Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (38)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • The Royals are net contributors to the Exchequer through the Crown Estates; George III surrendered the revenues from this estates in exchange for the Civil List. If we abolish the monarchy, not only do we lose a significant part of our history and constitution, we lose the revenues they generate. Our constitition, with its separation of grandeur and majesty from the politics. We never had fascism or communism in this country, it is one of the most stable democracies in the world.

  • @Bastiat90 The royals are fascist! So 'technically' the UK is a fascist state...

  • Some peppers are green, and are therefore envious.

  • @Bastiat90 Saying obscure things doesn't add any credit to your argument.

  • A nor does a smear by association. ''The royals are fascists so the UK is a fascist state.'' That is a pathetic argument.

  • @Bastiat90 Fair point. My argument really didn't have any substance.

  • Perhaps we could have a decent one now? A good debate is seldom seen on youtube so you could perhaps give 3 reasons why you are opposed to monarchy and I'll respond in kind. You don't have to, just a thought.

  • Comment removed

  • this is such a fucked up world, the sooner it ends the better.

    God will make sure the good people will triumph.

  • Comments made on the Independent's website indicate Royalism and the upkeep of the status quo that glorifies the bloody history of an ancien regime renowned for land grabbing and bleeding the common man to death is kept alive by those who don't understand the feral connection between elitism and slavery. These parasites have been feeding off the land their forefathers grabbed by force by renting it out to those who already occupied the land. Its a scandalous history dressed up in ermine & fur

  • Who would come to Britain if we had no royal family?

    nobody!

  • @CRAIGMASON1971 I think the fact that Britain attracts a significant number of tourist, of which only a minority come to see attractions related to the royal family, proves that assertion wrong. Also, the royal palaces of France attract millions of visitors every year, and they haven't had a monarchy for quite some time.

  • @CRAIGMASON1971 are you honestly saying the only interesting thing about britain is the royal family????

  • Listen to what he says about India !!!

  • @oceanbound222 Yes We all know the British killed around 43 million people in India, but what about all the things Britain did to raise the population of India, which saved atleast 70 million people? Nobody apart from Niall Ferguson says anything about that. Also I am a defender of British history not an apologist. Long Live the British Empire.

  • Also, no problem with his anti-monarchy stance which is his democratic right but making shit up about inviting Hitler to bomb more British cities????

    And what is anyones problem with the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight? It's a commemoration of the sacrifices made by servicemen and women from many, many countries around the world that defended us all from Hitler and the Nazis - something worth remembering!

  • What an idiot! Any country that once had an empire or overseas colonies committed atrocities...that was a different time and thankfully most of us don't live there anymore, unlike Mr Hari.

    At one time the USA wasn't particularly enlightened in its treatment of Native Americans and African Americans - slavery, displacement, land-grabbing, massacres.

    As for inviting heads of state from countries that torture, thank goodness Obama wasn't invited - waterboarding in Guantanamo Bay anyone?

  • @Quicksilver1271 Would you say the same for the death marches of Bataan and Sandakan? Let bygones be bygones, no compensation needed for the war veterans?

  • @Quicksilver1271

    why are you taking him out context?

    he was making a point about how most British people (in particular defenders of the monarchy) are not well aware of their history of the monarch and empire. and he has a point. not that Britain was unique in some way that it carried out crimes.

    its takes real genius to miss the context.

    so well done.

  • These guys are missing the point, any country would have done the same thing at the time. It is just a question who has power at the time.

  • @photis666 That's not true at all. China could've dominated the world when they were a super power, but they didn't. One of the reasons the west became the dominating force in the world was due to their rich history of violence, war and conquering.

  • @KeebRocks Violence has been a part of human history, both in the west and the east. That is undeniable. Chinese warfare is notorious for it, Chinese military thinking is still taught in military schools around the world( Sun Tzu's Art of war i.e) What separates the east from the west is imperialism. Western nations have a longest history of colonization, which is made more evident because it is far better documented. My point is that if it wasn't for the UK it would have been someone else.

  • @photis666 I agree that both China and the West have bloody pasts. But I was referring to how in the west was extremely violent and barbaric at a time when China was already rather civilised. China at that point could have conquered the world and indeed they travelled the world (Zheng He's voyages). It was the triad of violence, war and colonialism which consequently guaranteed the wests supremacy. So to say that any country would have done the same is a fallacy as is exemplified by China.

  • @KeebRocks Britain could have crushed China yet it just took Hong Kong. Which should still be British.

  • @mynoon1999 yea becuase just taking land off people makes it right yeh?

  • @vitaemecha No because we make those people's lives better.

  • Britain has an Empire you know. Well, you'd think so if you had the misfortune to see any of today's fiasco.

  • But to be accurate, you can't REALLY tell ANY kid in other "democracies" (more accurately corporatocracies) that they can grow up to become head of state. That's obviously not fucking true.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • What a hypocrisy of Britain, Syrian and Bahrain were dis-invited due to their violent crack down which is great.

    But Royal couple were saluted by over fly of WWII Bomber which most likely have Bombed thousand of innocent German woman children and elders in WWII.

  • Fuck the Royal Circus/Joke

  • The Royal Family allows a passive form of British nationalism. In the crowds there is all different forms of ethinic groups which brings people together. People can become the prime minsister and run the country, as the monarchy is merely representative. Johann is in the minority.

    With tourism : the idea of a national identity, makes us distinctive from other countires and is part of a toursit package, not to mention all the merchandise.

  • @paulhughes1379 I believe Johann Hari's (aswell as mine and many others such as Tony Benn) position is that you CAN have a royal family, but they shouldn't be the head of state whom should be democratically elected.

  • @paulhughes1379

    Passive nationalism? Bollocks. If it hadn't been for Blair, these clowns would have been out on the street after Diana died. That you actually consider an unelected, tax-payer subsidised family of Germans as being representative of Britain speaks volumes.

    Passive Republicanism is the majority in Britain. The monarchy, like other regressive and laughable notions, will inevitably die out.

    France makes treble from its 'tourism package' than Britain does. Your argument is invalid.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more