I'm sure those people in fancy dress are just plain old human beings. I'd love to know what gives them the audacity to prance around in costume and command all the nation to watch. Moreover, how do they convince the populace to care?!?!
@2havago Erm, I've read your question three times, and I still don't understand who I'm supposed to have done something to. I'll assume you're making the point that if I was in power I'd screw everything up. Well, I'd make a republic, where everyone is taught civics in schools, and everyone knows what sovereignty is. Ah yes, back in the days of olde, when people knew who they were :)
May I then put it this way: If you had complete power (over this country) to do as you wish, what would you do about those who have "the audacity to prance around in costume and command all the nation to watch." and about "the populace" they have "convinced to care" ?
@2havago Ah, I've already answered that question :) Make England a republic, and teach pupils in schools what their sovereignty means. At the moment our Queen is purely for show, she has given her powers away to the government, but in a republic with educated domiciles the Queen would actually have meaning again. The pointless tradition is what people currently enjoy, I would give it back it's meaning.
@2havago I would not "do" anything to them, they are entitled to their views, whether they're stupid or not. I would usher in a new culture, not annihilate the old one by force. The people that currently think the fanfare important will gradually get older, and die away. As we see already, the youth of today consider the royal fanfare far less important than the seniors. The process I speak of is already under way to some extent.
.... and in this new "Ideal Country" of yours (If I may call it that?) - who will dictate what is "stupid or not"? - And what if the majority of people (youth included) did not want to "usher in a new culture"?
@2havago It's actually already the law of the land in England, it's called Common Law. Basically don't punch anyone, or trick them into giving you something. After that, it's a part of life that you will be insulted by others, but not assaulted. Legal stuff and Stupid stuff gets sorted out in different courts of whatever authority. I believe in freedom, y'see.
With respect; I do not understand any part of your reasoning! Is it possible to be more specific?
e. g. Is it only your own freedom you believe in, or in the freedom of those with "the audacity to prance around in costume" ? - And if you can, please tell me which law decides whether they are "stupid or not"?
@2havago Those that prance around in costume are provided for by people they have never met. They enslave them to do so, that's a Democratic Capitalist state. But where the bulk of the public understands that they have no right to rule another, there is a necessity to take responsibility for ones own actions and needs. There is of course the need to provide for the elderly, and the young, but the law is not enforced by the corporate police, they are detained by good men and juried by peers.
May I ask you again: Is it your own freedom you believe in, or in those who have "the audacity to prance around in costume"? - And please also state which law decides whether they are "stupid or not"
incredible isn't it that our NATIONAL flag is lowered and replaced them with a Royal flag when the Queen enters our democratically ELECTED National Assembly?
@Myles0Harcourt nope, the people are sovereign and they should bow before no King or Queen - you can worship the aristrocrats if you want, I believe in democracy.
The undemocratic" argument is one of the oldest and weakest in the Republicans' book. A democracy is where the people who makes the laws are elected. That is the case here. The Queen does not make laws; instead she signs into law whatever the democratically elected representatives tell her to.
@Myles0Harcourt democracy is a very old argument, it is not the weakest argument but rather the strongest argument that republicans can make, i realise that for a supporter of the aristocracy that is difficult to understand.
The Queen enjoys enormous powers to make laws under the Royal Prerogative. She can makes laws by virtue of Orders-in-Council. Orders-in-Council can cover any area not covered by statute. She can dismiss the Prime Minister and declare a State of Emergency if she wants.
The powers she enjoys and the powers she excercises are comletely different things. that is something supporters of a republic find difficult to -or do not want to- understand.
@Myles0Harcourt you started off by saying that the 'damn crooks' meaning people democratically elected by the people had to show deference to an aristocrat and now you say the queen doesn't exercise real power? republicans are rational, we follow logic not kings and queens who belong in fairy stories.
They have to show deference to her, but they can still tell her what to do.
Why do Kings and Queens belong in fairy stories? The reason you get them in fairy tales but not republics is because monarchies are actually interesting. Sadly, too many republicans either look down upon everything they consider "irrational" or they simply get abusive. The latter kind are funnier, but at least you appear prepared to talkare in the mature former section.
@Myles0Harcourt the United States of America is probably one of the most interesting countries in the world and also a republic. The first, second, third, fourth and fifth richest countries in the world are all republics. The oldest and most stable democracy in the world is also a republic. Kings and Queens belong in fairy tales because they appeal to people who believe in magic and fantasy instead of aspiring to be whatever they want to be including their country's first citizen (Head of State)
What do you mean they appeal to people who believe in magic and fantasy? I don't believe in magic and I'm sure that most other monarchists don't either.
I am sure that the political wrangling in the USA, and the physical scenery is indeed very interesting. But if you want pageantry, pomp and elegance, you need to come to the UK. That is what a lot of people like to see, but I haven't seen much of that in America.
@Myles0Harcourt you don't believe in magic and fantasy but you want to see pomp and elegance. What do you think pomp and elegance symbolises if not fantasy? We have people dressed up as if it was the 16th century! We have someone sitting on a golden throne wearing a crown...yeah that's not fantasy. Get real! Wake up from your delusions, the country is a democracy and yes that's a messy business but life is messy. If you want fantasy or pomp go to the theatre, I don't want to pay for it.
Are you just confused between reality and non reality? Fantasy and magic do not exist, as they are made up by the human imagination, but pomp and elegance do exist (unless this video is made up). I'm sorry if this stuff isn't to your taste, but you don't actually have to look at it do you? No doubt there are some things that you enjoy that are not to my taste- unless it's bear baiting or cat burning I'm unlikely to want to ban it.
@Myles0Harcourt unfortunately fantasy and magic exist in the minds of working class people who support the aristocracy. the difference is I'm paying for your deluded fantasies, that's the difference, you want to watch kings and queens and fairy tales and princesses - that's your choice in a democracy - but why do I have to pay for your fantasy?
May I ask what you like doing? Do you ever go to public events, or sports matches? Unless you sit at home all day, i am quite sure that my taxes have paid for you.
May I ask what you like doing? Do you ever go to public events, or sports matches? Unless you sit at home all day, I am quite sure that my taxes have paid for you.
@Myles0Harcourt do you read my posts before you comment or do you just do what deluded rightwingers do which is mouth off? I told you I didn't want to pay for royalty doesn't that imply that I pay taxes, how do you think I pay MY taxes if I sit at home all day? Fool. Yes I do go to public events and sports matches, the difference is, idiot, that I don't ask other people to pay for it.
So I don't have to pay for the policing, nor for the area around to be cleaned up after the hordes of spectators have vomited over it and dropped litter?
And just for argument's sake, it is possible to pay taxes by staying at home... it's called working from home.
Talking of mouthing off too, I am simply replying in the same vein as you.
@Myles0Harcourt how can you compare fairy tale ceremonies like the one above with policing? is there a country in the world that doesn't have a police force? policing is not optional, fairy tale queens are. i agree there are things that we are all forced to pay for things we don't like but most of the time they at least have some purpose other than satisfying idiots who would prefer to restore aristrocracy.
Stop trying to take us off the point. You do not enjoy this ceremony, yet you have to pay for it. I don't enjoy sports matches yet I have to pay for those. The main point is not the policing or which part of the event I have to pay for; it is the very existance of the event. In this the cost comes with the carriage and the clothes. Wih a football match it comes with the damage caused to the local area by the fans (or prevention thereof).
And may I also ask the purpose of a sports match? Oh yes, it's satisfying idiots who want to watch balls being kicked around and/or men/women running, jumping and fighting.
@Myles0Harcourt yes because that's what this debate is about isn't it? the merits of a football match! why not debate the merits of the aristocracy that you support. I don't give a shit about a sports match. the people who attend sports matches pay for their tickets and their clubs contribute to policing costs. also the football fans as taxpayers are entitled to policing like the rest of the population. compare that with the parasites who get round-the-clock royal protection for idiots like you.
Oh dear, getting frustrated are we? Turning to abuse now...
What I am saying is that there are some things you dislike, and which I like , which you have to pay for, and there are things that you like, which I dislike that I have to pay for. You say you attend sports matches, which I am not interested in personally, yet I don't call you an idiot for being interested in them.
@Myles0Harcourt i'm getting frustrated by the fact that you are incapable of making any logical argument or staying on topic. now read this carefully: I DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR YOUR FAIRY TALE FANTASY. NO-ONE PAYS FOR A FOOTBALL MATCH EXCEPT A FOOTBALL FAN!!! Policing is Policing, even if you hold a peaceful demonstration, the Police will turn up even if you don't want them there.
No you just don't understand: FOOTBALL MATCH IS AN EXAMPLE. Use a concert or cheese rolling if you prefer. I have to pay for the policing of it, yet I don't go to it. Sometimes you have to pay for things which don't interest you. I don't want to pay for extra elections every year. I don't want to pay for someone who represents only those who voted for him. I want to pay for someone who represents everyone, regardless of political views.
And also: if you entertain some notion of monarchy being more expensive than a republic, let it drop. Most of the original costs of monarchy are also present in a republic, and you have the additional costs of presidential elections (official figures for 2010 showed a cost of £80m for the gen. election) and completely rewriting the constitutional law of the country. On top of that we lose tourism revenues and international publicity generated by events such as the Royal Wedding.
@Myles0Harcourt everything you have said is unsourced, inaccurate shite. you lack a proper education which is why you talk such shit. what you have just stated is so stupid and ignorant that it would be an insult to my intelligence to actually show you why. i thought you had more than one brain cell but i see now you really are completely thick. go on, be thick, i will not debate with a moron.
Most of it doesn't need to be sourced. It is common sense. A republic incurs most of the cost of a monarchy (you need to pay for security even with a president). And obviously an election costs money. And obviously royal events will generate international publicity (look at international coverage of the Royal Wedding). TheTelegraph said 2 Billion people from 180 countries watched the wedding. That is publicity. May I ask which point of mine was "unsourced, inaccurate shite"?
And if you are concerned about my "lack of a proper education" may I suggest you put the Harvard doctorate you no doubt possess yourself into good use and write with proper sentences, capital letters and write intelligently without using insults. Practise what you preach
Yes, I thought you were the one lacking education. Can't hold an argument without abusing. Still, that's the level of most republicans I've come across.
@Myles0Harcourt okay, okay fuckwit, you are right, all tourism to the UK would cease or decline significantly because we become a republic, yup. Nothing to see here folks, try the US, France, Italy, Germany, Russia, China, Ireland...oh wait. And of course everyone knows that there is no way to elect a President except by popular vote (except Germany, Italy, Greece, India). You are so brain-washed, you would actually lick the shit off the Queen's boot if she asked you wouldn't you?
Oh dear, how immature. Can't you argue without resorting to childish abuse? Typical advocate for republicanism.
No doubt I'm so brainwashed that my point that my statement about the constitutional reform needed to become a republic is brainwashed and unsourced. Of coruse I'm not saying we lose most of our tourism revenue, but the Royal Family do bring a tourists here and publicity for the country.
@Myles0Harcourt yes you are brainwashed, only a brainwashed fool would say that elected politicians should defer to an aristocrat. the 'royal family' by which, you brainwashed fool, you mean the house of windsor, brings zero tourists. the tourists come to see castles and palaces not the fucking 'royals' do you think they ever talk to a 'royal' or ever see one? our feudal history would not come to an end any more than french royal history came to an end in 1789! Versailles is still there FFS!
You're getting frantic now. Calm down. You don't need personal attacks or "FFS"s. A fact of life is that people disagree with you, and saying "FFS" isn't going to help you.
Now for the last time, do you or do you or not accept that worldwide events such as the Royal Wedding bring in publicity for this country, bearing in mind the large number of people who watch them?
@Myles0Harcourt no I don't accept the rubbish about increased tourism because an aristocrat married a 'commoner' (i.e. self made millionaire's daughter). have you got any statistics to back up your completely unfounded brain-washed beliefs? you are completely brain-washed, why do you think one person should be head of state because of nothing more than accident of birth? do we have hereditary doctors? hereditary dentists? hereditary speakers of the commons? answer that question.
So the fact that sevaral hundred million to over a billion people around the world watched the "aristocrat marrying a commoner" was not publicity for this country? Whether you agree with the event or not, it certainly advertised the country. What is head of State here. The monarch has no real power, she just does what she is told to by the PM. And tbh, she does a rather good job. 60 years service to this country is more than any Politician I can think of.
@Myles0Harcourt several hundred million people watch Eurovision Song Contest! Several billion watch Formula One racing, about a half a billion people have Facebook accounts! what is your point?!! Advertise this country?!!! Come on, have some faith in the country's artists, industrialists, sportsmen and women, academics, writers, scientists, engineers etc. You are BRAINWASHED.
@shahideurope Yes, F1 and Eurovision do have huge audiences, and are good publicity for the host country. The difference is that they are international competitions focussing on many competing teams. The Royal Wedding was focussing solely on Britain, people watched British Royalty get married. There were no competing foreign couples. In terms of the other professions you list, I have to think quite hard to remember the last time several hundred million people tuned into a writer or scientist.
@Myles0Harcourt that's your response? do you have a degree or a levels or anything like that? there's no difference in public spectacles, the royal wedding is a spectacle just like a us president's inauguration is a spectacle, just like the olympics is a spectacle. have you heard of the author J K Rowling? do you know how many hundreds of millions of people have read her books? the difference between Rowling and the parasites that you worship is that she earned her wealth through talent.
The difference between Rowling and the Royal wedding is that Rowling's claim to fame is writing books about a fictional wizard with little or no bearing on reality (you seem to have a chronic inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality, judging by your earlier comments about fairy tales) whereas this was a real event which brings international attention and scrutiny on this country and lets us show off. Do you consider Harry Potter to Bring the same attention on Britain?
No, I think you'll find polite and respectable debate way above your level. You are immature, abusive and unable to argue without displaying those disqualities. Sadly I can't expect much better from a republican. I have yet to find one who is able to argue without getting abusive whenever someone disagrees with him. Still, it demostrates to everyone the awful mess republicans could get this land into. So maybe I should be glad.
@Myles0Harcourt I plead guilty to being abusive towards you, I don't regret and I won't apologise for it. You are, without a doubt, the thickest person with whom I have ever debated this issue. Yes, that is abusive and yes that is also 100% accurate.
@Myles0Harcourt Don't feed the republican troll! Don't feed him! He lives off of it! Just joking.
Anyways, Republicans are always the same, here in Portugal, as well as in the UK. They get desperate, they make personal attacks on your person. And I can't truly understand why. Over 60% want to restore the Serbian Monarchy, and 35% Portuguese want the Braganzas back. Only the future will tell what it will be for us, but I hope one day we can be a Constitutional Monarchy like the UK.
By default I support every monarchy and I support the restoration of every overthrown one. I feel lucky to live in a successful monarchy in Britain, and I hope that one day you in Portugal can have ther same opportunity. I for one could never live to see my country's traditions go under and I hope that you can have yours restored one day.
@shahideurope yeh i watched a documentary on the state opening n why they do it n i seen the rehursals and he explained in behind the scenes why its slammed in his face and how he has to knock
@2havago I am British and fed up not only with these people--not The Queen but her brattish children and decayed cousins--and with this three-ring costume circus! I don't think it serves us well. It's a pompous bore and drag on our political life. I think only the monarch and heir should have official status; the Peers should be replaced with a Senate; the monarch should go to parliament in Rolls with motorcycle escort not a rickety carriage & mounted guardsmen. I am free to say what I think!
Everyone is free to say what they think in this country. It is your right to judge and condemn as you see fit. And you have already made it clear what is in your heart.
Like you I am also free to air my opinions; and I say this: I am grateful to be a native of this country and feel privileged to be able to witness its wonderful traditions first hand!
However, I am truly saddened when I hear from any who would calumniously try to bring it all down.
@2havago I am sorry to stress you, but you live off tradition and ceremony is ultimately boring, and when it is arcane and rickety it becomes laughable. I love this country too. I did my national service; I've paid my taxes; I've voted in every election. But in my opinion, things are going down, not forward. Most of the reasons are not the fault of ordinary, hard-working people, unless they allow it to continue unchecked. The Queen is fine; the rest of them should just be ordinary citizens.
if you don't like ceremony don't watch it and let those who do like it watch it. Like if you don't like football, stay away from Wembley and let football fans go there.
why does every person who has a different government type have to say something bad about ours, if we said something about yours we would get bombarded with bullshit
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Aren't all human beings supposed to be equal in the eyes of God? Why do Brits and many other European countries persist with this outdated monarchy tradition.....kings, queens, princes, princesses, barons, peers....why do you want to grant special birthright privileges to these people...what makes them better to you?
Although, I can understand it's part of the British/European traditions...but, traditions do change with time...you need to come to terms with the 21st century
@Writerandartiste Why should everybody become a republic? I'm Dutch and my country is a monarchy. yet we are rated more democratic than the US. The sovereign serves as our head of state while policy is made by the political parties. We don't need a chosen head of state to be democratic.
Also here the nobility is not better than others. People are equal but some are born with that title. You can't just take that away from them because others don't have a title.
@Myles0Harcourt Youtube represents free, international democratic media to me so I will comment on whatever video I want to. And, I'm being quite respectful in my comments so what is your problem?
@Myles0Harcourt I am British, and I am fed up with the way our particular monarchy is run and especially with the behavior of some of the The Queen's relations!
@TheSirRoberto So you won't have a problem with me addressing your queen as simply "Elizabeth" instead of "Your Majesty" (you can call her whatever way you want). That's what we do in my country. Our Prime Minister is a public "servant" (yes, you got that one right). Although, Gandhi is respectfully called Gandhiji by some Indians or even Father of the Nation (which sounds so stupid and ridiculous really), I call that old, dead man only Gandhi! I even made a positive vid of him on my channel
@Writerandartiste I was with a Princess once. An American lady said very nicely that as an American she found it impossible to call someone Your Royal Highness or anything of the kind. Without batting an eye, the Princess said, Oh, just call me. . . and she said her name. The two became fast friends, and there was never a murmer about it.
@Writerandartiste Because the alternative is just so flawed. Constitutional monarchy where we have a neutral head of state supported by most of the population at the top instead of a politician who more than half the country will not have actually voted for and one who is utterly hated by so many because of their political background and loyalties.
We have a better system and it is our system and part of our national heritage.
@TheBritishWatcher I have nothing against constitutional monarchy, but I feel the particular family has let us all down very badly. I am not at all satisfied by the way the British monarchy is functioning at present. We need a lot reforms.
@Writerandartiste The UK does not have a codified constitution. The monarchy serves as a constitutional guardian; to advise, guide and warn the government of the day.
[Ref: Democracy Index, Economist Intelligence Unit] Twelve of the world's 26 "full democracies" are constitutional monarchies; in fact the "full democracy" category has the highest number of constitutional monarchies than any other category. Why change something when it works so damn well and is a symbol of 1000yrs of history?
@Writerandartiste - there is certainly that romantic notion of everyone being "equal in the eyes of god", but down here on earth, people just don't operate that way. Human beings are naturally monarchical, as it's a brute & unchangeable fact.
@Writerandartiste What is supposed to be and what is are two different things. In Italy a paedophilic crooked prime minister has the Italian parliament engaged 24/7 in one Act after another designed to keep him out of prison. He is above the law and the majority of Italian want it that way. In England, The Queen is the law and her ex-daughter-in-law caught red handed peddling influence for a high price is not even prosecuted. The powerful and privileged exist. Why do you propose to do about it?
It is a Mace and was “created in 1876. Black Rod is in theory responsible for carrying the Mace into and out of the chamber for the Speaker of the House of Lords”
She is Sergeant at arms, Jill Pay (traditionally spelled “Serjeant”): “The Serjeant at Arms carries the mace in the Speaker's Procession each day and also into the House of Lords during the State Opening of Parliament. The Serjeant at Arms is the only person in the House of Commons allowed to carry a sword”
@undercover355 It's called the mace. It's the symbol of the Crown in the House of Commons. It's presence is a sign that the House is sitting lawfully.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
fking hilarious stiff arses XD
..... but despite the entertainment, monarchy is to be abolished. completely! and the royals should be expropriated immediately, since the era of enlightenment has left us with the wisdom that they are not sooooo much where they are by gods grace only
"recovers from the global economic downturn" the real downturn hasnt even happened yet, when all the government's go bankrupt from excessive debt they cant pay off and their currencies become worthless you'll finally see the real
This is so much better than the State of the Union. Why can't the United States have a Speech from the Throne? What are we, afraid of the Commonwealth??
I am not exactly sure, but I think they are traditionally carried by certain (or senior) officials of the houses of parliament. I may be corrected in this.
@2havago 'tis indeed a mark of power within the Houses. They were originally big staves but were made smaller as fashion changed (Black Rod is an example of the half-way point). You'll notice the Lord Great Chamberlain (the first one we see with a thin white rod) raise it up and then bring it down on a couple of occasions. That's to simulate the original motion, which would have been to bang his staff on the floor.
@Tzimnewman3 No you won't. For you are free to do so, and I am free to critizise you (without offending/ attacking your dignity). But this ceremony, for more "bullshit" it might seem, is what makes the United Kingdom different (in a positive way). It only shows that the UK did not break its links with its past as several countries in Europe did (which was/ is a mistake). This shows the UK is one of the best, if not the best country in the world.
It is out loss...nothing like knowing your country was founded because a bunch of rich, white guys didn't want to pay taxes or pay for their fair share of supporting their rear ends...oh well...we can always hope that one day we will correct out mistake
Not forgetting that with all our countries' faults. (And what country in the world doesn't have them) You and I belong to the free world ... In Democracies ... You and I, as individuals, cannot expect to have everything our own way, but, instead, we should all respect (and back) our leaders, once they are voted in ... Unfortuanately, I hear comments, from both inside the US and from the UK, that are often to the contrary! ... :p
I like how John Bercow is practically running towards Black Rod to leave the Commons, whereas Michael Martin used to amble by the labour bench at about 2mph!!!
@mightywindmill102 it is nearly 800 years old....I do hope we can always watch this as this is where democracy comes from....too many I fear are ignorant of history. I absolutely love how I can read "runnymeade" in the magna carta (1066 for the ignorant) and understand it as a human being almost 900 years later.....
@mightywindmill102 As do I. I love this country and am proud of our long and rich history, culture and traditions. The Monarchy embodies that history.... we'd become so bland and ordinary without it.
5:04 Dennis Skinner getting Ready :)
DMaddox2010 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
DMaddox2010 3 weeks ago
God Save The Queen!! God Save The Queen long live HM Elizabeth the second
thedarklordvoldemot2 1 month ago
God Save Dennis Skinner
blehface3000 2 months ago 2
3:25 - The page boy in the back on the viewer's left carrying the Queen's train is Arthur Chatto, the grandson of the Queen's late sister.
TheUnknown285 2 months ago
I know thats a statue of Churchill on the left, but who is the dude on the right at 4:40?
emmers57 3 months ago
@emmers57
That is David Llyod George.
IDontLiveTodayJH 3 months ago
God save the Queen.
Myles0Harcourt 4 months ago 10
I like the queen.
emmers57 5 months ago 5
I'm sure those people in fancy dress are just plain old human beings. I'd love to know what gives them the audacity to prance around in costume and command all the nation to watch. Moreover, how do they convince the populace to care?!?!
danrayson 6 months ago
@danrayson
....and what would you have done to them, or the many who may not share your views?
2havago 6 months ago
@2havago Erm, I've read your question three times, and I still don't understand who I'm supposed to have done something to. I'll assume you're making the point that if I was in power I'd screw everything up. Well, I'd make a republic, where everyone is taught civics in schools, and everyone knows what sovereignty is. Ah yes, back in the days of olde, when people knew who they were :)
danrayson 6 months ago
@danrayson I asked you a question (re your comments) I have made no point, nor did I say you have done anything (or "something") to anyone.
2havago 6 months ago
@2havago I still don't understand. Perhaps you miss-read my comment?
danrayson 6 months ago
@danrayson
May I then put it this way: If you had complete power (over this country) to do as you wish, what would you do about those who have "the audacity to prance around in costume and command all the nation to watch." and about "the populace" they have "convinced to care" ?
2havago 6 months ago
@2havago Ah, I've already answered that question :) Make England a republic, and teach pupils in schools what their sovereignty means. At the moment our Queen is purely for show, she has given her powers away to the government, but in a republic with educated domiciles the Queen would actually have meaning again. The pointless tradition is what people currently enjoy, I would give it back it's meaning.
danrayson 6 months ago
@danrayson
With respect: You still haven't answered my question. What will you do about those who may not share your views?
2havago 6 months ago
@2havago I would not "do" anything to them, they are entitled to their views, whether they're stupid or not. I would usher in a new culture, not annihilate the old one by force. The people that currently think the fanfare important will gradually get older, and die away. As we see already, the youth of today consider the royal fanfare far less important than the seniors. The process I speak of is already under way to some extent.
danrayson 5 months ago
@danrayson
.... and in this new "Ideal Country" of yours (If I may call it that?) - who will dictate what is "stupid or not"? - And what if the majority of people (youth included) did not want to "usher in a new culture"?
2havago 5 months ago
@2havago It's actually already the law of the land in England, it's called Common Law. Basically don't punch anyone, or trick them into giving you something. After that, it's a part of life that you will be insulted by others, but not assaulted. Legal stuff and Stupid stuff gets sorted out in different courts of whatever authority. I believe in freedom, y'see.
danrayson 5 months ago
@danrayson
With respect; I do not understand any part of your reasoning! Is it possible to be more specific?
e. g. Is it only your own freedom you believe in, or in the freedom of those with "the audacity to prance around in costume" ? - And if you can, please tell me which law decides whether they are "stupid or not"?
2havago 5 months ago
@2havago Those that prance around in costume are provided for by people they have never met. They enslave them to do so, that's a Democratic Capitalist state. But where the bulk of the public understands that they have no right to rule another, there is a necessity to take responsibility for ones own actions and needs. There is of course the need to provide for the elderly, and the young, but the law is not enforced by the corporate police, they are detained by good men and juried by peers.
danrayson 5 months ago
@2havago And about "stupid or not", I think the question is "Do you understand?" :)
danrayson 5 months ago
@danrayson
May I ask you again: Is it your own freedom you believe in, or in those who have "the audacity to prance around in costume"? - And please also state which law decides whether they are "stupid or not"
2havago 5 months ago
I try to watch this every year to see Black Rod get the door slammed in his face and to catch a glimpse of that killer statue of Churchill
emmers57 6 months ago 2
A hard working lady. God save the queen.
thr33wisemonks 6 months ago
This pageantry will never die.
BassChanter 8 months ago
Nice to see that the government has the QUEEN to answer to if they do anything wrong (1:25)
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
I`m sure I hear some bloke say "Bugger off" as the door to The House of Commons re-opens.
valarmanwe 9 months ago 4
@valarmanwe
It does sound like it.
2havago 9 months ago
@2havago
probably the arch traitor, Dennis Skinner.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@valarmanwe It'll have been Dennis Skinner, Ye Olde Typical Union man
taxiride1 9 months ago
@valarmanwe Sounded like Dennis Skinner to me
adam4757 9 months ago
@valarmanwe that was Dennis Skinner.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope That does not surprise me.
valarmanwe 8 months ago
@valarmanwe me too 4:54
SJIMVIC 6 months ago
I would of thought that someone would say "And now Her Majesty, The Queen of England, Elizabeth II" But they didn't. I disappointed. =/
TheVasilisas 10 months ago
I'm almost positive I shot dice with Black Rod.
BottomlessBen 10 months ago
@BottomlessBen
Did you shoot a great big seven?
2havago 10 months ago
dennis skinner is a national treasure!!!
shahideurope 10 months ago
@shahideurope
National traitor more like.
Myles0Harcourt 9 months ago
incredible isn't it that our NATIONAL flag is lowered and replaced them with a Royal flag when the Queen enters our democratically ELECTED National Assembly?
shahideurope 10 months ago
@shahideurope And the problem is?
celloswiss 9 months ago
@shahideurope Doesn't bother me in the slightest. It's a ceremony. I'm sure the crooks in the commons can handle it, they're big boys afterall..
pugilistofpower 9 months ago
@shahideurope It just goes to show that those crooks damn well have to show deference to somebody.
And remember also that the flag is the flag of the United KINGDOM.
Myles0Harcourt 9 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt nope, the people are sovereign and they should bow before no King or Queen - you can worship the aristrocrats if you want, I believe in democracy.
shahideurope 9 months ago
@shahideurope
The undemocratic" argument is one of the oldest and weakest in the Republicans' book. A democracy is where the people who makes the laws are elected. That is the case here. The Queen does not make laws; instead she signs into law whatever the democratically elected representatives tell her to.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt democracy is a very old argument, it is not the weakest argument but rather the strongest argument that republicans can make, i realise that for a supporter of the aristocracy that is difficult to understand.
The Queen enjoys enormous powers to make laws under the Royal Prerogative. She can makes laws by virtue of Orders-in-Council. Orders-in-Council can cover any area not covered by statute. She can dismiss the Prime Minister and declare a State of Emergency if she wants.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
The powers she enjoys and the powers she excercises are comletely different things. that is something supporters of a republic find difficult to -or do not want to- understand.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt you started off by saying that the 'damn crooks' meaning people democratically elected by the people had to show deference to an aristocrat and now you say the queen doesn't exercise real power? republicans are rational, we follow logic not kings and queens who belong in fairy stories.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
They have to show deference to her, but they can still tell her what to do.
Why do Kings and Queens belong in fairy stories? The reason you get them in fairy tales but not republics is because monarchies are actually interesting. Sadly, too many republicans either look down upon everything they consider "irrational" or they simply get abusive. The latter kind are funnier, but at least you appear prepared to talkare in the mature former section.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt the United States of America is probably one of the most interesting countries in the world and also a republic. The first, second, third, fourth and fifth richest countries in the world are all republics. The oldest and most stable democracy in the world is also a republic. Kings and Queens belong in fairy tales because they appeal to people who believe in magic and fantasy instead of aspiring to be whatever they want to be including their country's first citizen (Head of State)
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
What do you mean they appeal to people who believe in magic and fantasy? I don't believe in magic and I'm sure that most other monarchists don't either.
I am sure that the political wrangling in the USA, and the physical scenery is indeed very interesting. But if you want pageantry, pomp and elegance, you need to come to the UK. That is what a lot of people like to see, but I haven't seen much of that in America.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt you don't believe in magic and fantasy but you want to see pomp and elegance. What do you think pomp and elegance symbolises if not fantasy? We have people dressed up as if it was the 16th century! We have someone sitting on a golden throne wearing a crown...yeah that's not fantasy. Get real! Wake up from your delusions, the country is a democracy and yes that's a messy business but life is messy. If you want fantasy or pomp go to the theatre, I don't want to pay for it.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
Are you just confused between reality and non reality? Fantasy and magic do not exist, as they are made up by the human imagination, but pomp and elegance do exist (unless this video is made up). I'm sorry if this stuff isn't to your taste, but you don't actually have to look at it do you? No doubt there are some things that you enjoy that are not to my taste- unless it's bear baiting or cat burning I'm unlikely to want to ban it.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt unfortunately fantasy and magic exist in the minds of working class people who support the aristocracy. the difference is I'm paying for your deluded fantasies, that's the difference, you want to watch kings and queens and fairy tales and princesses - that's your choice in a democracy - but why do I have to pay for your fantasy?
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
May I ask what you like doing? Do you ever go to public events, or sports matches? Unless you sit at home all day, i am quite sure that my taxes have paid for you.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@shahideurope
May I ask what you like doing? Do you ever go to public events, or sports matches? Unless you sit at home all day, I am quite sure that my taxes have paid for you.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt do you read my posts before you comment or do you just do what deluded rightwingers do which is mouth off? I told you I didn't want to pay for royalty doesn't that imply that I pay taxes, how do you think I pay MY taxes if I sit at home all day? Fool. Yes I do go to public events and sports matches, the difference is, idiot, that I don't ask other people to pay for it.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
So I don't have to pay for the policing, nor for the area around to be cleaned up after the hordes of spectators have vomited over it and dropped litter?
And just for argument's sake, it is possible to pay taxes by staying at home... it's called working from home.
Talking of mouthing off too, I am simply replying in the same vein as you.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt how can you compare fairy tale ceremonies like the one above with policing? is there a country in the world that doesn't have a police force? policing is not optional, fairy tale queens are. i agree there are things that we are all forced to pay for things we don't like but most of the time they at least have some purpose other than satisfying idiots who would prefer to restore aristrocracy.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
Stop trying to take us off the point. You do not enjoy this ceremony, yet you have to pay for it. I don't enjoy sports matches yet I have to pay for those. The main point is not the policing or which part of the event I have to pay for; it is the very existance of the event. In this the cost comes with the carriage and the clothes. Wih a football match it comes with the damage caused to the local area by the fans (or prevention thereof).
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@shahideurope
And may I also ask the purpose of a sports match? Oh yes, it's satisfying idiots who want to watch balls being kicked around and/or men/women running, jumping and fighting.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt yes because that's what this debate is about isn't it? the merits of a football match! why not debate the merits of the aristocracy that you support. I don't give a shit about a sports match. the people who attend sports matches pay for their tickets and their clubs contribute to policing costs. also the football fans as taxpayers are entitled to policing like the rest of the population. compare that with the parasites who get round-the-clock royal protection for idiots like you.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
Oh dear, getting frustrated are we? Turning to abuse now...
What I am saying is that there are some things you dislike, and which I like , which you have to pay for, and there are things that you like, which I dislike that I have to pay for. You say you attend sports matches, which I am not interested in personally, yet I don't call you an idiot for being interested in them.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt i'm getting frustrated by the fact that you are incapable of making any logical argument or staying on topic. now read this carefully: I DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR YOUR FAIRY TALE FANTASY. NO-ONE PAYS FOR A FOOTBALL MATCH EXCEPT A FOOTBALL FAN!!! Policing is Policing, even if you hold a peaceful demonstration, the Police will turn up even if you don't want them there.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
No you just don't understand: FOOTBALL MATCH IS AN EXAMPLE. Use a concert or cheese rolling if you prefer. I have to pay for the policing of it, yet I don't go to it. Sometimes you have to pay for things which don't interest you. I don't want to pay for extra elections every year. I don't want to pay for someone who represents only those who voted for him. I want to pay for someone who represents everyone, regardless of political views.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@shahideurope
And also: if you entertain some notion of monarchy being more expensive than a republic, let it drop. Most of the original costs of monarchy are also present in a republic, and you have the additional costs of presidential elections (official figures for 2010 showed a cost of £80m for the gen. election) and completely rewriting the constitutional law of the country. On top of that we lose tourism revenues and international publicity generated by events such as the Royal Wedding.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt everything you have said is unsourced, inaccurate shite. you lack a proper education which is why you talk such shit. what you have just stated is so stupid and ignorant that it would be an insult to my intelligence to actually show you why. i thought you had more than one brain cell but i see now you really are completely thick. go on, be thick, i will not debate with a moron.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
Most of it doesn't need to be sourced. It is common sense. A republic incurs most of the cost of a monarchy (you need to pay for security even with a president). And obviously an election costs money. And obviously royal events will generate international publicity (look at international coverage of the Royal Wedding). TheTelegraph said 2 Billion people from 180 countries watched the wedding. That is publicity. May I ask which point of mine was "unsourced, inaccurate shite"?
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@shahideurope
And if you are concerned about my "lack of a proper education" may I suggest you put the Harvard doctorate you no doubt possess yourself into good use and write with proper sentences, capital letters and write intelligently without using insults. Practise what you preach
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt fuckwit, this is youtube.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
Yes, I thought you were the one lacking education. Can't hold an argument without abusing. Still, that's the level of most republicans I've come across.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt okay, okay fuckwit, you are right, all tourism to the UK would cease or decline significantly because we become a republic, yup. Nothing to see here folks, try the US, France, Italy, Germany, Russia, China, Ireland...oh wait. And of course everyone knows that there is no way to elect a President except by popular vote (except Germany, Italy, Greece, India). You are so brain-washed, you would actually lick the shit off the Queen's boot if she asked you wouldn't you?
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
Oh dear, how immature. Can't you argue without resorting to childish abuse? Typical advocate for republicanism.
No doubt I'm so brainwashed that my point that my statement about the constitutional reform needed to become a republic is brainwashed and unsourced. Of coruse I'm not saying we lose most of our tourism revenue, but the Royal Family do bring a tourists here and publicity for the country.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt yes you are brainwashed, only a brainwashed fool would say that elected politicians should defer to an aristocrat. the 'royal family' by which, you brainwashed fool, you mean the house of windsor, brings zero tourists. the tourists come to see castles and palaces not the fucking 'royals' do you think they ever talk to a 'royal' or ever see one? our feudal history would not come to an end any more than french royal history came to an end in 1789! Versailles is still there FFS!
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
You're getting frantic now. Calm down. You don't need personal attacks or "FFS"s. A fact of life is that people disagree with you, and saying "FFS" isn't going to help you.
Now for the last time, do you or do you or not accept that worldwide events such as the Royal Wedding bring in publicity for this country, bearing in mind the large number of people who watch them?
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt no I don't accept the rubbish about increased tourism because an aristocrat married a 'commoner' (i.e. self made millionaire's daughter). have you got any statistics to back up your completely unfounded brain-washed beliefs? you are completely brain-washed, why do you think one person should be head of state because of nothing more than accident of birth? do we have hereditary doctors? hereditary dentists? hereditary speakers of the commons? answer that question.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
So the fact that sevaral hundred million to over a billion people around the world watched the "aristocrat marrying a commoner" was not publicity for this country? Whether you agree with the event or not, it certainly advertised the country. What is head of State here. The monarch has no real power, she just does what she is told to by the PM. And tbh, she does a rather good job. 60 years service to this country is more than any Politician I can think of.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt several hundred million people watch Eurovision Song Contest! Several billion watch Formula One racing, about a half a billion people have Facebook accounts! what is your point?!! Advertise this country?!!! Come on, have some faith in the country's artists, industrialists, sportsmen and women, academics, writers, scientists, engineers etc. You are BRAINWASHED.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope Yes, F1 and Eurovision do have huge audiences, and are good publicity for the host country. The difference is that they are international competitions focussing on many competing teams. The Royal Wedding was focussing solely on Britain, people watched British Royalty get married. There were no competing foreign couples. In terms of the other professions you list, I have to think quite hard to remember the last time several hundred million people tuned into a writer or scientist.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt that's your response? do you have a degree or a levels or anything like that? there's no difference in public spectacles, the royal wedding is a spectacle just like a us president's inauguration is a spectacle, just like the olympics is a spectacle. have you heard of the author J K Rowling? do you know how many hundreds of millions of people have read her books? the difference between Rowling and the parasites that you worship is that she earned her wealth through talent.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
The difference between Rowling and the Royal wedding is that Rowling's claim to fame is writing books about a fictional wizard with little or no bearing on reality (you seem to have a chronic inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality, judging by your earlier comments about fairy tales) whereas this was a real event which brings international attention and scrutiny on this country and lets us show off. Do you consider Harry Potter to Bring the same attention on Britain?
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt fuckwit, that's the end of the debate, you are a complete moron, this level of debate is beneath me.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
No, I think you'll find polite and respectable debate way above your level. You are immature, abusive and unable to argue without displaying those disqualities. Sadly I can't expect much better from a republican. I have yet to find one who is able to argue without getting abusive whenever someone disagrees with him. Still, it demostrates to everyone the awful mess republicans could get this land into. So maybe I should be glad.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt I plead guilty to being abusive towards you, I don't regret and I won't apologise for it. You are, without a doubt, the thickest person with whom I have ever debated this issue. Yes, that is abusive and yes that is also 100% accurate.
shahideurope 8 months ago
@shahideurope
Oh please don't apologise. People like you make the monarchist's job a whole lot easier.
Myles0Harcourt 8 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt Don't feed the republican troll! Don't feed him! He lives off of it! Just joking.
Anyways, Republicans are always the same, here in Portugal, as well as in the UK. They get desperate, they make personal attacks on your person. And I can't truly understand why. Over 60% want to restore the Serbian Monarchy, and 35% Portuguese want the Braganzas back. Only the future will tell what it will be for us, but I hope one day we can be a Constitutional Monarchy like the UK.
AvatarMarxon90 6 months ago
@AvatarMarxon90
By default I support every monarchy and I support the restoration of every overthrown one. I feel lucky to live in a successful monarchy in Britain, and I hope that one day you in Portugal can have ther same opportunity. I for one could never live to see my country's traditions go under and I hope that you can have yours restored one day.
Myles0Harcourt 6 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt no the Royal Standard is not the flag of the United Kingdom.
shahideurope 9 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt
Sorry if I was unclear.
I meant the Union Flag is the flag of the United Kingdom.
Myles0Harcourt 9 months ago
when the dude has the door slammed in his face is funny n how the politicians are so casual about it all
shiozza 10 months ago
@shiozza you don't get it, do you?
shahideurope 10 months ago
@shahideurope yeh i watched a documentary on the state opening n why they do it n i seen the rehursals and he explained in behind the scenes why its slammed in his face and how he has to knock
shiozza 10 months ago
God save her Magesty Queen Elizabeth II she is such an admirable woman God bless her and her royal family.
Madonnadevotedfan 10 months ago
Get rid of all this exaggerated poppycock!
mc0558 10 months ago
@mc0558
Wouldn't it be better to get rid of all who would condemn and judge?
2havago 10 months ago 7
@2havago I am British and fed up not only with these people--not The Queen but her brattish children and decayed cousins--and with this three-ring costume circus! I don't think it serves us well. It's a pompous bore and drag on our political life. I think only the monarch and heir should have official status; the Peers should be replaced with a Senate; the monarch should go to parliament in Rolls with motorcycle escort not a rickety carriage & mounted guardsmen. I am free to say what I think!
mc0558 10 months ago
@mc0558
Everyone is free to say what they think in this country. It is your right to judge and condemn as you see fit. And you have already made it clear what is in your heart.
Like you I am also free to air my opinions; and I say this: I am grateful to be a native of this country and feel privileged to be able to witness its wonderful traditions first hand!
However, I am truly saddened when I hear from any who would calumniously try to bring it all down.
2havago 10 months ago 13
@2havago I am sorry to stress you, but you live off tradition and ceremony is ultimately boring, and when it is arcane and rickety it becomes laughable. I love this country too. I did my national service; I've paid my taxes; I've voted in every election. But in my opinion, things are going down, not forward. Most of the reasons are not the fault of ordinary, hard-working people, unless they allow it to continue unchecked. The Queen is fine; the rest of them should just be ordinary citizens.
mc0558 10 months ago
@mc0558
I am saddened, not stressed!
A very wise man once said: (of which I paraphrase) "You must be the change you wish to see in the world"
And I suggest it is very easy to find faults and limitation in others. But nigh impossible to see one's own.
2havago 10 months ago 4
@mc0558
if you don't like ceremony don't watch it and let those who do like it watch it. Like if you don't like football, stay away from Wembley and let football fans go there.
Myles0Harcourt 10 months ago
@2havago
4:43
Shit he's coming, don't let him in!
Then he comes and knocks.
gundamWWW 5 months ago 2
why does every person who has a different government type have to say something bad about ours, if we said something about yours we would get bombarded with bullshit
TheSirRoberto 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Aren't all human beings supposed to be equal in the eyes of God? Why do Brits and many other European countries persist with this outdated monarchy tradition.....kings, queens, princes, princesses, barons, peers....why do you want to grant special birthright privileges to these people...what makes them better to you?
Although, I can understand it's part of the British/European traditions...but, traditions do change with time...you need to come to terms with the 21st century
Writerandartiste 1 year ago
@Writerandartiste
It is called "Respect"
I respect God, I respect Christ, I respect Peace, I respect the Queen, I respect Gandhi, I respect your President and I respect you.
2havago 1 year ago 4
@Writerandartiste Why should everybody become a republic? I'm Dutch and my country is a monarchy. yet we are rated more democratic than the US. The sovereign serves as our head of state while policy is made by the political parties. We don't need a chosen head of state to be democratic.
Also here the nobility is not better than others. People are equal but some are born with that title. You can't just take that away from them because others don't have a title.
oggieismijncreatie 1 year ago 3
@Writerandartiste
You don't have to live in a monarchy, so you have no right to comment on other democracies' systems. It's just the way we are.
Myles0Harcourt 1 year ago
@Myles0Harcourt Youtube represents free, international democratic media to me so I will comment on whatever video I want to. And, I'm being quite respectful in my comments so what is your problem?
Writerandartiste 11 months ago
@Myles0Harcourt I am British, and I am fed up with the way our particular monarchy is run and especially with the behavior of some of the The Queen's relations!
mc0558 10 months ago
@mc0558
Sure we should give the Queen more power.
Myles0Harcourt 10 months ago
@Writerandartiste its what makes us different from you, so were not all robots wiht the same government type :)
TheSirRoberto 11 months ago
@TheSirRoberto So you won't have a problem with me addressing your queen as simply "Elizabeth" instead of "Your Majesty" (you can call her whatever way you want). That's what we do in my country. Our Prime Minister is a public "servant" (yes, you got that one right). Although, Gandhi is respectfully called Gandhiji by some Indians or even Father of the Nation (which sounds so stupid and ridiculous really), I call that old, dead man only Gandhi! I even made a positive vid of him on my channel
Writerandartiste 11 months ago
@Writerandartiste I was with a Princess once. An American lady said very nicely that as an American she found it impossible to call someone Your Royal Highness or anything of the kind. Without batting an eye, the Princess said, Oh, just call me. . . and she said her name. The two became fast friends, and there was never a murmer about it.
mc0558 10 months ago
@Writerandartiste Because the alternative is just so flawed. Constitutional monarchy where we have a neutral head of state supported by most of the population at the top instead of a politician who more than half the country will not have actually voted for and one who is utterly hated by so many because of their political background and loyalties.
We have a better system and it is our system and part of our national heritage.
TheBritishWatcher 11 months ago
@TheBritishWatcher I have nothing against constitutional monarchy, but I feel the particular family has let us all down very badly. I am not at all satisfied by the way the British monarchy is functioning at present. We need a lot reforms.
mc0558 10 months ago
@Writerandartiste The UK does not have a codified constitution. The monarchy serves as a constitutional guardian; to advise, guide and warn the government of the day.
[Ref: Democracy Index, Economist Intelligence Unit] Twelve of the world's 26 "full democracies" are constitutional monarchies; in fact the "full democracy" category has the highest number of constitutional monarchies than any other category. Why change something when it works so damn well and is a symbol of 1000yrs of history?
KC253 11 months ago
@Writerandartiste - there is certainly that romantic notion of everyone being "equal in the eyes of god", but down here on earth, people just don't operate that way. Human beings are naturally monarchical, as it's a brute & unchangeable fact.
mrlopez2681 10 months ago
@Writerandartiste What is supposed to be and what is are two different things. In Italy a paedophilic crooked prime minister has the Italian parliament engaged 24/7 in one Act after another designed to keep him out of prison. He is above the law and the majority of Italian want it that way. In England, The Queen is the law and her ex-daughter-in-law caught red handed peddling influence for a high price is not even prosecuted. The powerful and privileged exist. Why do you propose to do about it?
mc0558 10 months ago
So glad they slam the door in his face. Not without parliaments consent you damn monarchists.
WorshipInTruth 1 year ago
@WorshipInTruth
It is simply tradition; remembered from times of division. Respected by all sides and by respectable people.
It is in Unity that a state truly becomes free.
Unity, one day, could even (possibly?) set the World free. But never with thoughts of superiority and division!
2havago 1 year ago 2
@WorshipInTruth But it's an empty gesture. The House of Commons in powerless. Britain is a prime ministerial dictatorship run by Party hacks.
mc0558 10 months ago
@mc0558 I wont disagree with that statement.
WorshipInTruth 10 months ago
Does anybody know what that big thing the lady picks up on 5.30 is called?
undercover355 1 year ago
@undercover355
It is a Mace and was “created in 1876. Black Rod is in theory responsible for carrying the Mace into and out of the chamber for the Speaker of the House of Lords”
She is Sergeant at arms, Jill Pay (traditionally spelled “Serjeant”): “The Serjeant at Arms carries the mace in the Speaker's Procession each day and also into the House of Lords during the State Opening of Parliament. The Serjeant at Arms is the only person in the House of Commons allowed to carry a sword”
2havago 1 year ago
@undercover355 It's called the mace. It's the symbol of the Crown in the House of Commons. It's presence is a sign that the House is sitting lawfully.
mc0558 10 months ago
GOD BLESS THE QUEEN!!!
324wilson 1 year ago
why do they wear those funny costumes??? its not Halloween
thehulk3010 1 year ago
The British like to kick it old skool. Let them be.
slackerjester 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
fking hilarious stiff arses XD
..... but despite the entertainment, monarchy is to be abolished. completely! and the royals should be expropriated immediately, since the era of enlightenment has left us with the wisdom that they are not sooooo much where they are by gods grace only
bernd9000 1 year ago
@bernd9000
If you mean "BUT by God's grace only" ? ... What better Grace can there be?
2havago 1 year ago
"recovers from the global economic downturn" the real downturn hasnt even happened yet, when all the government's go bankrupt from excessive debt they cant pay off and their currencies become worthless you'll finally see the real
"downturn"
dave997 1 year ago
This is so much better than the State of the Union. Why can't the United States have a Speech from the Throne? What are we, afraid of the Commonwealth??
1221doowesor 1 year ago
Proof that the UK is the best country in the world
drechamanjon 1 year ago 3
A bit embarrassing to be stuck in 1743. Independence please
lNVlCTUS 1 year ago
@lNVlCTUS
Independence is found only in the mind of the free. Not within the minds of those who are embarrassed by heritage.
2havago 1 year ago 17
Why is everyone walking around with rods?
jabajabamaster 1 year ago
@jabajabamaster
I am not exactly sure, but I think they are traditionally carried by certain (or senior) officials of the houses of parliament. I may be corrected in this.
2havago 1 year ago
@2havago 'tis indeed a mark of power within the Houses. They were originally big staves but were made smaller as fashion changed (Black Rod is an example of the half-way point). You'll notice the Lord Great Chamberlain (the first one we see with a thin white rod) raise it up and then bring it down on a couple of occasions. That's to simulate the original motion, which would have been to bang his staff on the floor.
joninlethbridge 1 year ago
@joninlethbridge
Grateful for your informed input! ... Thank you.
2havago 1 year ago
This is bullshit, maybe I'll be locked up in the tower for my comments.
Tzimnewman3 1 year ago
@Tzimnewman3
I have learned from Christ that I am what I utter.
2havago 1 year ago
@Tzimnewman3 No you won't. For you are free to do so, and I am free to critizise you (without offending/ attacking your dignity). But this ceremony, for more "bullshit" it might seem, is what makes the United Kingdom different (in a positive way). It only shows that the UK did not break its links with its past as several countries in Europe did (which was/ is a mistake). This shows the UK is one of the best, if not the best country in the world.
AvatarMarxon90 1 year ago 2
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN
VigisKane 1 year ago 3
long live the queen! =D
Kyeongyee 1 year ago 4
woow amazing!
sneaker24p 1 year ago 2
It is out loss...nothing like knowing your country was founded because a bunch of rich, white guys didn't want to pay taxes or pay for their fair share of supporting their rear ends...oh well...we can always hope that one day we will correct out mistake
jgrisso07 1 year ago
Not forgetting that with all our countries' faults. (And what country in the world doesn't have them) You and I belong to the free world ... In Democracies ... You and I, as individuals, cannot expect to have everything our own way, but, instead, we should all respect (and back) our leaders, once they are voted in ... Unfortuanately, I hear comments, from both inside the US and from the UK, that are often to the contrary! ... :p
2havago 1 year ago
I wish I had this in America :-(...why can't we have a kick ass monarch and all the ceremony that goes with one (sighs)
jgrisso07 1 year ago
we told the british to kiss off in 1776 jgrissopu
histre101 1 year ago
@histre101
You mean the French Spanish and Dutch chielded you from our soldiers.
melonhead82 1 year ago
But you can enjoy this in America, just as I can enjoy things American here in the UK ... And do! ... :p
2havago 1 year ago
Histre101 has a point. You got rid of all the pomp and circumstance. Your loss! :P
mightywindmill102 1 year ago
no, it's a bit corny for my taste. I'm glad it exists in other countries for us to see, but it just wouldn't fit here
rawdawg15 1 year ago
you kooky brits with your castles, and queens.. its just so cute! :P
LPNeptune 1 year ago
Chess? ... :p
2havago 1 year ago
The new Black Rod has a GREAT voice!
FergusMcDopey 2 years ago 5
I like how John Bercow is practically running towards Black Rod to leave the Commons, whereas Michael Martin used to amble by the labour bench at about 2mph!!!
Nosmos 2 years ago 12
I love this tradition we have here. No other country has a culture so steeped in history and tradition as ours. Bloody hell I love Britain.
mightywindmill102 2 years ago 49
We do have wonderful traditions as part of our heritage. let us hope they remain ... :))
2havago 2 years ago
Have to admit I find your traditions and culture admirable
mmorrtt 2 years ago 7
we love you too (wink).l
histre101 1 year ago
@mightywindmill102 it is nearly 800 years old....I do hope we can always watch this as this is where democracy comes from....too many I fear are ignorant of history. I absolutely love how I can read "runnymeade" in the magna carta (1066 for the ignorant) and understand it as a human being almost 900 years later.....
histre101 1 year ago
@histre101 1215, not 1066, but either way it is good to watch.
joninlethbridge 1 year ago
@mightywindmill102 As do I. I love this country and am proud of our long and rich history, culture and traditions. The Monarchy embodies that history.... we'd become so bland and ordinary without it.