Why pledging allegiance to the new king feels so wrong
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 พ.ค. 2023
- You are called upon to pledge allegiance! To my TH-cam channel and all its successors. SO HOPE YOU GOD!
Thanks Luke! / lukecutforth
Vlog channel / evanedinger
Thank you so much for watching! Hope you enjoyed it!
If you're new to my channel and videos, hi! I'm Evan Edinger, and I make weekly "comedy" videos every Sunday evening. As an American living in London I love noticing the funny differences between the cultures and one of my most popular video series is my British VS American one. I'm also known for making terrible puns so sorry in advance. Hope to see you around, and I'll see you next Sunday! :)
If you want to know HOW I make my videos including gear, lighting, all the tiddly bits that connect it all together, (with cheaper alternatives and kit I used to use), I've listed each item, what it's great at, and why I use it on the gear section of my website here:
www.evanedinger.com/blog/my-gear
Otherwise: here's a quick list of some of my kit without descriptions from the above link:
Camera: Sony A7siii
geni.us/Evana7siii
Main Lens: Sony 24mm f/1.4 G-Master
geni.us/Evan24
Secondary Lens: Sony 16-35mm f/2.8 G-Master
geni.us/Evan1635
Main Light: Aputure 120d mkii
geni.us/Evan120d
Shotgun Microphone: Sennheiser MKH-416
geni.us/Evan416
Really useful SSD: SanDisk Extreme Portable 2TB
geni.us/EvanPortSSD
The background music I use is all from Epidemic Sound! I highly recommend it: geni.us/EvanEpidemicSound
Store: (LUTs, Presets, & Prints) ► evanedinger.com/store
Patreon: / evanedinger
Second Channel: / evanedingertravel
Twitter: / evanedinger
Instagram: / evanedinger
Facebook: / evanedinger
Discord: / discord
Twitch:(4 days a week!) ► / evanedinger
I don't know if anyone else feels this way, but I really appreciate how non-toxic the comment section of Evan's videos is :) really feels like a safe space to discuss these issues
Oh let me change that then… BEND THE KNEE OR FACE THE FATE OF ALL TRAITORS!!!
I don't mind all the monarchists hanging flags from their houses, but I AM very much minding about the actions of the police in arresting peaceful protestors!
The explanation of a minister was basically "There are all these posh foreigners visiting, we didn't want to be embarrassed."
@@pattheplanterWhich is more embarrassing- Arresting someone for holding up a white sign because he might write something offensive, or actually seeing the voice of all of what Britain thinks, rather than the select minority who's opinions we decided are the only legitimate ones today?
@@danielwebb8402 just because something is technically lawful does not mean it's right somehow lmao, there's no freedom of speech in the uk you're literally not allowed to protest the monarchy. It's embarrassing to claim that the monarchy is beloved by the public when it only seems that way because you're punished for voicing your dislike of it.
@@danielwebb8402 Yes they were unlawful as the protestors had actually okayed the protest ahead of time with the authorities. Also the group who arranged the protest are famously peaceful.
@@nathanisdying2748 I don't think it was lawful, there is a lot of evidence that it was not lawful to arrest the protestors at all. But there will be a half hearted apology after the fact from the Met.
What is concerning is that the freedom to peacefully protest is in very great danger in the UK and it needs to be protected. I really do not care one way or the other about this issue, but they arrested peaceful protestors who were only holding up signs and who had arranged with authorities to protest ahead of time and had GOTTEN THE OKAY.
That is seriously concerning!
Luke's analysis of the "persons of good will" subtle pressure is spot on.
It reminds me of "anywhere fine goods are sold" which I used to see in American commercials
Yeah, it's clunky old language, and is why they changed it.
A medieval hangover
@@Blessingsuponyou I'm pretty sure the vast majority didn't!
,❤] 😊
I had some attachment to the queen, for me she was like gravity, she was an omnipresent fact of reality. She was always there. Until she wasn’t. I felt deeply saddened by her passing, it was like a content of reality had suddenly changed. She was THE QUEEN.
That being said as someone who didn’t follow the royal family at all I don’t know who this stranger is that I’m asked to pledge myself to.
I am married, I have already pledged myself to another and have no intention of pledging myself to anyone else.
Ps. I didn’t realise Americans have to say their pledge of allegiance daily, that seems insane to me, then again in my north west English public school we had to say the Lord’s Prayer each morning so I guess we are not that different.
I haven't said it since elementary school. We're a big country, so mileage varies
Most people stop after grade school. I suppose people in the military or government might be expected to say it each morning too, but most adults only say it at baseball games and other events where it's commonly recited.
my schools continued it til highschool, not every day that i remember but at least once a week in homeroom, but by then i'd stopped saying it because i'd rather not consider myself 100% loyal to america
@Jengo Asked being the operative word. You weren’t told to do it. If you wanted to you could and if you didn’t want to then you don’t. (I didn’t).
You don't follow the Royal Family at all yet you had an attachment to the Queen, bit of a juxtaposition there and you have no idea who Prince Charles was and is now as King Charles III?
I think your friend makes a very good point. While he has been propagandized to see QE2 as the symbol of his nation, you have been propagandized to see your flag as the symbol of your nation. While strange and equally nationalistic, an American need not essentially "worship" a person as a symbol for the collective, but a symbol as a symbol for the collective.
I find it fascinating that Americans officially pledge allegiance to the flag and abhor kings and yet tend to treat their presidents (particularly past presidents) with such reverence and give extreme authority and power to them (even if current ones don’t always utilise it).
It’s almost like there’s a king-shaped space in people’s heads and elections are just a quicker and less-bloody way of switching out unpopular ones.
@@DeadDancers Humans are social mammals, and social mammals have pack mentalities. One is the alpha; the rest follow or live as loners. It's in our nature, and politics reflect that basic nature.
@Deaddancers You're do right. Look at how the Kennedys were treated like royalty. Jackie was their queen. Even calling Beyoncé Queen B, Americans may not consciously realise it but they do have a royal shaped space they like to fill. Oprah the Queen of tv (well not now, more a disgraced royal). I believe there are certain Americans who love being treated like royalty while at the same time disparaging them (looking at you Oprah and Meghan).
@@DeadDancers Some eighth grader actually found that a shocking amount of the presidents all the way up to Obama (remember, Obama's mixed and not black, guys) are all related to King John. Yes, that King John from Robin Hood. So it's not too far off to say the presidents are treated as kings.
@@DeadDancers Oh yes, I definitely get the exact same feeling from Americans when it comes to the presidents. They only seem to give them as much authority in reverence as if they are royalty or more.
I work at a supermarket, i asked people over the weekend if they were doing anything to celebrate or were going to watch the coronation.
Most people just used it as an excuse to have parties, and most people actually spoke about not being that into the monarchy (including a lot of older people)
And what's wrong with having a party?
@Helen Bartoszek nothing is wrong with having a party.
What I was trying to say is that people (including those in the demographics that we would expect to care about the monarchy) don't really care about Charles
You were talking to the wrong people!
paying our wages single-handedly with BBQ supplies lol
i think we probs made 5-10k on alcohol sales alone over the coronation weekend. over xmas as a whole, so nov-december, i think it was around 20k
My street basically did this just to meet up with everyone and meet anyone new who moved onto the street
Persons of goodwill? Fortunately I already knew that I'm a grumpy old git, so I didn't pledge allegiance. Evan, nice to see yourself and Luke in a video again.
I have a friend who left the UK aged 15 to go the US as his father got a job over there. His first day in school when the class recited the pledge of allegiance he sat quietly and let them get on with it. His teacher was offended that he refused to take part evven though he was British and every day for a week he was put in detention. My friends parent complained and someone had to word with the teacher explaining he didn't have to do it but after that he was sent out of the classroom every day while the rest of the class recited the pledge of allegiance.
Do they really have to recite the pledge of allegiance daily in school? Why? Surely if you have pledged it then you have done the deed? Daily seems overkill, surely if it needs repeating once a term is enough?
@@lindyashford7744 Legally, no, but there's still varying levels of social pressure to do so depending on where you are. While it rightfully seems cultish to foreigners, it really is just something you do, and because it's 30ish seconds out of your day, you don't really bother to question it.
There was an immediately noticeable shift against it immediately after Trump was elected, but I grew up in a politically mixed area and had (to my knowledge) fairly liberal teachers. Things were likely quite different just one or two school districts over. Regardless, that shift held strong at least until I graduated a year and a half later in 2018. Turns out once you give teenagers a feasible excuse to not stand up for thirty seconds at 7:30 in the morning, they will gladly take it whether they care about politics or not.
@@lindyashford7744no one said it in high school or middle school (grades 6 to 12) when I was in school (graduated in 2012), but we did have to at least stand and be quiet. But no one really cared about it
It's actually illegal for a teacher to force a student to say the pledge of allegiance. I know because I always refused to do it.
Did he move to the south? Sounds like some southern US crap
As someone who is applying for citizenship my first thought when I saw all the people saying "pfft, I ain't doing that mate" was "At least it's optional for you".
The British tradition of saying one thing while believing the opposite is very important to us, that is why you have been asked to lie about your love of and loyalty to the richest, laziest man in the UK.
Id feel weird about pledging allegiance to a dude who wanted to be a tampon. Just me?
Although the form of the pledge to king Charles "and his heirs" seems to imply unswerving, inviolable loyalty to that individual (and their progeny) there have - of course - been numerous British kings and queens who have either been directly overthrown, or other times nearly overthrown, because it was felt (at the time) that they had themselves betrayed or abandoned their own coronation oaths to rule "according to the laws". I sometimes worry people aren't taught about those moments of British history in general.
Yeah though stuff like the republican age gets overlooked and Charles the second gets glamorised (looking at you HH) despite him doing shitty things like breaking his oath of clemency upon the leaders of the new model army
And just to balance this out fuck Cromwell that genocidal bastard is rightfully hates I just think the monarchs should also be hated
Luke's thoughts on the monarchy are so bang on, it's exactly that I feel. I'm not anti or pro monarchy and it's good to hear others articulate this in a way that's not hard one side of the other.
Yeah I’m indifferent. Or rather I have mild feelings both for and against the Royal establishment. When it comes to Charles, to me, he is just another wealthy human being with immense privilege that has both positive and negative character traits like most humans out there.
@@fifinoir if that’s really how you feel how do you tolerate having an “average person” rule over you and your country in a position of power and privilege for no other reason than by an accident of birth? Your position seems like one of extreme cognitive dissonance (with respect).
@@InsidiousEthereal if they have no meaning, why on earth would you spend over £200 million just on their coronation? ps you’re either not British or you’re uninformed as you would understand their influence, power, privilege and constitutional roles as highly significant if you were. Look up the The "black spider" memos and the Queens vetting of More than 1,000 laws through the secretive Royal ascent procedures _before_ they were approved by MPs,
@@L-mo I mean, extravagant ceremonies for the swearing-in of heads of state isn't unusual; the US, for example, spends about $100 million USD ever four years to inaugurate the president, even if he (or theoretically she) was already in office.
@@secretforreddit but as @InsidiousEthereal said, the RF are figureheads with no meaning in day to day life. So why pay anything? They do nothing and are not even elected democratically. Plus there's bunch of royals and we also pay the PM's expenses. Times are hard, people can't pay their bills or put food on the table for their kids, meanwhile a 75 year old independent millionaire gets to put a diamond-encrusted hats on himself and the mistress he was adulstours with throughput his marriage, and claim to be the head of a church, all at taxpayer expense. If this wasn't true, you'd think it was a scene out of a pulp fiction novel.
I read that the pledge was historically said by earls etc. to declare that they accepted the crown passing to that person and wouldn't challenge it. In that case it makes a lot more sense and explains why the bit about heirs is included.
That makes more sense. If you make the people who might actually be able to mount a coup, swear they aren't going to, then heads will roll (literally) if they do.
Even though it was only asked, it feels wrong that it was even asked, like hell no. I'm English but do not care about the monarchy, I'm fascinated by their history but thats it.
My siblings and I had to go to school in America cos my dad went there on sabbatical when I was very young. Like 4-5 years old I was so I don't remember it much.
But basically whenever my dad had sabatticals. He took the whole family even though we had a family home. I think it was to give my siblings and I an experience of the world.
Mum told me the story of how my eldest brother laughed when the other students in his class did the pledge of alliegence and he refused to do it because he found it stupid. They called my mum in to complain at her and my mum went off at them and called them stupid because James was British. So why would he swear alliegence to a flag that's to America and that it was a ridiculous reason to put someone in trouble for.
Evan, during your British citizenship ceremony, you could’ve took an affirmation to the country rather than the Oath of legends for the Queen. This is the same in Australia, and is the sole reason most people now become citizens as they do not want to pledge allegiance to the queen/King of another country they take an affirmation to the country of Australia, and you could have done the same for Britain.
I’m from Quebec, Canada. We had the same issue as Australia. Some parlement member didn’t want to pledge allegiance to the queen/king. So the passed a law (or something like that) so that they don’t have to. You can now pledge allegiance to your nation. (Sorry for my English, Quebec is a French province ^^)
Nothing wrong with your English it's very good xx
Your english was almost perfect, so much in fact that I think you’re safe removing that disclaimer from any future comments! You’re about as good as anyone could reasonably ask for, or expect.
@@SirArthurTheGreat awesome thank you! I often hesitate with my choice of word.
Australia has their own excellent queen in the making - and she's made princes and princesses enough for two countries.
They don't need the British royals anymore - we're happy to lend them Frederik for a couple of weeks every year.
Fellow Québécoise here! Can confirm it’s true! And it’s an advancement
enjoyed this conversation! i’m canadian and won’t be saying a pledge lol - i haven’t seen or heard anything related to the coronation except online, though my gran did text to ask if i’d watched it so i assume it was on the news. honestly keep forgetting we don’t still have a queen.
I have a lot of respect for the royal family and the hard work they do. I would much rather have a king or queen rather than President Blair, president Johnson or president Starmer....fills me with fear. 😂
Why would we need a president? Genuine question, what job that the monarch does would need to be replaced if we abolished the monarchy?
@@OneTrueScotsman We could do that. But, what does "head of state" actually been? Pomp and ceremony aside, what does the king currently do, that we would need for a functioning govt, and thus would need to be performed by a president?
Parliament already de facto controls the military, the monarchy has more power than they pretend with regards to their exemption to various regulations on crown estates and their personal wealth, but with regards to the military? That power is purely ceremonial, so if it's already being controlled by the PM and parliament, why would we need a president?
That's my point, the "I wouldn't want a president" line just doesn't make sense. If we don't want one, we don't need to get one.
The parliamentary oath of allegiance to the king is one of the main reasons for the Irish Civil War kicking off. The peace deal after the War of Independence that gave Ireland dominon status, similar to Canada and Australia today, required it, but that was unacceptable to some. It was eventually removed as part of the stealth transition to a republic.
It’s 100% unacceptable
Besides let’s all agree between the king and other aspects of the government we would all choose to pledge allegiance to tge NHS because that’s an actually useful system
I not only didn't pledge but I completely forgot the coronation was even a thing that was happening 🤣🤣
based-est british out there
Same lol because I honestly don't really care it's just another person in charge of the country.
I slept right the way through most of it, I'm not missing out on shut eye to watch an old duffer who plopped out the correct chuff get a bit of bling put on his noggin. 😂
I found out the queen died about a day later than most. From reddit.
me too lmao
It wasnt the King who invited people to pledge allegiance to the King It was the Arch Bishop who invited everyone to pledge their allegiance. The peers are expected to pledge allegiance but it was opened up to the people of the country to pledge their allegiance if they so wished. Personally I liked how everyone was invited to be a part of it if they wanted.
I found it so interesting you both said you would be peer pressured into patriotism as a kid. Specifically when Evan said the other kids would be weird to you if you refused to say the pledge of allegiance.
As a fellow American this was not my experience growing up at all.
When I was growing up in the Midwest we absolutely HAD to say the pledge. It was a requirement and if you refused you would be in official trouble. You 💯 did it because you were being forced to.
But you also didn’t really care because you didn’t mean it and were just going through the motions. No biggie. Like a fire drill or reciting a list of historical dates. Just doing what you’re told.
On the rare occasions a kid didn’t say it or refused to say it and got in trouble, everyone CHEERED. That kid was hero for the day. Not because we were especially political for 2nd graders, but because acts of rebellion towards authority was always celebrated and respected. 😂😂😂
But my point is patriotism wasn’t encouraged by other kids where / when I grew up. It was entirely a grown up thing. It was something adults pushed on you while lecturing about respect. Country, church (depending on if they were religious), family, respecting your elders. Etc etc
Of course, in the USA, things are worse now than ever. But you failed to point out the difference between saying the Pledge to the King in the UK versus saying the pledge of allegiance in the United States. The Pledge of Allegiance in the United States is not to any person, but to the country. No person is above the US Constitution, which I had to say my own pledge of duty. Of course, this is the opposite of what Magats want people to do. They want to pledge their loyalty and allegiance to only one person and to hell with the Constitution, which has been the root of our problem for the last 6-plus years.
I love how you both came prepared with works cited it's such a pleasant video experience :)
I couldn't believe some Brits were amazed you had to pledge allegiance when becoming a citizen. I was shocked. On another thing when your friend said we don't like change, really, really hope the Tories get voted out of the elections next year BUT somehow I doubt it.
Tories got wrecked in the local elections. Hopefully we'll see the same when they eventually hold a general election
Labour won't change anything in an impactful way what so ever, you know that right?
Theyre as bad as each other
I absolutely do not swear fealty & I'm Scottish.
What about to your clan chief? Or Scotland as an independent country? 😉😊
@Jay Lagan better than being English
@@scorpioproductions7068 go and visit some of the poor countries in the world and tell them how horrible it is to be English.
They would be astonished.
Why are you ashamed of being English?
I have an aunt (northern Irish) who had to do this when she got her Australian citizenship & it nearly killed her. Then she found out because she was born in NI, she could of avoided it because the Crown sees her as already loyal but I think being a subject of the crown at birth would even been more offensive to her
@Jacob I'm guessing you didn't grow up watching British soldiers terrorising your community as I'm sure the OP's Aunt did.
Ignorance really is bliss for people like you.
@@Anonymoose66G well given that crown forces regularly bursted in her front door as child, shot indiscriminately into catholic (irish) areas & an apartheid like society was held in a Northern Ireland in the name of the crown…I think she had every right to care. Maybe do a bit of research before making ignorant throw away comments. Google “Bloody Sunday”
Ok but why would she be surprised? Australia/Canada were British commonwealth countries,if that's NOT for her,Why not pursue a life in Republican Catholic France or somewhere else which Isn't associated with the UK monarchy@@sams3015
When I got married to my ex husband (he’s English, and I’m American) we got married at the local parish Church of England church in Essex. In order to get our marriage license I had to swear, officially, in a govt building that I wasn’t…. Catholic.
I always found that odd.
Your maiden name wasn't Fawkes was it??😂
Well, that was illegal. The C of E is obliged to marry you in your local parish Church, by law, even if you aren't a member and regardless of whether or not you are a Roman Catholic. You have to go through the C of E ceremony but at no point are you asked or need to declare that you are or aren't RC at all. I don't know where or when you married your former husband but that is outrageous.
@@paulcollins5423 I doubt they ask due to any issues from the Church of England. However, if one of the marriage party is a Roman Catholic and wants the Roman Catholic Church to recognize the marriage, they will first need to seek the advice of their Roman Catholic priest about the permission required for marrying a non-Roman Catholic. Getting married ahead of getting that permission is problematic. So I think they verify the participants aren't RC so the Catholic Church doesn't get upset that their values are being ignored by England.
@@xzonia1 That would be a matter for the RC Church not the Registrar (i.e. Government). In my experience, the RC Church would not accept a C of E marriage as valid anyway - I am not even eligible to be a Godfather for my friend's children as I am of C of E and not RC. The C of E has no such problems with someone who is RC.
@@paulcollins5423 Exactly. As I said, I'm sure they ask to be respectful of the Catholic Church's wishes, not because it matters to the Church of England at all.
More videos together with Luke please! You guys make a great team to create super interesting conversation :) I'd listen to an Evan & Luke podcast for sure!
I'm not British so my opinion is of no bearing, but I did watch the coronation for it's historical implications. Twas kinda cool seeing the coronation live and imagining what it would have looked like in the past. It connects you with history in a way
History is mostly common people rather than those lazy old men in expensive hats.
@@pattheplanter you don’t know a lot about history then
@@conormurphy4328 You know the wrong history, try reading something by modern historians.
@@pattheplanter modern historians that rewrite history to appeal to modern sensibilities
I really don't see what is so historical about this coronation. People keep going on about how Elisabeth was a symbol or some such, but what's changing, really? About the only way I can see this becoming historical is if his coronation becomes so unpopular it dissolves the UK. Since I don't think it's very likely, all I see is one celebrity being replaced by another. It might be important to individuals, but I think it's a footnote that most future historians won't even bother with. Granted, I'm not from UK and I haven't been really following any news regarding British royal family so I might be missing some political shift, but right now, I just roll my eyes at just how much buzz this makes, especially outside of the UK.
I felt that what King Charles was asking, was for the public support as he embarks on his voyage as the king, to be backed up by the country, so they can do a good job at serving the United Kingdom.
The Monarchy, has many faults like any of us have, they are here above all, to be active in public service for Great Britain and for the Commonwealth countries, to support the government in a way, to promote Great Britain within the world stage and to support his chosen charities.
I didn’t feel that was a big deal, was a message in search of support so they can serve the country and help those that need helping.
Who knows… maybe some of us or anyone that we care about, have been already helped by a charity that is backed up by the Royals and not even know about it.
It was the archbishop, not the charles.
@@sheridanwilde the Archbishop only delivered the message, I meant. * edit.
Pledging allegiance to individuals, flags, anthems, politicians etc is an very Un--British Activity. It smacks of something that 'new' countries that are not confident in their institutions might do ........ I think this request has back-fired. The Aristocracy of Birth and Wealth have been in charge for a 1000 years ...... this smacks of a concern that they might not be in charge for another few decades and they're desperate for us to tell them that we'll still go along with it.
I’m vaguely fond of the monarchy but the pledge felt weird as hell so I didn’t do it.
Same
You weren’t required to, that bit was slipped into the service by either the Church of England or the Government. Buckingham Palace actually issued a statement saying it hadn’t come from them.
@@ffotograffydd It was only the Conservative Government that wanted the public allegiance, the Royal family and the Church of England did not want it in.
@@carolinelabbott2451 It was suggested on Radio 4 that it might have come from the Archbishop of Canterbury, but it did sound to me more like a Government thing, so thanks for confirming.
Apparently Canada will officially be printing King Charles on our coins and $20 bill next design. They announced this past week. I'm tempted to get a fresh $20 while it still has the queen and never spent it.
Edit- Hey, this isn't the right channel to see Luke! Lol. And I've got a SciGuys next on my queue.
I visited Canada a few years ago and still have a 20$ note that I never exchanged back for euros. I’ll probably spend it when I visit Canada again but in the meantime I use it as a bookmark.
Which banknote has a leader who gets "Spocked" ? I'd hate to see that go out of circulation
At the moment for Australia, the Reserve Bank of Australia left the door open to put King Charles III on the AUD$5 note if a government in the future desires for it.
@@angeladawn805 Sir Wilfred Laurier, Canada's 7th Prime Minister, on the 2001 design $5. Alternatively some people turn him into Alan Rickman as Snape. The portrait was changed in 2013 but the 2011-2012 notes are harder to deface anyway because they switched from the paper/cotton notes to the plastic notes.
I got a .999 silver coin with her likeness in the final year for my wife uncirculated. I felt like it would change next year to the King.
I'm a royalist, I don't have a problem with a constitutional monarchy, but I'm relieved that this pledge was not a call on us, or a demand, but rather an invitation, as the individual should always get the final say. I'm also really concerned about the arrests of peaceful protesters. In a country that should be a bastion of free speech, where you are freely allowed to disagree with other people and institutions, it's quite terrifying.
IKR, the increasing moves against protesters is really unnerving, and I’m hoping we can pull it back
Apparently they took away some of the ‘leaders’ or rather people who had things they thought could be used to attach themselves to street furniture, there were still loads of others left, much to some people’s annoyance who were trying to celebrate and enjoy the day, but it is a small price to pay for freedom of speech
I also heard that a few arrested (either the vegan, oil or not my king) had intended to startle the horses somehow, which would have been very dangerous.
It's because free speech has always been an illusion and our Democracy died in the 1980s and they closed the coffin lid in 2010.
They could not be s tool of state design to enact their monopolised violence
Actually Evan The king never asked anyone to swear allegiance to him , it was the Archbishop of Canterbury who said it then the likes of sky news (fox's sister channel ) jumped on the bandwagon bit like Chinese whispers then when the other news channels picked it up it was then all changed to the king asking but he wasn't the one that asked , but the church should not have stayed silent while Charles was getting the blame someone should have said something .
That's kinda how the church works though, isn't it? Stays quiet instead of protecting it's followers? Seems pretty normal behavior from them
Evan's king?
It makes sense to me that new citizens have to pledge while born citizens don’t. Outsiders have roots outside the nation. Automatic fondness, loyalty and family cannot be expected. Therefore, a conscious oath is not only expected but acts to make it clear to the new citizen the choice they are making and that when times are tough, they’re choosing their new home over their old one.
Eh, not really. Just because you're born and raised in a country it doesn't mean you'll love its royals. Just ask the French. Or Russians. In Poland our last king left a pretty bad after taste
That's ignoring the fact you're pleading to a person, not country. Wouldn't it be better if the new commers were loyal towards the country they're a part of instead of an old, rich dude who could or could not care about the state?
As someone born and raised in the UK, may I say; Fuck the King.
Also hi to all the immigrants who've moved here, happy to have you. Remember a compelled oath is no oath at all.
It's a relic of pre-World War days when wars in Europe could start at the drop of a Habsburg hat.
To be fair, the American Pledge literally starts with "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of America" then goes into the "ideals"
as an Australian i dont know a single person and i have a fairly wide circle of acquaintances in many social circles who A) cares about the monarchy or B) was even entertaining the idea of pledging allegiance to the King
I shall continue my childish, yet proud tradition of singing the Ren and Stimpy Royal Canadian Yaksmen anthem during others singing God Save the Queen/King!
I found this video really interesting.
I think that your friend articulated a lot of good points, some but by no means all of which, I agreed with. I also think that you are both advocating a very London view (understandably). I used to live in and love London but now I live outside. There is a reason why, when your friend drove around the countryside, he saw a very different reaction.
Some of this is perhaps generational - I watched the Coronation the whole way through and most people I know watched at least most of it, although not everyone. I felt the swearing allegiance bit was un-British but I did it anyway, somewhat uncomfortably, because I support the Monarchy.
The points around the Church of England were equally interesting. I am sure that you're right that a lot of people would decline to pay a tithe if they wanted to say that were members of the C of E. On the other hand, there are loads of people who want to be married in Church or have their loved ones buried by the Church who would not call themselves C of E or Christian. At the moment, they have a legal right to be married and buried by the C of E in the parish they live in, even if they profess another religion or are atheists. There are plenty of people who will join their local Church (for a few months, anyway) if it means that they can get their kids Christened there or it will get their kids into a Church school. I wonder if your German model proposal wouldn't also have a reverse impact from people who aren't religious but want a Church wedding, for example.
More broadly, I fear that we are all living increasingly in bubbles. The gulf between different parts of our country is growing, fuelled in part by the internet, in part by our politicians and in part by our increasingly different economic and social experiences. It is really important to have measured debates and this video, which presents a lot of opinions different to mine, contributes to that, certainly for me. So, thank you.
There is a bubble, London vs UK but more broadly rural vs city. It's not a red vs blue thing that the US has, although there is a little advantage taking to that effect as I understand it.
I'm firmly in the rural camp, visited London three times and that was two times too many. Went to my local city when I had to, which was fairly often before the internet but now is only required for big events. Hustle and bustle and people and annoyance and rush rush rush sod all that with a rusty spoon. It's not an age thing (33) or an intolerance thing (very left) or an unsocial thing, it's that the pace of life in cities is not for me and it's not for a lot of people. Many of the experiences on this channel supposedly being very british are in fact very london, which is fine but not ideal when being represented as the whole.
Wales is where it's at. I'm from Norfolk.
Might be just a tiny bit excessive to assume that Charley boy will be around for 20 to 30 years. He's pretty long in the tooth as it. He's only about six years short of the average UK age of death.
But also has the best health care - no waiting for appointments or tests for their family!
@@vacuumdiagram Of course, but I can't see him living to be over 100 like his grandma.
Its clear these 2 don't get outside London much.
Bro I have been waiting for this guy to come back he has been on my favorite video of yours 😂
21:05 Church tax is not the only thing why people leave the church in Germany. Especially (but not exclusively) the Catholic Church has had a lot of scandals that made this decision easier.
(Also, the church tax is basically a payment service any church could register for, but smaller independent ones usually don't and have their own system)
i know it sounds weird and i don't mean it in a "he deserves more" way, not at all. I thought that the new king would've inherited more from his mom, queen elizabeth. 500m doesn't sound like "much" coming from the queens inheritance. I expected something in the low billions maybe lmao
I don't see the monarchy as representing my community. I'm a proud Welsh man (who also thinks Welsh culture is different from the rest of the UK) and traditionally we have not been terribly royalist. Monarchy in the UK seems to be about keeping the wealth and not looking after your fellow countryman. I'd like to think a more socialist leaning view would mean more wealth for everyone rather than kept at the top
The monarchy doesn't cost as much as many sources suggest because of the royal estate which is basically the government get 75% of the profits for the royal estate which most years saves money on the average persons taxes.
I could listen to you two talk about anything 😁 you guys should start a podcast if you don't already have one!
omg the title is so real i feel exactly that way
I'm going to put this out there. I think the Archibishop was thinking of the pledge in a religious way. In that God is a common unifier for so many people and people don't mind using words like worship or subject when it comes to god. So, seeing King Charles as a defender or head of the church. He used the same sort of language not kind of realising that people would treat it differently when it's referring to a person.
He had good intentions. But they just backfired.
finally someone understands. The Coronation is absolutely and purely a religious service. people purposefully misconstrue the meaning.
Or maybe it's been suggested to the Archbish that subtly changing the basis of our belonging,in our society,community,whatever is a helpful idea,for some who might find that useful. It's a start.
@@volkhane i don't question any of your post and i never said it should be religious, it just is ,because its a symbolic 1000 year old ceremony.
Its not really a problem to me at least as a non church attending Brit that it is religious because i can accept tradition and continuity.
I am certain that millions of the non christian Brits are all over the Xmas celebrations,Easter,Pancake Day etc etc all Christian religious festivals.
They are tradition and so is the Coronation, so i can accept it easily and enjoy it for that reason. Thats the way i look at it at least.
@@volkhane you miss my point, if people can celebrate Christmas etc and not be bothered that its a Christian festival, then the Coronation is no different. It is what it is, and why not. Obviously the Coronation was celebrated by millions who have no religion or a religion that is not Christian, it's a traditional ceremony and lots of people can accept it for what it is.
90,000 sing Abide with Me at the Cup Final but probably only a few hundred go to church,is that a reason to ditch the tradition?
@@volkhane if the Coronation is not a Christian religious service, then i must have watched a different Coronation to you. Its a fact that its a Christian service whether people like it or not. I understand if your view is that it should not be Christian, its a valid point of view, but to say it is not a Christian service is incorrect.
Thank you guys, I'm not a US citizen, nor a UK one, but I have really appreciated your chats on monarchy, nations, countries, patriotism, values and religion.
King Charles didn’t request the pledge of allegiance. It was likely the Archbishop of Canterbury
I hated the pledge of allegiance. I had to say it at my church club too. (Which was gross.) Once I hit high school I started saying I was a Scottish duel citizen and so would not be giving one country preference. It worked and I was pleased not to have to get up and down every day like a nob.
Evan , living in Australia - we are (for all practical purposes) independent and every few years the republican movement gets a rush of blood and attempts to get the head of state moved to a president. Australia is a relatively free , successful democracy - and it seems to be working just fine having a head of state who has no practical power BUT keeps power out of the hands of others with agendas.
This has made me think a lot. Really interesting discussion 👌🏻
I think it's complicated by the fact that, yes there is the whole inheritance tax and sovereign fund thing (which is definitely too much money, we should change that), but our government is currently not great and hasn't been for a while. And I know the idea is kinda messed up, but charles and will genuinely seem to think they have a duty to the country, and so they do actually do some good work. For example, Charles had massive diplomatic success in Germany a month or two ago (am currently a Brit on a year abroad in germany, and they absolutely loved him over here - my German supervisor was asking if I'd watched his speech and all). And we need friends as a country desperately right now, and tbh, charles and the royals seem to be doing a lot more for us in that regard than our government, so I think we would actually find international relations more difficult if we got rid of the royals entirely and just had our not very democratic government.
The bigger problems are the CofE involvement (like the oath to the church from charles was way more detailed than that to the people - felt kinda medieval actually, and not in a good way), and the house of lords. That's worse.
In general, yeah, monarchy is a messed up idea, but currently I like Charles more than our mps cause he cares about the environment, which is the biggest issue of our time (in terms of long term impact), so... yeah. If charles seemed to care less or didn't champion an issue I also value, I would be more republican probs. Our government is just so, so bad at the moment, and the royals do a lot of leg work for our international image (at least in europe)
I had to make a pledge as a brownie/girl guide and I think my brother did the same as a cub scout, then later in the armed forces. These things are woven into British society and in some ways we become institutionalised and therefore accepting. However, having left the UK many years ago, I quite like this idea of a renewal simply because we can opt out whereas in other circumstances we are not given the choice. My views on monarchy have changed over the years but the problem of what to replace it with is the issue. No one is ready to see Boris Johnson or Tony Blair worming their way into the role of Head of State!
but since the queen/king is basically neutral in 99,9% of the time and they don't butt in, isn't it just a phasade? Like here in Austria, we have a president as head of state, but he is more of a figurehead instead of someone who actually makes decisions. Like the queen/king he is the face of our country, he meets with other leaders of states but internally he basically has near to no power over laws or decisions that are made. He can veto some stuff but usually he doesn't.
So if someone else already makes the rules and laws, what is the difference?
The president here at least is voted directly by the people 🤷
I recently published this:
For all my fellow Brits who want to abolish the monarchy, I have one remark. Do you really believe the British electorate can be trusted with electing a Head of State? This from the people who, when offered a public vote chose: 1. Boaty McBoatface; 2. Brexit; 3. Boris Johnson (and by default Liz Truss). Expect to see the following on any Presidential ballot: 1. Larry the Downing Street Cat; 2. A bacon sandwich; 3. Postman Pat. British humour is so anarchic that we cannot be trusted to put a Head of State in place.
Excuse you, what's wrong with BoatyMcBoatface >:(
@@Robb3636 Absolutely nothing. I thought it was brilliant!
My point is who the heck would we vote for in a Presidential election. ;-)
England had an Elective Monarchy during Anglo-Saxon period of the Witenagemot. Poland Lithuania Commonwealth had an Elective Monarchy and Greece too off the top of my head. As you have Dutch sounding name there was also the Stadtholder in the Netherlands.
I think you don't understand what is a head of state. It just a nominal position.
People don't directly elect them. For example India a former British colony with similar democratic structure, has President as head of the state instead of Queen/King since 1950 when India became republic.
The president isn't elected, most people don't even know who is the president. It is a figurative and nominal position elected by the upper house of parliament. The real power still lies within the hands of Prime Minister.
I don't see what you're implying.
As far as I know the king's only power is to refuse to sign a law into reality, a power that is rarely used so barely matters and in Belgium, with similar laws our politicians were even able to circumvent his refusal by declaring him unfit to rule for a day, thus not needing him to sign, I'm sure the British parlement can find a similar trick.
So tell me, what would be the major difference between pm Boris Johnson and president Johnson?
I think for Americans, the flag is the symbol, and for Brits, the symbol is the monarch. In both cases, it feels weird to me. Especially when it’s kids being requested to do this. (I’m a US citizen, if it matters.)
The UK had a republic once upon a time. It was called the Commonwealth, and it was head from 1649 by Oliver Cromwell (faming for having the First King Charles lose his head) till his death in 1658. The republic had a problem with religion, specifically over the puritan-inspired laws put on them; famously including no Christmas and whatnot. Cromwell'd son took over but Charles II (headless king's son) was invited by the masses in 1660 to be their king. So while I don't see why they should exist, the current political system is shit. Plain and simple
And I don't see a way out for this country from what could end up as anarchy.
You'd get the likes of Boris/Etonian toffs holding on to power for ever....the wealth at the top would be divvied between a very few oligarchs ...you'd be a miniture Russia. You still have a class system, it's in the regional dialects it's everywhere
Cromwell cancelled Xmas. His son Richard "Tumbledown Dick" was totally useless. He was a nice enough chap but no brains or ambition at all,thank goodness. He just wanted to live the life of a country squire,which thankfully he did get to do. The ordinary people were fed up with being forced to live good abstemious virtuous lives,they wanted to party,so they sent for The Merry Monarch and his disgusting,rakish friends,and things got very naughty and (nearly) everybody was happy.
"Charles II was invited by the masses" I think it would be correct to say that he was invited by majority Parliamentary agreement. Universal Suffrage would not exist for another 250+ years so I don't think "the masses" apply. In fact, "agreement of the army" was arguably more fitting given the parliament in question was formed by George Monck who was de facto military dictator at this point. It's a really interesting period of British history not often highlighted.
@@mjwoodroff8446 ppl forget this, and wonder why we don't become a republic. But I see more why we should be one than not. Just hoping that the parliamentary system actually doesn't screw us up this time (not likely unfortunately). And even under a more useful monarchy of centuries past, parliament was a pain up their backside. You know what I mean? A lot of the laws on the monarch's part weren't unanimously greenlighted by them, so you can see from 1660, or even earlier than that, parliament had a more influential role in how the country was ran by kings and queens up to James I. History intrigues me, cos we repeat it too often.
@@angeladawn805You are describing the current situation.
Recent machinations by various persons and institutions in the US have warmed me to a constitutional monarchy. I was leaning towards republicism but the US example appears to have no teeth to punish the rich and powerful.
As a kid, I always thought doing the Pledge of Allegiance was stupid; as soon as I discovered that it wasn't compulsory, I refused to do it (tho' the teacher still required that I stand); I don't recall getting a lot of flack for it, except once in a school camp where every morning we had to do the pledge, and I didn't do it and didn't take my hat off, and a teacher came over to me, grabbed my hat off my head, and jammed it into my stomach, knocking the wind out of me as I doubled up on the ground. Great way to instill "respect for the flag" and patriotism, eh? 😞
So glad you are doing this topic.
Such an insightful and interesting discussion, loved this!!
As a British Australian I definitely did not swear allegiance. Was too busy celebrating my anniversary to remember that it was coronation day at all. A bit annoyed we didn't even get a public holiday out of it down here in Aus but I guess it was on a Saturday anyway.
Probably more fun anyway
The bit at 5:06 is what they read out a few times during the crowning and the audience there responded/read along.
Naturalized Canadian here, so I’m on the same boat as Evan. I already had to pledge allegiance to the Queen, and her heirs and successors when I became a Canadian citizen 🤷♀️
As a British person who moved to America in the past decade.. I had to also had to pledge allegiance to the USA/flag/etc upon citizenship, while my natural born American citizen partner did not have to take the same oath legally at any point. So I think that's just a thing everywhere when you immigrate? It's weird that it's still the monarchy you're pledging allegiance to when they're just figureheads we keep around for tourism at this point, though.
I am a royalist and I didn't do the pledge. It's a choice. I find it odd that the USA pledges to a flag/country so I did not choose to pledge to the king
@@steelydanlover1972 I have always loved the royals. I think they bring value to the country.
@@steelydanlover1972 there was also a crisis with the economy when the Queen had her coronation. The amount of tourism they attract and the money they help bring in through this makes them value for money. I am proud to be British and proud to have a monarchy. Love live the king
@@nic3525 Would just like to politely point out that France makes much more money in tourism than we do on their royal buildings (well, previously royal) and theirs are not occupied.
@@Robb3636 I really don't care I have my opinion about the royals
@@Robb3636 It's much easier to turn your palaces into profitable tourist attractions after they aren't "in use" anymore...
I understand your point about inheritance tax. Here’s another point of view. The “assets” are not owned by the King. He cannot sell the Crown Jewels etc….should the cash money be taxed. Absolutely
But he gets full control of the profits of the dutchies that doesn’t get taxed and the hand over is exclusively volentary
He also has his personal wealth from property ownership. Having some nice ornaments which could sit in a museum isn’t as much of an issue as the fact he is able to gobble up tax payer money then ask those same people to consider him literally higher than they are. His Royal Highness is a statement in relation to subjugation. Which we cannot choose. Least he could do is chuck us a few hundred million in accordance to the legal system the rest of us have to adhere to
Great video, research and discussion!
I’m glad they took the time to have this talk. However, I’m definitely 100% true monarchy and I did pledge my allegiance to his Majesty King Charles the third. No regrets.
Extreme wealth aside it seems like a punishment more than an honor to be a royal. I hope Charles lives a long time to spare Will and George from having to make it their life. I feel bad for little George, his destiny has been planned since before his birth. Lovely to see you back on the channel Luke :)
I’m Scottish and I identify as a human being or if it fits better for other’s narrative I’m neither Scottish or British I’m a person living on this rock we all live on and should try to make a better life for ourselves and those that come after us. Too many people right now can’t see passed their own faces and see the rather huge picture of what’s happening we as a generation that could have done something are literally watching the start of the end and it won’t be pretty by any means
13:38 whenever someone asks me "To you, what was the most common London thing ever?" I answer "Mind the gap".
I've visited this city 10-ish times in my life, and this phrase is deeply ingrained in my experience because I've been using the tube multiple times every single day.
We were in hysterics when the Queen died, and a Tory MP gave one of her achievements as "She grew the Commonwealth," which if you think about it means "She watched the Empire shrink".
My experience of this was all my friends and people at work my age (under 30) did not care much about the coronation bar, as you mentioned, it was pretty and historic and interesting. BUt, our parents and grandparents were really into it. My mum had friends that camped out on the Mall and they're having street parties today ect. And yes, people liked the bank holiday, but i work in hospitality so i'm working today regardless... so that's not a benefit for a lot of people. so i'm a bit, meh about it all.... I did not pledge allegiance, it felt wrong tbh.
The coronation wasnt really a big thing in Canada. I actually saw more about the fashion of the attendees than the actual ceremony
12:00
Evan: "everyone loves you, you're now a member of a cool team!"
Luke: "...a cult"
HA
I find it really interesting, growing up in the US, everyone said the pledge kinda mindlessly in elementary school (including a cousin of mine who is not a US citizen) but by high school most people just remained quiet during the pledge. I usually remained seated and halfheartedly mumbled it but in french.
This sort of reminds me of something George Takei talked about. His entire family was rounded up during WWII and put in a Japanese American concentration camp. He was 5 years old. After one year in the camp, they had to sign off on an American Loyalty questionnaire. Two of the questions where totally outlandish.
Question number 27 asked if Nisei men were willing to serve on combat duty wherever ordered and asked everyone else if they would be willing to serve in other ways, such as serving in the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps. Question number 28 asked if individuals would swear unqualified allegiance to the United States and forswear any form of allegiance to the Emperor of Japan. Both questions caused a great deal of concern and unrest. Citizens resented being asked to renounce loyalty to the Emperor of Japan when they had never held a loyalty to the Emperor. Japanese immigrants were barred from becoming U.S. citizens on the basis of racial exclusion, so renouncing their only citizenship would be problematic. Young men worried that declaring their willingness to serve in combat units of the army would be akin to volunteering. If you said no to both questions you were sent to a camp for disloyal Japanese Americans in Northern California, surrounded by three rows of barbed wire fences, and patrolled by 6 tanks. with machine gun towers pointed inward. Bear in mind these are American born citizens.
I wonder how British American born citizens would have taken the same questions. #27 wouldn't have been quite so problematic, but you have to remember these young men were being asked to agree to fight for a country that had their parents and siblings in a concentration camp and they had been there for a year already. When originally trying to volunteer to fight they had been denied and told they weren't even citizens, but enemy aliens. Would you say "Sure, I'll fight for you." after enduring that? Oh and your parents will still be in that camp the whole time your at war over seas. #28 would be "Do you pledge unqualified allegiance to the US, and forswear any allegiance to the Monarchy of England?" Of course if you answer yes than you are also admitting you were loyal to the British Monarchy. You Redcoat!
Of course British Americans didn't have to worry, although German Americans did. They had concentration camps as well, but not nearly as infamous as the ones of their Japanese American counterparts.
I never pledged, never going to on principle
My Mum spent 3 years in an American High School growing up. She said the other kids would be funny with her that she didn't want to do tye pledge because she was British
Fascinating discussion. I will do the thing you spoke of and only voice my opinions to my nearest and dearest!
I am happy for the royal family to exist and the cost of the coronation will l think be less than the cost in the US of inauguration of presidents. What I will not be doIng is making any pledges to the king.
I became a British Citizen 10 years ago and I had to swear allegiance to the Queen, which I had absolutely no problem doing, as I took it as an essential part of being British. By the way you didn’t have to say, “So help me God”. There was an alternative option for the atheists. Consequently, I felt a lot of respect and some sense of loyalty to the Queen. When she died I was shocked and emotional. I even considered joining the queue, probably would have if not for work. But I don’t feel the same about Charles. I don’t care about him, wouldn’t swear the allegiance to him. I am generally in favour of there being monarchy in the UK, but Charles and Camilla are not it. I agree that William would be a better choice from the marketing perspective.
Would have respected Charles a lot more if he’d saved the money, pomp and ceremony by just abdicating immediately in favour of his son. He’s so old that being crowned now really does come off as a man who has waited his whole life to be king finally getting the chance and not caring in the slightest that he’ll be having a royal funeral in like half a decade. (Or caring a lot because that’s part of why he wants to be king).
Selfish and wasteful isn’t a good look. Not good for stability to have back to back deaths of the head of state either. Should have just passed it along.
@@DeadDancers But his mum hung on until she was 98. Charles is, what, in his 60s?
@Dead Dancer Exactly how Luke said it. William would have had a chance of being King for a really long time similar to the Queen and also hasnt had as many public controversial opinions as Charles so could be more everyone's King. So Charles stepping aside and abdicating in favor of William would probably have been way better for the continuing existance of the monarchy, less changes of power and being more popular. Now he just seems selfish and wasteful spending all that money to play King for a few years. But as Im not British nor do I ever forsee myself becoming a Brit (or citzen of another Commonwealth country) I don't have any skin in the game.
@@hughtube5154 74
I feel that a glaring misunderstanding needs to be corrected. The monarchy made a deal with the Treasury in the 20s to not pay inheritance tax whilst still "funding" the crown.
The Crown Estates makes a budget that says "we need this much to operate this year" which the government "gives" them. However this is after they have received all of the profits from the crown estates. If you compare one versus the other, the Crown pays 90%+ in tax. If you add this up over the last 70 years, not even adjusting for inflation, the Treasury has received well over £200M. If adjusted for inflation, it would be Brititsh Billions received. (Millions of millions not yhousands of millions.)
I was thinking the same wtf did you do that for 😅 regarding getting British citizenship. 😂 For all of eternity!!!
Honestly i feel like this is such a constructive, useful and eye opening discussion!
I don’t understand why pledging or not is such an important issue. Whether a person says the words or not, how is their life different in even the slightest way ??
I suppose it's the symbolism: the idea that you have pledged to this thing creates a certain feeling. to me even if I pledged it would have no effect on me, but that's because I would never Actually, Properly pledge. it would just be some words I say for a laugh, but if you genuinely really mean that you swear fealty to the King and all his successors, it feels like you Actually have a duty to them, even though it was just words.
You're almost there. If it doesn't matter, then why dedicate a second to it? Why force/pressure kids to do it? There have been Supreme Court cases over forcing kids to say the Pledge of Allegiance.
Me (a british citizen) missing the coronation because I thought it was on the Monday because we were given a bank holiday, only to see it had already happened on the Saturday😐
King Charles reading “Mind The Gap”, you for real?! 😂
as soon as my anti monarchist ass saw that we had to pledge allegiance to the king I kid you not my legit first reaction was "f*** that"
What you have to realise is we live in a constitutional monarchy. The King/Queen is the only person that can open and close parliament. The monarch has the power to choose anyone to be Prime Minister. All laws in the UK have to go through royal assent. Furthermore, the King/Queen is the only one can declare war on a country.
What you are pledging allegiance to is the crown. If you break a law you are prosecuted by the crown.
I did advocate for a republic a few years. As I get older, my opinion has shifted somewhat.
I do think the throne should have skipped Charles passed down to William.
That is true. We do live in a constitutional monarchy, and the monarch does have those powers. *technically* like imagine if Charles came out someday and said he has declared war on Germany. like lol no you didn't shut up. Also I fail to see how this is at all an argument for the monarchy. Is it supposed to be? it seems more against tbh.
It's neither an argument for or against. It's more a statement of fact. The only part which is opinion is at the end. I do believe the throne should have skipped Charles. His behaviour towards Dianna was disgraceful. In my view a monarch should be held to a higher standard.
For me, it's not so much about tourism etc, but more about keeping the politicians out of the top jobs (head of armed forces etc)
It's interesting we are consider as being low on freedom of speech when countries like China removes candidates and media that do not espouse the party line. Are we held to different standards than other countries. By the way the money the Monarchy gets is from the Crown Estates, the government depending on if any of the Royal buildings need renovation work keeps the other 65 to 75%.
Im from republic but ive been like lukewarm monarchist when I moved to UK but the overexposure( in last few years its been wedding, jubilee, funeral, coronation and each went on months and months) and certain excesses( like now the inheritance tax, the lack of it, and the repeated cases of arrest of protesters and the heavy pro-monarchical campaign in media and now the pledge...) made me quite republican over last decade, even considering I too had to make pinky promise to the late queen and her heirs to become a citizen.
in principle im not against monarchy but only if monarchs are subject of all the laws like rest of us, taxes, anticorruption, disclosure- including their pay etc, and have no right to prescreen proposed laws and veto them or gain exceptions if the bill impacts them in a way they dislike. simply just being purely ceremonial head, otherwise Id prefer president.
But you've got to be careful what you wish for ........ we could easily end up with President Johnson or President Farage
@@markthomas2577With a name like Thomas you won't even welcome the English into Wales, so stop dissing Farage 😂
@@markthomas2577 yes, but they wouldn't be for life and we wouldn't be forced to pay for their whole extended family and in laws. presidents are usually limited to 2 terms or so, so one would have to deal with them only for a decade and prolly only for half of it before they're changed and we have new one to complain about.
@@rehurekj America literally pays for the whole extended family and every president gets secret service protection until the day they die.
@@markthomas2577 I'm going to make a guess based on the name that Jiri is a fellow Czech man. Trust me - we know very well what idiots we can end up with as presidents through elections. But he's right - we had a miserable one, his two terms are up and he's gone. And while I strongly disliked him, I understand that the majority wanted him which to me makes him much more credible than if he were born into that role.
God save the king
I'm interested in how this request/call to pledge allegiance, apparently made by third party (not the monarch or the court), will affect people's view of King Charles. You said it's a quote, or appears to be a quote, by the Arch Bishop of Canterbury (if I remember that correctly) but then you also talk about it as though it was the King himself who made it. It's a subtle effect, but since the King is, in some ways, the "higher authority" (essentailly the one with more power) of the two, even if it WAS by the arch bishop, it ends up being attributed to the King indirectly or appears to have his blessing. Even if he didn't say it or isn't in agreement with the wording or it being said at all.
The announcements weren't just on the underground. We were in Bath on Friday and heard it. Very confusing considering that we don't hear mind the gap outside of London, and it was the whole of bank holiday weekend.