My g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g Grandfather was Major General Robert Overton who fought under Cromwell against this bastard. The Overtons are numerous in America and still survive today :) Divine right of kings??? Didn't last too long did it????
Hopefully when HRH prince Charles becomes King he will live up to the regal names of Charles or George whichever he chooses. God save our future King!
james 6 of sotland tho james the 1st he led stuwarts ruled till charles 1 the one that lost his head no monerkey till charles 2 the one who likes to party!!!!!!!!!!!!
@andwqhs He always sympathised with catholicism, but he remained nominally protestant though his reign to avoid trouble. And he converted to catholicism in his deathbed.
what did james do other than be a different religion than parliament? i dont know much about that part of english history but it seems like he got a bad rap.
@mackshayster Well at this time England was a Protestant nation, and James II being a very open Catholic, the country hated him for it. Therefore Parliament sought for a new monarch, and the nearest related one was the Dutch king William of Orange. He invaded, fought James II in Ireland and he went into exile.
James also believed in an absolute monarchy, where the decisions of Parliament did not matter and the king decided everything, which naturally did not go down well.
@DarthMaul8065 It wasn't God's will that made Charles II the king, just Birth, but it was God's will what saw his neck on the chopping block... heh heh.
@DarthMaul8065 What are you saying my Wiki Sources aren't credible, heh heh; I meant Charles the first, smart Ass, It's called a Typo, and I can't edit my posts, My history books are just... somewhere, I’ll have to look for it later, I’ll get back to you on the condition of them, in the meantime, "Put an F’n Sock in it you Cow"... heh heh, sorry couldn't resist. Now have a nice Day.
@DravenWolfe "Damn you" and "smart ass" are comments most unbecoming. If you use such vocabulary, along with other obscenities, you're only degrading yourself.
@DarthMaul8065 Pleaese tell me your teasing me, there are lot worse words then "D" and "A", which I was teasing you, but if you do find those words offensive then I shall refrain from using them, unlike the words some of your fellow Royalists have used against me... heh heh, They make the D and A words look mild.
When people start to say they are speaking for God, I believe they will say anything to maintain power. Henry made up his own religion and said he spoke for God as well. When I've studied the histories of countries, it usually comes down to that. In wars, it's the same thing. God is usually on their side. Whatever god they worship. Hitler didn't. He was at least honest that way. He was the god to himself. People need to believe in something and they usually won't look closely.
@Songsmirth Well... Hitler is a bad example, as he too said that Providence was on his side. And let us not forget the motto of the Werhmacht: "Gott mitt uns" - which was inhenrited from the Prussian army, but never the less, it means "God is with us".
Henry basically did that to confirm his "authority", as several other historical authorities, to manipulate the events to their own cause. It doesn't mean God was really on their side. But that's a more profound and theological matter to discuss.
I just watched the entire "power and the passion" mini-series. It was great. If you liked this clip and are interested in Charles II, I wholly recommend you watch the mini-series. Great king!
I could be wrong here, but despite the flaws of Charles II or any of these monarchs it seems to be that Parliament thought only it knew what was best for a country and its people. If that is the case then what is the point in choosing a king when Parliament could have been its own king?
@xyPERSON Britain needed a King back then. After the death of Charles I Parliament became so corrupt and greedy that they had the same people sit in office for six years without reelection. That is why Cromwell proclaimed himself Lord Protector and ruled as a dictator, he even tried to make that position heretical, and pass it down to his son.
England needed a King to control Parliament and to command the people's loyalty. I think a constitutional Monarchy is the best form of government.
@shahideurope Personally i'd be happy to see Parliament dissolved and have her Majesty rule Kingdom and the commonwealth by herself. My loyalty is to the Monarchy not those corrupt fools in Parliament.
@DravenWolfe Personally i think i might prefer it like that. Democracy is a nice ideal, but it is weak, decadent, and an illusion. Also it is paralysised by debate and disunity when a crisis strikes. Sometimes a strong leader is needed to see to the well being of the nation over the individual.
@AlphaOmega804 Did you even read what I wrote, or just ramble on.... you need a wise ruler, strength is nothing without wisdom but brutality and tyranny...
@AlphaOmega804 So one corrupt person instead of a bunch, I see. one with absolute power to do as he pleases with the populas, such as murder those he deems a threat or live richly off the backs of the Serfs.
@DravenWolfe Look back at history, it was under such regime's that great nations and men have been created. You cannot argue with results. And like i said it is the state that matters, not the individual.
@DravenWolfe And since you don't seem to be responding to what I wrote, i'm going to stop responding to what you write... so next time i'm giong to pretend you are talking about egg shells....
@AlphaOmega804 Let me share with you the same sentiment but only after re-considering ideally the eventual support of these vote's merchants as needed for an absoulte rule. Without it somewhat.... we are incomplete.
@AlphaOmega804 I didn't read what you wrote since you dont' seem to do like wise, so don't bother anymore... if your not going to have an open mind, read what I wrote and counter it properly if you disagree then go away... i'm not reading anything from you anymore you are a waste of my time, and a fool who deserves to have his freedom taken away, plus your internet access. YOu are a sheep, a lamb to be slaughtered by superior minded people who will rule over you as willfully let them do so.
@DravenWolfe I read what you wrote and i answered that sometimes the nation must be put before the person. But you are clearly a pathetic little insect who likes to through your bitch fits around at random people who have tried to have a civilized conversation with you. What a shameful little ant you are, you actually seem to think that your opinions amount to anything with me . You can go rot in a ditch for all i care, and as for your insults, i see them as prove of your ignorance and shame.
@AlphaOmega804 Intresting, I hit a nerve with yah...Intresting... and no you didn't read what I wrote nor really answered back, but more important I find it intresting when certian words set a person off... usually when they explode, it means I hit pay dirt. so calling you a sheep or lamb affects you, why? I know why, people aren't offended by things that aren't true, they laugh it off. by the way I do love insects.
@DravenWolfe Ok i am sorry for what i said, i usually consider myself better then that. I am sorry if i didn't seem to read your comments, i did and i took them into thought when making my reply's. I am sorry for what i said in my last comment, although i do take offence to what you also said. I ask your forgiveness, i do not change my opinions on government, nor will i ask you to change yours.
@AlphaOmega804 You were almost interesting... I only pray your view of the world dies with the old world... and individual liberty and responsibility win out in the end. God help us with people like you, whether you’re Royalist or even a socialist... it leads to one end. when the government has absolute near absolute power... you can have your opinion but that doesn't mean myself and others my mind set will willfully hand over our freedom because of your naivety and romance of a feudal idea.
@AlphaOmega804 Also, I find bugs to be amazing creatures, Ants can lift 10x their weight they also farm cattle (Beetles) and clean the ground, Spiders are master architects spinning their webs, Bees make Honey, and Mantises, move like the wind, ever held one in your hand, watching it stare back at you with the same curiosity, or watch it stalk its prey... I love bugs.. So feel free to call me an insect, they are hardly pathetic, I admire them more then my fellow man at times.
@AlphaOmega804 You cannot ignore human nature... and with your last comment, you showed your true colors, What you think of a bug is what kings have tought of their people, as pathetic bugs to be squashed. It's fine to have an idea and you may have your fantises, but when they interfer with my freedom or the freedom of my brothers and sisters in humanities freedom, then I haveone hell of a problem. NO matter who they are. so keep your kings, but don't expect us to bowe to them.
@DravenWolfe Look i am trying to form a bridge here. I am a royalist, i always have been, i always will be. I keep the opinion that the country would be better off under s supreme head. I do not expect you to agree or anything i am just trying to end what would be a futile argument.
@AlphaOmega804 I’m done with you.... I don't associate with sheep, especially when they are so willfully so, when you decide to be a Lion, then we'll talk. God gave us free will and self- reliance, self-governance, self-responsibility, and I intend to keep mine and defend my fellow humans who want to keep theirs, whomever they are. Your ancestors, perhaps mine as well, would have gladly traded you for the freedom you so willfully hand away.
@DravenWolfe Ok that's that is it!! I tried to be nice, i tried to find a common ground. But you are the most closed minded, arrogant, bitchy people i have ever had the misfortune to come into contact with. If you are so pathetic and so needy that you cannot even try to find a common solution then you are not worth my time. You are not even worth the air you breath! If i get anymore comments from you i will print them out an recycle them, at least then they will be of use to mankind
@AlphaOmega804 I have a common solution, I was just saying that an Absolute Rule isn't it whether it be a king or a govermental body, nothing personal towards a monarch, persay. It's just a matter of that is your belief, I would say the same (Minus the monarch part), to a socialist who believes in the Government should have the power. But I do have an Idea you might like, a form of government that works towards the betterment of the people by forcing the government to heed to them (Let's say).
@AlphaOmega804 HEy Alpha, I know we aren't allies, but I think I need your help on something, or to say, there is a person who posted on my channel calling your bbeloved Henry VIII a pervert, i'm sure if anyone can handle him it would be you or one of your English Royalist buddies... heh heh, have at him.
@DravenWolfe I am a Royalist but i can admit that Henry VIII was not perfect. Tell him Henry built the designs for the Mary Rose and there by the modern day warship. This was the first step to our unrivaled Navy. He also left England a very rich nation due to his religious reforms. Henry had his problems but he helped make England great!!
@AlphaOmega804 Thanks for the Help, and to show my apperciation I shall tell you a secret, i'm not 100% anti-Monarchist (Royalists), I 'm just against an absolute Monarch or Absolute Rule, government, in general.
At that moment, all the members of Parliament must have been thinking..."and to think we restored this asshole to the throne...he's no better than his father." Then their second thought was "and how did we rid ourselves of his father?"
He could send parliament home because secretly he was receiving payment from Louis of France. This to my mind makes his as much a traitor as he condemned and executed father.
@TylerMaple3009 He got revenge on the Irish catholics who massacred a hundred thousand Irish protestants, bet they never told you that. I am an American with Irish heritage but I am not such a tool that I use that as some sort of lame reason to support catholic tyranny.
@WorshipInTruth Can you believe that there are people on here wishing to be ruled by an absolute monarch?? It's enough to make you weep, and think that all who died in WW2 was for nothing.
@jed371 Ok I bought a book the other day on the English Monarchy. You are right, Charles II was a prick, but I don't think he was as much as a douche as Charles I, Oliver Cromwell, or James II.
@MajBlood oh im sorry did you know him intimately? no you didnt so you dont really know anything. so hush yourself.
if you werent there then you have no right to comment on his personality. just because a few books say he was bad..which he wasnt because of the times he lived in doesnt mean what you say is right. so hush canadian
@lokna Oh I didn't know you knew him either. Dick. I can comment on what I damn well please, you stupid American prick. And I think Charles II was not a very good king.
@lokna Wow, Charles II was a prick, but I think you have showed him up. I called you an American, because you insulted me for being Canadian, and in all my years I have shown respect and loyalty to the British Commonwealth and Crown, just as British people I have met have respect me and my country for being loyal allies. I cannot see why you would insult a fellow member of the Empire. You obviously have your allegiances messed up.
@324wilson The King was a cunt and the people are like sheep who look back on history as something to be proud off. There is no pride in having a cunt control the country while ordering the deaths of anyone who does not be his slave.
@Tzimnewman3 I never said that I am "proud" of King Charles. I do not believe in the absolute rule of the Kings. I do, however, believe in the contitution of our "constitutional" monarchy. Nevertheless, I only referred to his speech, which was absolutely wonderful. Just as Elizabeth I (not that I am comparing Charles to the Gloriana) was an absolute monarch yet a great orator. One cannot and should not judge different ages based on what we believe now. We must go back, metaphorically speaking.
@Tzimnewman3 The English Constitution. It maybe not written. I personally would like to see the formal written constitution. But based on hundreds of years of parliamentaty conventions, it has a figurehead role in our society. According to Bagehot, Herbert and Wilson, a "dignified" (rather feminine role). Anyway, it is of no business of yours as to what I believe in. Why should you or anyone else care of what I believe in? Our argument (if that's a right word) was about the speech.
@Tzimnewman3 Because you on it. You asked me a question, there is this inevitability about it on YouTube, I suppose. I think you should read what I said in my earlier reply, "...based on hundreds of years of parliamentaty conventions." These precedents are so entreched that they are taken for granted and it also gives a tone of flexibility to the gov't occasionally. I personally would like a written constitution but then again, I know there is no appetite for that at this moment in the land.
Charles II was definitley the man for the job of restoring the faith in the monarchy, if it had been James who came back in 1660 it would've lasted about five minutes
The idea of hanging , drawing and quartering in a period certainly the foundation of the 18th Century beggars belief. ( Yes, I know you could be burnt at the stake in 1750's Scotland for " knowing" a horse...
Can anyone on YT care to discuss this issue? Who were the MPs Charles executed/ when/ how many?
@Kelly14UK As far as I know he only went after the ones who either A. Voted to have Charles I executed or B. The ones whose names were on his fathers death warrant, the rest he either imprisoned, exiled, fined or simply let go
@Zeruel3 He must have been legally just and logically minded. And straight down the road compassionate and forward thinking . That's why I always find myself drawn to him.
I'm no Royalist, but Charles the Second was a breath of fresh air...
Style, and the disintegration of claustrophobic, and often cruel, backward religious issues and chauvenism all had their roots May of 1660.
Only 15 decades later, we had the Napoleonic period and Industrial Revolution. Fifteen decades PRIOR to Charles....Early 16th Century and the glorified caveman.
Long live the Parliament! Don't you realize that absolute monarchy is absolute tyranny? Long live Glorious Revolution that liberated people from serfdom and gave subjectivity not only to all British, but contributed to political phiolosophy of modern times. King might be good or bad, gallant or mad and as Charles said man could do nothing. It is just like in slavery. They could have these of those masters, but they had allways been servants, slaves.
@tendrebarbare Looking back on history, a monarch who had truly loved the country and its people that he/she governed was probably much better than an elected parliament which produces politicians who represent special interests and only care about their political careers.
Does Parliament REALLY care about the native British people? Does the US Congress REALLY represent the wishes of American citizens? The answer to both is a resounding no.
@Cissy2cute I would never trade sovereignity of myself and whole nation for good policy of a king because kings are different. It doesn't matter what is his name - emperor, king, fuhrer or first secretary. The most stupendous and fundamental question is if people, as a political society has its rights to decide about itself. Ask for example French what do they think about their rulers. The last positively evalueted was Henry IV.
Let me know when Parliament opts to undo several centuries of bigotry and eliminate the prohibition against a Catholic reigning as monarch. Until that step is taken GB will remain what it has been since 1688, a morally bankrupt country.
the monarchy is the safe guard against dictators and reformers who might want to control the power from there selves
and plus everythin in the UK is revolved round the monarchy, it would take millions of £'s to change anything, and just extra voting costs and taxes for a prez
@kanenkitten You're joking, right? I mean, no modern person living in a Constitutional Monarchy, a democracy or a republic should ever wish to go back to autocracy, tyranny & governance without consent ... Truly monstrous. Glad we Americans overthrew the tyrannt King George!
@GeoffreyDinosaurs Amazing how we Americans are so ready to call King George a tyrannt without doing the reasurch. The majoraty of things we blame King George for was not his doing but Parliament. Yeah, he did stupid shit but most of what caused the American Revolution was because of the chosies Parliament made. Get your facts straight.
@mist648 I apologize but it's hard to take one's opinion seriously with the barrage of misspelled words ("reasurch", "majoraty", "chosies"). Since the Crown was the potent symbol of the military & legislative power of G. Britain, it is not rhetorically inaccurate to discuss the revolution as a revolt against the tyranny of King George. Sure, the Parliament enacted the various laws (at his behest) that led to the revolt, but as the sovereign, the King was still the "executive" of the colonies.
@damienvargas: Because we'd then have the stability that we sometimes seem to lack nowadays. Not to mention that you'd have someone who's been brought up and taught to rule
@kanenkitten What if the monarch decides that iphones are witchcraft and against the royal religion? Everyone else on Earth gets to have iphones except us?
@kanenkitten Quite so. We would simply have beheadings for treason, star-chambered proceedings, and corpses under St. Peter in Vincula Chapel. We have Parliament for a reason. We all were quite wont to have absolute monarchs, but they consecutively compelled us into the course upon which we have come. Even today, the Sovereign enjoys the absolute right to deny assent to any act of Parliament whatsoever, this being last exercised by Queen Anne. Today, we have the correct balance.
@melonhead82: But of course. If the govt in the far future ever tried to pass a "major pollution bill" You just know that Prince Charles would use the powers that the monarch has and is fully entitled to do so
@Pilaf1984 On the bright side, people who feel that way probably don't vote.
I wish Power and the Passion had a John Locke cameo. He was Shaftesbury's secretary during this period and ran off to Holand when he thought he might be implicated (and executed!) for involvement in the plot, when he wrote the letter on government. Just think; no Charles II, no John Locke as a famous author, no Declaration of Independence. Wheels within wheels.
@kanenkitten Go to Saudi Arabia or some other backward medieval country. Wanting to be ruled by an absolute monarch is wishing serfdom and slavery on yourself..and belies a feeble and immature mind.
@kanenkitten Charles II could declare parliament dissolved but he had to accept the election of a new one forthwith. He couldn't reighn without parliament as his father could.
My g-g-g-g-g-g-g-g Grandfather was Major General Robert Overton who fought under Cromwell against this bastard. The Overtons are numerous in America and still survive today :) Divine right of kings??? Didn't last too long did it????
Mrd777 3 days ago
Hopefully when HRH prince Charles becomes King he will live up to the regal names of Charles or George whichever he chooses. God save our future King!
mak34237 4 weeks ago
What an impressive monarch!
HenrikNeslow 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What a King!
ajgor1974 1 month ago
Charles II: Can anyone here contemplate such evil without horror?
Random guy peeps up: I CAN
Charles II: Shut Up!
Guy: ok........ slowly walks away.
Godzilla52 1 month ago
This it what the Monarch should be doing now because of the E.U
infidel1978 2 months ago
@iUseTech thanks for the advise
goombamario1 3 months ago
james 6 of sotland tho james the 1st he led stuwarts ruled till charles 1 the one that lost his head no monerkey till charles 2 the one who likes to party!!!!!!!!!!!!
goombamario1 3 months ago
Wow! This is powerful and I love the acting! Brilliant!
daisies53 3 months ago
Charles, by the Grace of God, of England, SCOTLAND, and Ireland KING, Defender of the Protestant Faith, etc.
andwqhs 4 months ago 4
@andwqhs He always sympathised with catholicism, but he remained nominally protestant though his reign to avoid trouble. And he converted to catholicism in his deathbed.
1999521 1 month ago
Does anyone knows who's the actor playing Charles II ? I really like his acting
Iusedtobeacat93 5 months ago
@Iusedtobeacat93 His names Rufus Sewell.
tribetng 4 months ago
Brilliant actor ....one of the very best.. Ann
Paulol100 6 months ago
What a fantastic man. Long live our monarchy!
thefeuds 6 months ago 2
what did james do other than be a different religion than parliament? i dont know much about that part of english history but it seems like he got a bad rap.
mackshayster 6 months ago
@mackshayster Well at this time England was a Protestant nation, and James II being a very open Catholic, the country hated him for it. Therefore Parliament sought for a new monarch, and the nearest related one was the Dutch king William of Orange. He invaded, fought James II in Ireland and he went into exile.
James also believed in an absolute monarchy, where the decisions of Parliament did not matter and the king decided everything, which naturally did not go down well.
In a nutshell :)
thefeuds 6 months ago
Charles II A TRUE KING!
TheWarlord900 6 months ago
I see the two people who dislike this are Cromwell.
alternatehistorian 6 months ago
Is that Russel Sewell? He has his voice and crazy eyes if not.
HojoOSanagi 7 months ago
God bless King Charles II, God's appointed King
DarthMaul8065 7 months ago 28
@DarthMaul8065 It wasn't God's will that made Charles II the king, just Birth, but it was God's will what saw his neck on the chopping block... heh heh.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe LOL You ought to check your history books.
DarthMaul8065 2 months ago
@DarthMaul8065 What are you saying my Wiki Sources aren't credible, heh heh; I meant Charles the first, smart Ass, It's called a Typo, and I can't edit my posts, My history books are just... somewhere, I’ll have to look for it later, I’ll get back to you on the condition of them, in the meantime, "Put an F’n Sock in it you Cow"... heh heh, sorry couldn't resist. Now have a nice Day.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DarthMaul8065 Ah damn you... now I have the Thumbnail of this video in my History tab above, and just when I forgot about it... heh heh.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe "Damn you" and "smart ass" are comments most unbecoming. If you use such vocabulary, along with other obscenities, you're only degrading yourself.
DarthMaul8065 2 months ago
@DarthMaul8065 Pleaese tell me your teasing me, there are lot worse words then "D" and "A", which I was teasing you, but if you do find those words offensive then I shall refrain from using them, unlike the words some of your fellow Royalists have used against me... heh heh, They make the D and A words look mild.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DarthMaul8065 Just like Nicholas the Second and Louis the XVI
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe Indeed. They were all anointed kings. Charles II benefited, however, from the fact that he wasn't executed like those two.
DarthMaul8065 2 months ago
When people start to say they are speaking for God, I believe they will say anything to maintain power. Henry made up his own religion and said he spoke for God as well. When I've studied the histories of countries, it usually comes down to that. In wars, it's the same thing. God is usually on their side. Whatever god they worship. Hitler didn't. He was at least honest that way. He was the god to himself. People need to believe in something and they usually won't look closely.
Songsmirth 7 months ago
@Songsmirth Well... Hitler is a bad example, as he too said that Providence was on his side. And let us not forget the motto of the Werhmacht: "Gott mitt uns" - which was inhenrited from the Prussian army, but never the less, it means "God is with us".
Henry basically did that to confirm his "authority", as several other historical authorities, to manipulate the events to their own cause. It doesn't mean God was really on their side. But that's a more profound and theological matter to discuss.
AvatarMarxon90 7 months ago
@RichBanks2010 If that's what you want then go for it.
AlphaOmega804 8 months ago
I just watched the entire "power and the passion" mini-series. It was great. If you liked this clip and are interested in Charles II, I wholly recommend you watch the mini-series. Great king!
MajBlood 8 months ago
They should have rushed the ponce and given him a damn good kicking. In the words of Lord Flashheart - 'What a poof!'
maureenOWW 8 months ago 2
It must be hard on the wrist holding up that damn orb all the time.
MajBlood 8 months ago
Comment removed
dmax631 8 months ago
Comment removed
dmax631 8 months ago
why are there subtitles? the guy is speaking perfect Queen's English, if you can't undrestand him then learn how to speak English properly!!!
shahideurope 9 months ago
@shahideurope So, whatever accent a king has is the perfect english accent? What about when they only spoke french at court? :) Songs
Songsmirth 7 months ago
weird al...
BrOkEnCyDebitchh 9 months ago
I wish the actor playing Charles could pronounce his Ts... a King who sounds like a gabbler is a little odd
Henners1991 9 months ago
@Henners1991 he can pronounce his ts.
shahideurope 9 months ago
@shahideurope "Not speak of i-"
There are others but I cba to watch the video again to pick them up...
But generally when a word ends in a t, he fails to pronounce it.
Henners1991 9 months ago
Comment removed
AlphaOmega804 9 months ago
I could be wrong here, but despite the flaws of Charles II or any of these monarchs it seems to be that Parliament thought only it knew what was best for a country and its people. If that is the case then what is the point in choosing a king when Parliament could have been its own king?
xyPERSON 10 months ago
@xyPERSON Britain needed a King back then. After the death of Charles I Parliament became so corrupt and greedy that they had the same people sit in office for six years without reelection. That is why Cromwell proclaimed himself Lord Protector and ruled as a dictator, he even tried to make that position heretical, and pass it down to his son.
England needed a King to control Parliament and to command the people's loyalty. I think a constitutional Monarchy is the best form of government.
AlphaOmega804 9 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 I think democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others.
shahideurope 9 months ago 3
@shahideurope Personally i'd be happy to see Parliament dissolved and have her Majesty rule Kingdom and the commonwealth by herself. My loyalty is to the Monarchy not those corrupt fools in Parliament.
AlphaOmega804 9 months ago 25
@AlphaOmega804 fair enough you're entitled to believe in hereditary, I believe in democracy.
shahideurope 9 months ago
@shahideurope Fair enough, whatever works for you.
AlphaOmega804 9 months ago
@shahideurope im not even a citizen of england and i agree with this.
lordmerlin1 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AlphaOmega804 Thanks God people who think like are a minority!!
Kopite4life12 3 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 Just a step away from Tyranny with you, huh.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe Tranny and Absolute rule is not the same thing. But if they work.
AlphaOmega804 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 I know on paper the two are different buty in real world application and coupled with human nature, they are the same.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe Personally i think i might prefer it like that. Democracy is a nice ideal, but it is weak, decadent, and an illusion. Also it is paralysised by debate and disunity when a crisis strikes. Sometimes a strong leader is needed to see to the well being of the nation over the individual.
AlphaOmega804 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 Did you even read what I wrote, or just ramble on.... you need a wise ruler, strength is nothing without wisdom but brutality and tyranny...
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe exactly i never said anything different. i just want one person in complete charge then a bunch of corrupt people.
AlphaOmega804 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 So one corrupt person instead of a bunch, I see. one with absolute power to do as he pleases with the populas, such as murder those he deems a threat or live richly off the backs of the Serfs.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe Look back at history, it was under such regime's that great nations and men have been created. You cannot argue with results. And like i said it is the state that matters, not the individual.
AlphaOmega804 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe And since you don't seem to be responding to what I wrote, i'm going to stop responding to what you write... so next time i'm giong to pretend you are talking about egg shells....
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 Let me share with you the same sentiment but only after re-considering ideally the eventual support of these vote's merchants as needed for an absoulte rule. Without it somewhat.... we are incomplete.
sinoples 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 Finally lol i'm Canadian and even i share your opinion.
Godzilla52 1 month ago
@AlphaOmega804 I didn't read what you wrote since you dont' seem to do like wise, so don't bother anymore... if your not going to have an open mind, read what I wrote and counter it properly if you disagree then go away... i'm not reading anything from you anymore you are a waste of my time, and a fool who deserves to have his freedom taken away, plus your internet access. YOu are a sheep, a lamb to be slaughtered by superior minded people who will rule over you as willfully let them do so.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe I read what you wrote and i answered that sometimes the nation must be put before the person. But you are clearly a pathetic little insect who likes to through your bitch fits around at random people who have tried to have a civilized conversation with you. What a shameful little ant you are, you actually seem to think that your opinions amount to anything with me . You can go rot in a ditch for all i care, and as for your insults, i see them as prove of your ignorance and shame.
AlphaOmega804 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 Intresting, I hit a nerve with yah...Intresting... and no you didn't read what I wrote nor really answered back, but more important I find it intresting when certian words set a person off... usually when they explode, it means I hit pay dirt. so calling you a sheep or lamb affects you, why? I know why, people aren't offended by things that aren't true, they laugh it off. by the way I do love insects.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe Ok i am sorry for what i said, i usually consider myself better then that. I am sorry if i didn't seem to read your comments, i did and i took them into thought when making my reply's. I am sorry for what i said in my last comment, although i do take offence to what you also said. I ask your forgiveness, i do not change my opinions on government, nor will i ask you to change yours.
AlphaOmega804 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 You were almost interesting... I only pray your view of the world dies with the old world... and individual liberty and responsibility win out in the end. God help us with people like you, whether you’re Royalist or even a socialist... it leads to one end. when the government has absolute near absolute power... you can have your opinion but that doesn't mean myself and others my mind set will willfully hand over our freedom because of your naivety and romance of a feudal idea.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 Also, I find bugs to be amazing creatures, Ants can lift 10x their weight they also farm cattle (Beetles) and clean the ground, Spiders are master architects spinning their webs, Bees make Honey, and Mantises, move like the wind, ever held one in your hand, watching it stare back at you with the same curiosity, or watch it stalk its prey... I love bugs.. So feel free to call me an insect, they are hardly pathetic, I admire them more then my fellow man at times.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 You cannot ignore human nature... and with your last comment, you showed your true colors, What you think of a bug is what kings have tought of their people, as pathetic bugs to be squashed. It's fine to have an idea and you may have your fantises, but when they interfer with my freedom or the freedom of my brothers and sisters in humanities freedom, then I haveone hell of a problem. NO matter who they are. so keep your kings, but don't expect us to bowe to them.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe Look i am trying to form a bridge here. I am a royalist, i always have been, i always will be. I keep the opinion that the country would be better off under s supreme head. I do not expect you to agree or anything i am just trying to end what would be a futile argument.
AlphaOmega804 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 I’m done with you.... I don't associate with sheep, especially when they are so willfully so, when you decide to be a Lion, then we'll talk. God gave us free will and self- reliance, self-governance, self-responsibility, and I intend to keep mine and defend my fellow humans who want to keep theirs, whomever they are. Your ancestors, perhaps mine as well, would have gladly traded you for the freedom you so willfully hand away.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe Ok that's that is it!! I tried to be nice, i tried to find a common ground. But you are the most closed minded, arrogant, bitchy people i have ever had the misfortune to come into contact with. If you are so pathetic and so needy that you cannot even try to find a common solution then you are not worth my time. You are not even worth the air you breath! If i get anymore comments from you i will print them out an recycle them, at least then they will be of use to mankind
AlphaOmega804 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 I have a common solution, I was just saying that an Absolute Rule isn't it whether it be a king or a govermental body, nothing personal towards a monarch, persay. It's just a matter of that is your belief, I would say the same (Minus the monarch part), to a socialist who believes in the Government should have the power. But I do have an Idea you might like, a form of government that works towards the betterment of the people by forcing the government to heed to them (Let's say).
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 Erh.. maybe Heed is the wrong word... actually... let's say, three heads are sometimes better then one or many.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 HEy Alpha, I know we aren't allies, but I think I need your help on something, or to say, there is a person who posted on my channel calling your bbeloved Henry VIII a pervert, i'm sure if anyone can handle him it would be you or one of your English Royalist buddies... heh heh, have at him.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe I am a Royalist but i can admit that Henry VIII was not perfect. Tell him Henry built the designs for the Mary Rose and there by the modern day warship. This was the first step to our unrivaled Navy. He also left England a very rich nation due to his religious reforms. Henry had his problems but he helped make England great!!
AlphaOmega804 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804 Thanks for the Help, and to show my apperciation I shall tell you a secret, i'm not 100% anti-Monarchist (Royalists), I 'm just against an absolute Monarch or Absolute Rule, government, in general.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@DravenWolfe fair enough, i can respect that.
AlphaOmega804 1 month ago
@AlphaOmega804 Oops I forgot to spell check, i'm sure there are mistakes... damn.
DravenWolfe 2 months ago
@AlphaOmega804"due to his religious reforms" read, he seized everything from the churches.
Udany147 1 month ago
God, please send us another man like Oliver Cromwell!
guyfroml 10 months ago
At that moment, all the members of Parliament must have been thinking..."and to think we restored this asshole to the throne...he's no better than his father." Then their second thought was "and how did we rid ourselves of his father?"
guyfroml 10 months ago
Comment removed
677222 10 months ago
He could send parliament home because secretly he was receiving payment from Louis of France. This to my mind makes his as much a traitor as he condemned and executed father.
mc0558 10 months ago
God Save the King!
mak34237 10 months ago 3
king Weird Al II
bellydweller 10 months ago
canadians are retards
jcolossale21 11 months ago
BRING BACK CROMWELL. DOWN WITH THIS SWINE.
WorshipInTruth 11 months ago
@WorshipInTruth Your beloved Cromwell harassed my Irish ancestor
TylerMaple3009 10 months ago 2
@TylerMaple3009 He got revenge on the Irish catholics who massacred a hundred thousand Irish protestants, bet they never told you that. I am an American with Irish heritage but I am not such a tool that I use that as some sort of lame reason to support catholic tyranny.
WorshipInTruth 10 months ago
@WorshipInTruth Can you believe that there are people on here wishing to be ruled by an absolute monarch?? It's enough to make you weep, and think that all who died in WW2 was for nothing.
comanchio1976 10 months ago
@comanchio1976 Yeah it is nuts, ignorance leads to tyranny.
WorshipInTruth 10 months ago
think i got my point across then. farewell!
lokna 11 months ago
i sitll love watching this series....and this is my best scene ever!
lokna 11 months ago
@lokna It is wonderful - and the end garden scene that goes on forever
machtrebel 11 months ago
Charles II doesn't take any shit from Parliament. He is the man!
MajBlood 1 year ago
@MajBlood no he was a prick
jed371 1 year ago
@jed371 Charles I and James II were supposed to be pricks but I thought Charles II was supposed to be a decent guy.
MajBlood 1 year ago
@jed371 Ok I bought a book the other day on the English Monarchy. You are right, Charles II was a prick, but I don't think he was as much as a douche as Charles I, Oliver Cromwell, or James II.
MajBlood 1 year ago
@MajBlood oh im sorry did you know him intimately? no you didnt so you dont really know anything. so hush yourself.
if you werent there then you have no right to comment on his personality. just because a few books say he was bad..which he wasnt because of the times he lived in doesnt mean what you say is right. so hush canadian
lokna 11 months ago
@lokna Oh I didn't know you knew him either. Dick. I can comment on what I damn well please, you stupid American prick. And I think Charles II was not a very good king.
MajBlood 11 months ago
@MajBlood
1) obviously i didnt you uneducated colonial prick who sitll ass kisses my queen
2) im english you blind fuck
3) thats better, you THINK he was not very good.....knowing and tihnking are two different things. next time, please state which term you are using.
"He was a prick"...is not a good historic point
"I tihnk he was a prick" is the one you should of used you uneducated fool.
perhaps you should come back to the homeland for an education? obviously he colonial education is shit
lokna 11 months ago
@lokna Wow, Charles II was a prick, but I think you have showed him up. I called you an American, because you insulted me for being Canadian, and in all my years I have shown respect and loyalty to the British Commonwealth and Crown, just as British people I have met have respect me and my country for being loyal allies. I cannot see why you would insult a fellow member of the Empire. You obviously have your allegiances messed up.
MajBlood 11 months ago
Monmouth disliked this
MrJoshSomerville 1 year ago 2
What movie is this?
drakezen 1 year ago
Gives me goosebumps everytime I watch it!
martinlindsgaard 1 year ago
Captain Hook got himself into plenty of trouble this time! =D
alexp9999 1 year ago
@alexp9999 Actually, J.M. Barrie (author of Peter Pan) did base some of Capt. Hook's aspects on Charles II.
UsagiDreams 1 year ago
He was a fool, he didn't know how his people felt, if he did he would not have made his brother heir, and doomed his Dynasty.
Nearchus23 1 year ago
Whomever this guy is he is one hell of an actor, this scene is delivered like a punch in the face and is fabulous!
Donryall 1 year ago 2
What a speech! What a King!
324wilson 1 year ago 32
@324wilson What a hat!
cyclos12 1 year ago
@324wilson The King was a cunt and the people are like sheep who look back on history as something to be proud off. There is no pride in having a cunt control the country while ordering the deaths of anyone who does not be his slave.
Tzimnewman3 7 months ago
@Tzimnewman3 I never said that I am "proud" of King Charles. I do not believe in the absolute rule of the Kings. I do, however, believe in the contitution of our "constitutional" monarchy. Nevertheless, I only referred to his speech, which was absolutely wonderful. Just as Elizabeth I (not that I am comparing Charles to the Gloriana) was an absolute monarch yet a great orator. One cannot and should not judge different ages based on what we believe now. We must go back, metaphorically speaking.
324wilson 7 months ago
@324wilson "I do not believe in the absolute rule of the Kings. I do, however, believe in the contitution of our "constitutional" monarchy."
Which constitution is that and what does the constitution say?
Tzimnewman3 7 months ago
@Tzimnewman3 The English Constitution. It maybe not written. I personally would like to see the formal written constitution. But based on hundreds of years of parliamentaty conventions, it has a figurehead role in our society. According to Bagehot, Herbert and Wilson, a "dignified" (rather feminine role). Anyway, it is of no business of yours as to what I believe in. Why should you or anyone else care of what I believe in? Our argument (if that's a right word) was about the speech.
324wilson 7 months ago
@324wilson "The English Constitution. It maybe not written."
So what is the extact wording of the constitution that is not written.
"Anyway, it is of no business of yours as to what I believe in."
So why the fuck tell me then?
Tzimnewman3 7 months ago
@Tzimnewman3 Because you on it. You asked me a question, there is this inevitability about it on YouTube, I suppose. I think you should read what I said in my earlier reply, "...based on hundreds of years of parliamentaty conventions." These precedents are so entreched that they are taken for granted and it also gives a tone of flexibility to the gov't occasionally. I personally would like a written constitution but then again, I know there is no appetite for that at this moment in the land.
324wilson 7 months ago
Of course had Charles II sired an heir to the throne, none of this would have been necessary.
ers586 1 year ago 3
@ers586 Oh, Charley had LOTS of kids- 22, in fact. It's just....
None were the children of his wife ^^;
ludicrus32 1 year ago
Charles II was definitley the man for the job of restoring the faith in the monarchy, if it had been James who came back in 1660 it would've lasted about five minutes
Zeruel3 1 year ago 17
@Zeruel3 LOL
Iusedtobeacat93 5 months ago
it's hamilton from john adams! I knew he was trouble...
thrashing0donut 1 year ago
RUFUS is Brilliant as Tom the builder in The Pillars of the Earth
I vote him the worlds best actor.. Glad he doesn't have to play bad broody guys any more His choice! Bravo Rufus Bravo
Paulol100 1 year ago
The idea of hanging , drawing and quartering in a period certainly the foundation of the 18th Century beggars belief. ( Yes, I know you could be burnt at the stake in 1750's Scotland for " knowing" a horse...
Can anyone on YT care to discuss this issue? Who were the MPs Charles executed/ when/ how many?
Kelly14UK 1 year ago
@Kelly14UK As far as I know he only went after the ones who either A. Voted to have Charles I executed or B. The ones whose names were on his fathers death warrant, the rest he either imprisoned, exiled, fined or simply let go
Zeruel3 1 year ago
@Zeruel3 He must have been legally just and logically minded. And straight down the road compassionate and forward thinking . That's why I always find myself drawn to him.
Kelly14UK 1 year ago
I'm no Royalist, but Charles the Second was a breath of fresh air...
Style, and the disintegration of claustrophobic, and often cruel, backward religious issues and chauvenism all had their roots May of 1660.
Only 15 decades later, we had the Napoleonic period and Industrial Revolution. Fifteen decades PRIOR to Charles....Early 16th Century and the glorified caveman.
Kelly14UK 1 year ago 2
Does anyone know what is the music that is played at middle of this video to the end?
rubatirabbit 1 year ago
Anyone know if the music is an actual song or something?
loystloystloyst 1 year ago
Why did they/do they wear those gdawful wigs?
SanDiegoArtNut 1 year ago
A megalomaniacal utterly capricious bully!
lurconis666 1 year ago
i like the english use here,plain n to the point.
hlimkb 1 year ago
Long live the Parliament! Don't you realize that absolute monarchy is absolute tyranny? Long live Glorious Revolution that liberated people from serfdom and gave subjectivity not only to all British, but contributed to political phiolosophy of modern times. King might be good or bad, gallant or mad and as Charles said man could do nothing. It is just like in slavery. They could have these of those masters, but they had allways been servants, slaves.
tendrebarbare 1 year ago
@tendrebarbare Looking back on history, a monarch who had truly loved the country and its people that he/she governed was probably much better than an elected parliament which produces politicians who represent special interests and only care about their political careers.
Does Parliament REALLY care about the native British people? Does the US Congress REALLY represent the wishes of American citizens? The answer to both is a resounding no.
It all depends on integrity-a rare trait nowadays
Cissy2cute 1 year ago
@Cissy2cute I would never trade sovereignity of myself and whole nation for good policy of a king because kings are different. It doesn't matter what is his name - emperor, king, fuhrer or first secretary. The most stupendous and fundamental question is if people, as a political society has its rights to decide about itself. Ask for example French what do they think about their rulers. The last positively evalueted was Henry IV.
tendrebarbare 1 year ago
LONG LIVE THE KING!
martinlindsgaard 1 year ago 4
Let me know when Parliament opts to undo several centuries of bigotry and eliminate the prohibition against a Catholic reigning as monarch. Until that step is taken GB will remain what it has been since 1688, a morally bankrupt country.
deyo3396 1 year ago
Awesome... one on the worlds greatest actors
great film
Paulol100 1 year ago
his voice is like musical composition.. wow
fairytaleforest 2 years ago
Humph!
mc0558 2 years ago
what is the choir music at when he stands and walks out of parliament?
moderate1992 2 years ago
I just wish HM would do this now and have us go back to the times when Royalty ran the country
kanenkitten 2 years ago 65
I wish that was so, an even balence between Monarch, Government and Parliment, where one balences the other.
melonhead82 1 year ago
The ancient Judaen monarchy had those elements.
There was a balance between the Courts, the Priesthood and the Monarch.
But the truth is, as G-d himself said, the Monarchy was not a good thing in His opinion. But what can you do? People want a strongman to rule them.
ballantrae101 1 year ago
@ballantrae101
i believe in a monarch
melonhead82 1 year ago 2
Have you ever lived under someone with absolute power? Even the Thailand monarchy doesn't have that.
If you haven't, you might want to seriously reconsider the idea.
ballantrae101 1 year ago
@ballantrae101
the monarchy is the safe guard against dictators and reformers who might want to control the power from there selves
and plus everythin in the UK is revolved round the monarchy, it would take millions of £'s to change anything, and just extra voting costs and taxes for a prez
i prefer a monarch
melonhead82 1 year ago
You are a gentleman. And if England can produce a kind person like you, than she deserves a good monarch.
:)
ballantrae101 1 year ago
@ballantrae101
Why thank you (and may i correct you by saing its the UK after the Acts of 1707 and 1801)
I've been brought up this way
and you as well are really polite and kind, you don not get many people like that on youtube
melonhead82 1 year ago
@kanenkitten You're joking, right? I mean, no modern person living in a Constitutional Monarchy, a democracy or a republic should ever wish to go back to autocracy, tyranny & governance without consent ... Truly monstrous. Glad we Americans overthrew the tyrannt King George!
GeoffreyDinosaurs 1 year ago
@GeoffreyDinosaurs: No, i'm serious
kanenkitten 1 year ago 2
@GeoffreyDinosaurs We didn't overthrow him, we just seperated. I figure, if the people will to be oppressed, let them be oppressed.
YourProfessor 1 year ago
@YourProfessor I stand corrected. I suppose what I meant was, we threw off the shackles of an oppressive monarchy, but I appreciate your precision!
@kanenkitten I'm not sure even members of the House of Windsor would agree with you.
GeoffreyDinosaurs 1 year ago
@GeoffreyDinosaurs Amazing how we Americans are so ready to call King George a tyrannt without doing the reasurch. The majoraty of things we blame King George for was not his doing but Parliament. Yeah, he did stupid shit but most of what caused the American Revolution was because of the chosies Parliament made. Get your facts straight.
mist648 1 year ago
@mist648 I apologize but it's hard to take one's opinion seriously with the barrage of misspelled words ("reasurch", "majoraty", "chosies"). Since the Crown was the potent symbol of the military & legislative power of G. Britain, it is not rhetorically inaccurate to discuss the revolution as a revolt against the tyranny of King George. Sure, the Parliament enacted the various laws (at his behest) that led to the revolt, but as the sovereign, the King was still the "executive" of the colonies.
GeoffreyDinosaurs 1 year ago
@mist648 Yeh and the fact that the colonies were wrong to revolt in the first place. The evil George wasn't King George III, but George Washington.
MajBlood 1 year ago 2
@MajBlood Hahaa! Are you kidding?
thinkgood 1 year ago
@thinkgood No I am dead serious.
MajBlood 1 year ago
@kanenkitten Why?
damienvargas 1 year ago
@damienvargas: Because we'd then have the stability that we sometimes seem to lack nowadays. Not to mention that you'd have someone who's been brought up and taught to rule
kanenkitten 1 year ago
@kanenkitten What if the monarch decides that iphones are witchcraft and against the royal religion? Everyone else on Earth gets to have iphones except us?
damienvargas 1 year ago
@damienvargas: Don't be silly. That would never happen in reality or if HM did have all the power
kanenkitten 1 year ago
@kanenkitten Quite so. We would simply have beheadings for treason, star-chambered proceedings, and corpses under St. Peter in Vincula Chapel. We have Parliament for a reason. We all were quite wont to have absolute monarchs, but they consecutively compelled us into the course upon which we have come. Even today, the Sovereign enjoys the absolute right to deny assent to any act of Parliament whatsoever, this being last exercised by Queen Anne. Today, we have the correct balance.
damienvargas 1 year ago
@kanenkitten
HM still has that power, but choses not to uses it.
She should, I know HRH Prince Charles would.
melonhead82 1 year ago
@melonhead82: But of course. If the govt in the far future ever tried to pass a "major pollution bill" You just know that Prince Charles would use the powers that the monarch has and is fully entitled to do so
kanenkitten 1 year ago
@kanenkitten
Exactly.
melonhead82 1 year ago
@kanenkitten Hope you're prepared for tyranny.
thinkgood 1 year ago
@kanenkitten The scariest part about your comment is that 57 self hating human beings somehow unfathomably agree with you in 2011 no less.
Pilaf1984 11 months ago
@Pilaf1984 count me in as number 58
machtrebel 11 months ago
@Pilaf1984 On the bright side, people who feel that way probably don't vote.
I wish Power and the Passion had a John Locke cameo. He was Shaftesbury's secretary during this period and ran off to Holand when he thought he might be implicated (and executed!) for involvement in the plot, when he wrote the letter on government. Just think; no Charles II, no John Locke as a famous author, no Declaration of Independence. Wheels within wheels.
Faboba 11 months ago
@kanenkitten Go to Saudi Arabia or some other backward medieval country. Wanting to be ruled by an absolute monarch is wishing serfdom and slavery on yourself..and belies a feeble and immature mind.
comanchio1976 10 months ago
@comanchio1976: What is belies?
kanenkitten 10 months ago
@kanenkitten Charles II could declare parliament dissolved but he had to accept the election of a new one forthwith. He couldn't reighn without parliament as his father could.
Popperite 10 months ago