZockerSantana
Because we feel like it. :P
ChivKnight 6 months ago
@ZockerSantana Youtube ist ja nicht im Internet, dessen "Amtssprache" Englisch ist. Hab ich ganz vergessen, die anderen wohl auch.
Butterbrot207 6 months ago
Soy de Guatemala, pero amo la Historia de Prusia y lo que hoy en dia es Conocida como Alemania.
Elichapin 6 months ago in playlist MUSICA BELICA
The only thing that Stalin did good for the world to destroy Prussia.
bartolomej009 6 months ago
@bartolomej009 Just a technicality, but Prussia ceased to exist in 1871 when it along with other smaller german states combined to form Germany.
But in all sincerity, you probably meant Prussia as in the military heritage that Germany inherited from Prussia so your point is clear.
eeg10 6 months ago
Prussia had it 5 minutes, a season state made up by the freemasonery...
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus Na, don't tell me, and the WTC was an "insider job" set up by Elvis, who is in hiding with Marlyn Monroe, working secretly for the CIA, to find out how Jimmy Hendrix is helping the aliens microwave your brain, right?
FurorTeutonicus1 6 months ago
@FurorTeutonicus1 Such a funny joker you are.
Let me tell you another, funny conspiracy "theory"... there was once a deal of three German monarchs which, with a help of sponsored agents inside, destroyed and divided a big European country without any organised resistance. Moreover, these agents just signed it in a parliment. Of course it`s just a theory ;)
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
Every nation has a right to be proud of something,Germany beat tons of nations with Fredrick the great ,but in turn got beaten by Napoleon.Britain had it´s glory by using Wellington and Nelson against Napoleon but in turn got beaten by natives at Iswandal.France beat nearly every nation in one conflict except Britain who defeated them at Waterloo.Every nation has something to be proud of.
Thekeir100 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Langweilige abgedroschene Märsche !
DAS (!) ist ein Marsch:
youtube.com/watch?v=3PlImfRsxE4
Den gab es schon 1932 - hätte jeder Deutsche das gehört, verstanden und befolgt gäbe es noch heute Deutsch-Danzig und 20 Mio .
Im Kapitalismus gibt es NIE eine solidarische Gesellschaft - und wenn dann nur als Betrugsgrundlage ! Was nicht heißt, dass es keine solidarischen Menschen gäbe.
edgar0001 6 months ago
Hey guys, how can you be proud of Prussia, Napoléon took Berlin in 19 days in 1806 ... the battles of Iéna and auerstadt, Prussia lost so hard against France. Yes, you can say : " we beated you easily in WW2, nahnahnah", okay, but Prussia man !!
Heybuddy06 6 months ago
@Heybuddy06 You are stupid. Learn history beyond one period of time.
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@Heybuddy06 if prussia's army in 1806 hadn't been outdated things would have gone a lot different.
plus prussia got it's revenge in the franco-prussian war . and at first germany was beating the allies so easily. the tide only turned in 1943 after stalingrad
Prussia75 2 months ago
0:19 a Polish King is granting a flag to his Prusian prince. A Polish King was his senior and Prussia was declered to be part of Poland. This shows 0:19. The Polish King has given him a standar of black eagel. So even Prussian falg was Polish invention;)) (I had just written it to provoke you to check history and read more, how deep are historical tights of Poland and Prussia. Most Germans dont even know it...
FightingforTRUE 7 months ago
@FightingforTRUE
Ahm... that´s not true... Friedrich II. Holy Roman Emperor gave the Teutonic Knights the black Reichsadler.
The colours black and white were also in use by the Teutonic Knights and the house of Hohenzollern.
SoSollEsSein1 6 months ago
@SoSollEsSein1 "Reichsadler" (is this a historic name?) - you mean the black, two headed eagle, a simbol of a Catholic Emperor?
At 10 april 1525 in a ceremony of a vassal pledge in Kraków Albrecht Hohenzollern received this coat of arms from Sigismund Senex (the Old), King of Poland and a sovereign of Albrecht... The Order used Imperial Eagle as a PART of its arms.
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus The Reichsadler was introduced at 1170 by Kaiser Friedrich Barbarossa. The symbohl was overtaken from the roman empire as he became imperator of it. Every King or Duke who used a Eagle symolized with this, that he was a subservient and member of the German Empire and also accepted the authority and guaranteed loyalty to the Kaiser. The right to use a eagle could only be gifted by the Kaiser himself.
Rick2010100 6 months ago
@Rick2010100 I`ve asked if that was a historic, or a contemporary name, do you know?
Correction, Conrad III was the first one to use it, the Roman Empire existed till 1453, the "Holy" Roman Empire is confusing. The so called "German Empire" was proclaimed in 1971, after the other so called "Empires" of these "enlighted" times. If you sugesst the Order state or the Duchy of Prussia was a member of the HRE ever, you`re wrong. Originally, every monarch had to be loyal to the Emperor and Pope.
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@Rick2010100
Pardon... of course the German "Empire" was proclaimed in 1871, it was merely a typo mistake that century.
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@FightingforTRUE Yes sure, a black Eagle as a flag was invented by Polish, you are an idiot. Also Poland had nothing to do with Prussia. The only thing you did was inviting the Teutonic Order to beat the Pagan Prussians. Otherwise Prussia would have formed with or without Poland. The Order would of turned Prodastant and turned into Prussia. All you did was help Brandenburg marry the Prussian Princess inwhich added the land to Brandenburg.
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@XIronChancellorX Duchy of Prussia was a Polish puppet for a longer time than it was independent... and it becomed such on a clear request of the German colonists, the Lizard Association and than Prussian Association, they even wanted just to be annexd into Poland. What princess? The last Grand Master of the Order was from the house of Hohenzollern, a nephew of a Polish King btw.
The order did NOT turned heretic, it exists till now in Vienna.
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus Yes as Prussia, but its whole history it was not a puppet. I forgot her name but it was how the Hoehnzollern got Prussia. They married her, I think Anna, and got Prussia and Julich areas. Also the Teutonic Order ended as a nation when they converted. I don't know why you call them heretics but ok.
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@XIronChancellorX For most of it, it was. If you`ll remember, tell me.
As i`ve said, the Grand Master Albrecht Hohenzollern was granted that land, as a secular Duke, by the King of Poland (Grand Masters were vassals even before).
I tell you the Order didn`t ended, it`s still in Vienna, a Catholic order is hardly a "nation"... but ok.
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus In addition, the Hohenzollern were never Grand Masters of the Order. They come from souther Germany, if I am correct they come from Nerburg.
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@XIronChancellorX At least one Hohenzollern was, Albrecht, that`s how thier career in Prussia begun, as the vassals.
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus No, that simple. You got your facts wrong. The Hohensollern come from Nuerberg(ever how you spell it). They bought Brandenburg and then through marriage they got Prussia.
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@XIronChancellorX I don`t care from where they camed. The pojnt is you failed to tell me which marriage that was, so i presume you just don`t know how it was and for some strange reson refuse to check that i`m right here...
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus Oh haha. Albrecht is like a distant cousin. He is in no way a real Hohensollern.
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@XIronChancellorX As real as his name was, a cousin whose line eventually died out and unfortunatelly Poland was so nice to allow the Brandenbourg line to sit there as its vassals.
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus Brandenburg, and later Prussia, was never Polish vassals. Infact The Hoenzollern helped get one of their friends(or family I cant find my book on Prussian history) on the Polish throne.
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@XIronChancellorX Of course Duchy of Prussia was, or more precisely its Dukes were vassals, some of which were also Dukes of Brandenburg, as well as the Grand Masters of the Order were since Henry VI Reuss von Plauen. Find that book.
You mean the August III Wettin? Muscovites helped him, but the only time he spent in Poland was when his Saxony was occupied by Prussia. Poland was an elective monarchy, a republic, its Kings haven`t had even legislative power since 1505.
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus When I say Prussia I mean later Prussia. the one after Brandenburg annexed the Duchy of Prussia. Brandenburg under the Hohenzollern were not vassels of Poland. Maybe the rulers before may of been pro-Polish but when the Hohensollern bought Brandenburg for Hungarian gold they were no-ones vassel.
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@XIronChancellorX And why to pick up some certain period out of the whole history?
Seems you don`t understand these times, Hohenzollerns were pledging thier vassalage as the Dukes of Prussia, not of the Brandenburg or any other land. They definetly weren`t "pro" Polish, they just had no other choice.
Sure they were, as the Dukes of HRE were the vassals of the Emperor, but Duchy of Prussia was never in the HRE.
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus No I do. That book also talks about pre-1600's. Mainly about the Hohensollerns. Hey man I am done with this debate. Football just kicked my ass and I just dont even feel like talking so see ya. Maybe another time.
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@MaximusProteus
Elector Joachim II married Princess Hedwig of Poland in 1535. In 1564 his wife's brother was on the Polish throne. He did that so he could aquire Prussia and make his two sons named as secondary heirs to the duchy. Joachim helped get his wife's brother on the throne.
This is from the book "Iron Kongdom: The Rise and Downfall of Prussia, 1600-1947"
XIronChancellorX 6 months ago
@XIronChancellorX Very funny :)
Sorry to say, but Sigismund the "Old" died in 1548 and than Sigismund August was crowned. No idea how could some secondary German Duke influence the election of the Senate, especially if Sigismund August was the only male Jagiellon. I`m afraid your book is not very serious.
So which sons of them aquired that right if none was Joachim`s sucessor? Tell me about the original source, i mean a deal between Sigismund and Joachim (if that book has referrences).
MaximusProteus 6 months ago
Jeder Schuß ein Russ
Jeder Stoß ein Franzos.
Jeder Tritt ein Britt
Jeder Klaps ein Japs.
:)
I recommend polish comedy movie "C.K. Dezerterzy"
Santiago8240 7 months ago
Comment removed
Santiago8240 7 months ago
ich bin preusse !!!!!!!!!!!!
33veteranen 7 months ago
Really glorious march!
EisenerGustav 7 months ago
danke "edigan"
Hemmelmark 7 months ago
Aha, wusste gar nicht, dass Preussen früher mal ein "Lehen" (english=fief) von Polen war... interessant.
Hemmelmark 7 months ago
@Hemmelmark Das ist mir allerdings auch gänzlich neu...
KoelscheUltras 7 months ago
Ich sehe lauter Kriegsbilder, was soll an dem sinnlosen sterben glamourös sein ?
formeandyou83 7 months ago
@formeandyou83 ...Preussen war kein Staat der sich auf eine große Völkische Geschichte oder Territoriale Integrität berufen konnte. Es war im Grunde kein Staat mit einer Armee sondern eine Armee mit einem Staat. Und da der Militarismus und das Soldatentum die Grundpfeiler der preusischen Gesllschaft waren, so lieberal und fortschrittlich sie auch gewesen sein mag, wird man im Zusammenhang mit Preußen immer Bilder von Krieg und Soldaten sehen. Auserdem wurde dieser Marsch anlässlich des Sieges
xFeindkontakt 7 months ago
@formeandyou83 über Frankreich im deutsch Französischem Krieg kompniert, aus dessen Ergebnis die Gründung des Kaiserreiches resultierte.
xFeindkontakt 7 months ago
701 leute haben in geschichte nicht aufgepasst als Faschismus an der reihe war
mondmanaikin 7 months ago
Heil dir großes Preußische Reich würd es dich doch nur geben und nicht diesen heutigen Staat
MRScheich88 8 months ago
Komiker!
Communaysard 8 months ago
00:05 BOTH BARBARIANS TOGETHER
unfukkkmee 8 months ago
@unfukkkmee
Ich geb dir gleich babaren du ami angelsachse oder was du fürn Burger-fresser bist!
MrStefan83 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrStefan83 DEATH TO GERMS FUCK UR LANGUAGE MANEATER CREATURE
unfukkkmee 8 months ago
@unfukkkmee Go Home you MOFU aho!
SayeretMatkal01 8 months ago
@SayeretMatkal01 DIE
unfukkkmee 8 months ago
@MrStefan83 Ihr bayern seid Kannibalen und Leichenficker! Ich hasse Euch! God bless America du alter Drecksack! Euer Inzucht-Gesocks wird in den naechsten zweihundert Jahren aussterben und von den Tuerken niedergefickt! Ich scheisse auf Euer Bayern und das ist noch zuviel der Ehre ...
SpaceCowboy641 8 months ago
@SpaceCowboy641 Ich verzeihe Dir
armeselige Kreatur
Gott schütze Dich
Gott schütze Bayern
Auf König Ludwig II
Auf den Kaiser
Und das die Idioten in unserem Land nicht die Oberhand gewinnen
misterReinhard 8 months ago
@misterReinhard Hast Du nicht Dein "Heil Hitler" vergessen? Das fehlte noch ...
SpaceCowboy641 8 months ago
@SpaceCowboy641 Einfache Frage, Du bist schon irgendwie ein kleiner Depp, oder???
Ich habe zu Deiner Mutter, dieser Nutte, immer weider gesagt, Dir soll Dir kein Haschisch in die Muttermilch mischen. Weiß man schon wer Dein Vater ist? Einer von den 3 Albaner´n, die 2 Russen, oder war es doch einer von Ihren Neggerfreunden. Gelegtnlich tippe ich nachwievor auf den Ochsen, weil Du Dich wie ein Rindviech benimmst.
Kleiner Typ
Schiess Dich selber auf den Mond, dann ist dieser auch bewohnt.
misterReinhard 8 months ago
@misterReinhard Hahahahaha! Danke fuer Deine multikulturellen Komplimente !
SpaceCowboy641 8 months ago
@SpaceCowboy641 Haha, ich wußte es gleich, Deinen Pap, kann man nicht merh ermitteln, kleiner Bastard.
Ich bin mir sicher Du kriegst von allen Dresche, von den Neonazis, den den Moslems, den deutschrussen, Albanern, egal Du bist einfach ein Bastard
misterReinhard 8 months ago
@unfukkkmee What is your problem mr. Faggot?
DutchPetriot 8 months ago
@DutchPetriot GO BACK IN SIBERIA ASSHOLE AND IF U SO '' MAN '' SHOW ME UR PIC COME ON CHICKEN
unfukkkmee 8 months ago
GO GALLIA
unfukkkmee 8 months ago
Excellent music from a great era . . . long live the Kaiser!
MrBazza86 8 months ago
47 sind Franzosen.
HeiligesReich2 8 months ago 38
This is a terrific rendition. The tuba obligato makes it a masterpiece. Howard says that the 3d Brandenbergers marched to Verdun in '16 singing this. Does anyone know the words?
jastdi2 9 months ago
FUR GOTT FUR KONIG UND FUR VATERLAND !
Primalineapadana 9 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@nato1265 Ziitat aus Wiki: "Das Gebiet des Ordensstaat Preußens wurde durch den nicht anerkannten Zweiten Frieden von Thorn 1466 geteilt: in das der polnischen Krone direkt unterstehende Königliche Preußen ......"
walzi2001 9 months ago
@nato1265 Ziitat aus Wiki: "Das Gebiet des Ordensstaat Preußens wurde durch den nicht anerkannten Zweiten Frieden von Thorn 1466 geteilt: in das der polnischen Krone direkt unterstehende Königliche Preußen ......
walzi2001 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Some of the murders by the German BND known to the public:
Uwe Barschel (politician), Jürgen Möllemann (politician), Heiner Gehring (author), Martina Pflock (political activist), Tron (internet activist), Karl Koch (political/internet activist), Bernd Seiffert (human rights activist), Kirsten Heisig (author/judge), Fritz Bauer (persecutor of the Frankfurt Auschwitz processes), Markus Bott (human rights activist).
Google the names and check out my channel and homepage.
wwwtotalitaerde 9 months ago
FYI Poland didn't create prussia but it came to be after the teutonic order converted to protestantism.
KZSRZ 9 months ago
Ich bin bayer! Aber ich bewundere das alte Preussen
Bierfass70 10 months ago 40
@Bierfass70 Bayern braucht Preussen!!! Ich bin Preuss (Ich bin in Ostpreussen geboren). Heil Kaiser dir!
59Skott 9 months ago
@Bierfass70 Hey alter Barzi
Danke sehr
SayeretMatkal01 8 months ago
@Bierfass70
Why? Because they kept serfdom until their Napoleonic defeat? Because they impressed not only their own people but also foreigners by the thousands? Because of their absolutism? Because Frederick II, by his own admission, started wars for the sake of war? You southern Germans in the Austrian sphere has traditionally been champions of republicanism and civic liberty (surprising since you're mostly Catholics), the first ones in Continental Europe.
Faxe90Swe 7 months ago
@Faxe90Swe Why? Preussen hat Deutschland nach Jahrhunderten der Zersplitterung wieder vereint.Der katastrophale Westphälische Friede von 1648 wurde 1871 endlich überwunden.
Preussen begann zu beginn des 18 Jhr als kleines,armes Land seinen Aufstieg zur Grossmacht.Aufgrund
zweier herrvoragender Könige Friedrich Wilhelm I. und sein Sohn Friedrich II.
Bierfass70 7 months ago 7
@Bierfass70
It's funny, cause it was the northern german states (Saxony, Brandenburg, etc..) the ones to blame for the "disastrous" Treaties of Westphalia and the following French conquests. Cause they were so butthurt with the Empire and the Habsburgs that they didn't have a problem betraying the Empire and selling out German lands to their masters the French, Swedes, wahtever, etc...
So long for the Prussian "saviours" LOL!! besides half of them were french huguenots....
Sky1green 1 week ago
@Bierfass70
Ich bin Russe, aber bewundere dat Preussen auch! )))
anatoliduhanin 7 months ago
@Bierfass70 Da krieg ich gleich einen Ständer
stefan1708 6 months ago
0:18 - "Prussian Tribute" by Jan Matejko: Albrecht Hohenzolern on the knees made tribute for Polish king Zygmunt I Old in Krakau XD It was disgrace for Prussia, not "gloria".
SlavicWolfPL 10 months ago 3
@SlavicWolfPL
Well, technically, it wasn't the modern Prussia. By modern I mean it wasn't the nation-state of Prussia, it was the duchy of Prussia in the feudal sense and homage was a natural part of vasallage. In a way, Poland created the Prussian state by setting up the Prussian duchy. My point is, Piefke was refering to the modern Prussia in his march, and so Matejko's painting is really out of place.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
0:19 Prussia under Polish dictate !!!
Matti8482 10 months ago
as for your EU-IT is diear in the extream, and for there will be one extream-imeciablle consume that is your issue-ingress-but, and self...!!!
montgomery217 10 months ago
Tisk, tisk everybody: Just accept the EU.
croscream 11 months ago
@croscream
No thanks.
WSWarthog 11 months ago
@WSWarthog
Why is that?
croscream 11 months ago
@croscream
Because it's undemocratic. If there should be a union of nations with the authority to make important decisions affecting economic policy, immigration, the law and so forth then that body should be democratically elected by the people of those nations and not appointed by bureaucrats and politicians.
WSWarthog 11 months ago 2
@WSWarthog
Is there a good and valid reason why the EU can not be made more democratic?
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Let me quote from Lord of the Rings:
"There is only one Lord of the Ring, only one who bends it to his will, and he does not share power! "
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
Do you have any valid reasons?
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
If you don't regard being undemocratic as a valid reason then you can't be helped.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
So: You can't think of any solid reason why the EU can not be made more democratic?
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
When in history has any unaccountable, undemocratic institution spontaneously democratized itself?
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
The founding of the republic of Rome, when a group of noblemen hunted down Superbus after his son raped a woman and then instituted a republic. But that wasnt what i asked, i asked if it is possible to make the EU more democratic and not to do so spontaneously. Do you think it is possible to make the EU more democratic?
PS: This is your last chance to give a correct and honest awnser, leftist.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
That wasn't a "spontaneous" democratization. That was the culmination of many generations of despotism and growing dissatisfaction with the centralized power structure of the nobility. I'm not willing to let the EU prove how rotten it is over the course of decades or perhaps even centuries for the sake of the possibility of some vaguely democratic union in the far future.
And no I don't believe it's possible to make the EU democratic and history is on my side of the argument.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
Again, you refuse to awnser my questions: I did not ask you if the EU can be made democratic, i asked you if it can be made ''more democratic'': Unless you want to claim that the EU is a full-out totalitarian system.
PS: Adding a second element in this discussion ''Can a democracy be establised without any historical ground for it'' goes outside of the bounds of this discussion.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
I don't want the EU to be "more democratic". I want to be democratic outright. Whatever concessions are made that fall short of proper representational democracy are inconsequential. And the EU may not be completely totalitarian but that doesn't mean it's a good thing. The only way it could be rescued is to start over from scratch with ONE referendum per country and let the people of Europe decide.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
I have every ounce of respect for what you want, i want to see a contintental European superstate that is both democratic, conservative and social-liberal at the same time: I am not seeing it.
But my question was: Can the EU be made more democratic, even if you wan't it to be completely democratic and even if it is only an inch or jab.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Well now you're provoking an entirely different question which concerns whether or not it is possible for there to exist a system which is "partly democratic". I don't believe that it's possible because the internal power struggles, mechanisms of exercising power, forms of political activity and so on force the political system either to accept public consent as its foundations or to reject it. Any attempt at merely having "more democracy" would be nothing more than permisiveness on
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
But you do agree that it is possible.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
the part of the ruling powers. And as soon as a fundamentally important issue arises on which the people disagree with the powers they will have to be removed most likely by force or political upheaval or else accept that the will of the body politic is irrelevant and slip into a state of consenting servility. In light of this, it's clear to me that it can not be made more democratic in any meaningful sense unless it becomes fundamentally democratic.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
Yes, or no: Lefty.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
From my last reply "it's clear to me that it can not be made more democratic ".
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
Yes, or no: Leftist man.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
No.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
So via the treaty of lisbon both Germany, France, UK and Italië have 29 seats in the council of Europe and the European council even though they have different population numbers; the European parliament on the other hand has MEP numbers more closely resembling population numbers but no exactly.
Is it your opinion that it is impossible for the EU to change only one, only one single MP seat in the European parliament to make the the devision more fair?
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
More fair but not more democratic.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
What is the difference.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Fairness is not a system of determining who governs a country, democracy is. Fairness is completely separate concept dealing with the perceived justness, equity or logicality of something political or not. For example you may have a benign dictator who is completely fair in the way he governs his country, but nobody would say that by virtue of this his country's political system may be characterized as democratic.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
I think you are mistaken: The change that i describe is both fair and democratic because it is intrinsically fair, and also makes the system more democratic.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
It may be fair but that under no circumstances makes it more democratic. Democracy means the people are provided with a free choice to elect the administration of the state by means of a popular vote. So the only way to make the EU more democratic would be to initiate steps by which all important figures are elected by popular vote and not appointed by other politicians or bureaucrats.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
But the first step is being made: The vote is divided more by population, making the vote; though only by an inch, more popular and therefor more democratic.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Is it your claim that we are completely unable to vote anyone into the European parliament?
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
In my view this is an example of the permissiveness I was talking about earlier. I'll happily eat my humble pie if this ends up making an actual difference, but naturally it won't.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
I do not understand your reaction.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
I simply don't like power being concentrated in the hands of unaccountable, unelected circles and believe every development that furthers that concentration of power is extremely corrosive to our democracy.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
You are starting your game again: I asked if it is your opinion that we are completely unable to vote politicians into the EU parliament.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Ofcourse we're able to vote politicians into the parliament, but how much power does the EU parliament actually have?
PS. I'm not playing any game, but youtube only puts one comment in the chain of replies so it makes it hard to keep track of the argument.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
So we CAN vote people into parliament, but we CAN'T make it more democratic not even by an inch and the EU is totalitarian, but actually it has little power. It seems to me you are contradicting yourself.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
It seems that way because you're confusing separate concepts with each other (like fairness and democracy). I never said that the EU has little power, but that the EU parliament has little power.
WSWarthog 10 months ago
@WSWarthog
So you admit that since the EU parliament is slightly democratic, it can be made more democratic.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Do you mean to say, that making the amount of representation one country has in the EU correspond to its population is democratic? That the most populous countries should have more seats?
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
Yes, though that would not be a fine strategy because then the other countries would complain that the bigger countries can push them around.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Exactly, the Americans realized it in 1787, so why shouldn't we. Each country shall have an equal vote, just as each individual within the country shall have. If not, we have majoritarian tyranny. The French idiots have already insulted my country by suggesting that they would share the Presidency of the CEU with us, as if we couldn't handle it. Well, we proved them quite wrong.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
So you are willing to sacrifice a more democratic system, for a more fair system?
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Democracy should not be about two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat, not in any context. If so, we might as well go back to absolutism.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
I don't understand what you mean here; please explain.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream If we have a "democratic" democracy, instead of a "fair" democracy, it only boils down to two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat - majoritarian tyranny.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
Could you please give a definition of democracy that would include both you idea of a ''democratic'' democracy and a ''fair' democracy: Because i believe the two concepts contradict eachother.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Yes, they do.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@croscream
I think, within a nation, democracy should be direct, not representative. That's a democratic and fair democracy, worthy of its name. Representative democracy serves only to increase the ranks of depots, living on tax money. In the ideal democracy there are no politicians tied to the state apparatus, only administrative officials and clerks executing the direct will of the people.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
So it is your opinion that the definition of democracy should always be a type of ''fair'' democracy and not the kind of ''populist'' democracy where everyone gets equal votes.
But since the EU parliament uses the ''fair'' democracy type and allows nations like Malta more seats in the parliament so that they can have more influence: The EU parliament is by your definition atleast a little bit democratic, which contradicts your previous claim that the EU is not at all democratic.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Direct democracy is, by all means, populist democracy, where everyone gets an equal vote. I don't really see how you were able to misunderstand me on that point.
The EU is not at all democratic when it comes to the peoples within countries - it is only democratic on the level of nations.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
The point is that you contradict yourself: Clearly there is a democratic element within the EU, only if it is very small and you said before that there wasn't.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
You better get used to it - contradictions are plentiful in this world.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
So you don't believe in anything that makes sense: By your opinion the EU is both democratic and not democractic. Am i right?
PS: If you think you can feel superior because you are able to think in contradicting terms you are making a big error: You are only capable of thinking in contradicting terms.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Oh don't worry, I leave all the superiority complexes to you.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
You are starting to insult me: That means i am winning.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
First, how have I insulted you? I on my part was quite insulted when you started talking about superiority pretending.
"Except for the hereditary part" was a direct continuation of my previous post. Hence I meant that the politicians in my country falls under the definition of aristocracy except for the hereditary part. I wasn't challenging your definition.
As for what you say about "fair" and "direct" democracy, you've lost me.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@croscream
It's also a question of definitions. The general consensus is that the EU is democratic, and most dictionaries and scholars would also define it as such. By my standards, there have never been a democracy, only bad and less bad failures at democracy. But it also depends on what mood I'm in... one day I am all for populist democracy, the next I'm an ardent supporter for classical democracy. I haven't set any definite bearings on that issue, I'm of the pragmatic nature.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
Good: By trying to appear disinterested i might stop taking you serious.
If there has never been a real democracy, then the democracy is a hollow word without substance, a form of idealist political rethoric like communism and anarchism. Does it bother you to use a common and accepted definition for democracy?
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
Have you taken me serious this whole time? And I who stopped taking you seriously at the second reply... sorry, we haven't been arguing on even terms, it seems.
And yes, I would very much agree that democracy is about as utopian as communism. And yes, the common definition bothers me, because all cases of modern democracy (and thus the modern application of the term "the people") boils down to an elected aristocracy - if they´re not aristocrats from the beginning... more
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@croscream
... then their political post will make them aristocrats. That's why I want direct democracy without politicians.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago
@Faxe90Swe
I am sorry: But the accepted definition of aristocrats is that it is a hereditary titel associated with land and a manor or great house. The real meaning you want is most likely plurocrats, technocrats or beurocrats.
Also your claim that you want a democracy without politician, contradicts your previous claim that you wanted a fair democracy: Clearly a direct democracy must always be a fair democracy.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
I am sorry: I wanted to say; clearly a direct democracy can't be a fair democracy.
croscream 10 months ago
@croscream
I think it would be a fair democracy. It would be even fairer that the more money you pay in tax, the more votes you have.
Can't speak for your country, but in mine our politicians pretty much falls under that definition.
Faxe90Swe 10 months ago