Pretty much every person i know, including all my family, are at awe and have nothing but admiration for the monarchy besides me. They are seemingly happy to be their subordinates... wprship the ground they walk on, i look at all of these people in my life with disgust when they act this way in presense.
Go back to school, learn to read and write. Once educated, teach your family and friends to read and write then you may see that the royal family and all born to privilege are parasites.
@@lochnessmunster1189What’s wrong with the statement “worship the ground they walk on”? I don’t believe it’s as exaggerated as you suggest. Most monarchists I know (coming from one of the “colonies” myself, and from a family of “Loyalists” I have a substantial personal familiarity with monarchist fandom) had an outsized intellectual interest and emotional investment in the castles and palaces and gardens inhabited by the British Royal Family now and throughout history. You could almost say the relationship they felt as “subjects” of the British Crown is so reverential, and their own identity as people so contingent on their relationship to the Crown and the Royal Family and every part of the history of these hierarchical institutions, it almost defined them as people and as a class within the society they lived in. It’s not an unreasonable stretch to say these true monarchist “subjects” I grew up knowing were so wedded to the hierarchical social structure all of this left them with a state of awe about persons and the property and habitual residences and places the Royal Family conduct their lives they “worshipped” the ground the Royals walked on. I know how aghast they were at the thought or mention of “dirty commoners” (people identical to themselves keep in mind) walking around in the royal gardens like common tourists, or the opening of many of the palaces and other royal haunts to guided tours for the public. One event in particular I recall that left a real impression was how scandalized they all were when the Michael Fagan got into the Queen’s bedroom back in 1982 while she was asleep in it and sat on her bed chatting with her for a while about his family’s diminished life under decades of misrule that favored growing enrichment of the monarchy, the British wealthy establishment and their American partners while the 95% sank into poverty. Of course he didn’t put it in those terms. But that’s what he was talking about. How theyd won the war almost forty years earlier but people like him were never really better off afterwards and how could that have happened? At least they got the NHS (which has since been gutted by tax cuts for the rich) … but that’s another story. All the monarchists in my life could see back in 1982 about the Fagan story was the despoilment of the Queen’s person and the inner sanctuaries of their Royal Lives. How unjust this was to dirty and insult the nobility of the Queen and her palace in this way. My own feelings about Monarchy quickly diverged from my working class family’s during the late 70s and 80s as I grew a brain to think in terms of the interests of my own economic class and learned more about the real history of Monarchy and the methods of creating and enforcing hierarchical societies. But it certainly wasn’t then, and even today it still persists even if quite diminished, the capacity, the world view, the ideology among monarchists to “worship” the ground the Monarchy habitual walks upon. It’s a grotesque combination of the radical private property tradition of Europe, combined with the mystical BS the monarchies of Europe surround themselves with, but there’s truth to the saying that ideological monarchists of the lower classes have such reverence for the Monarchy they worship these places and the ground the monarchy habitually walks on. The idealist, non-material nonsense is of course got to go. But it’s persistent precisely because the Monarchy knows that the magic show is all they have to separate them from the successful bourgeoisie class (and thus … gasp … Republicanism), so they play it up for all it’s worth, even now, if more subtly and cagily.
@@revolutionarycommunists I'd like to be a Socialist too. I'd like to ignore the lower wages and severe restrictions on human freedom which existed in every attempt to implement Socialism, in history
@@lochnessmunster1189 1.Lower wages were due to the fact that revolution happened in developing regions. Once they had the revolution HDI, wages grew massively. Even capitalist countries had low wages during their developing phase. 2. Most of the restrictions were due to the fact that there was a danger of sabotage by imperialist countries. Documents are available nowadays showing all the ways they imperial countries tried to sabotage revolutions and freedom struggled by planting fake news, infiltration, terrorism etc.
It is slightly disadvantageous to a Capitalist economy, to have a Royal Family. The Family will have to be paid for by taxation, which a) leaves employers and the wealthiest poorer, and b) makes it more expensive to hire employees (I won't say 'workers' as Marxists do), because if their wages will be reduced by paying for Royalty, the wage (price of labour) will need to be increased slightly to compensate.
Pretty much every person i know, including all my family, are at awe and have nothing but admiration for the monarchy besides me. They are seemingly happy to be their subordinates... wprship the ground they walk on, i look at all of these people in my life with disgust when they act this way in presense.
Go back to school, learn to read and write. Once educated, teach your family and friends to read and write then you may see that the royal family and all born to privilege are parasites.
Do they actually worship the ground they walk on? Is that actually true?
@@lochnessmunster1189 I think anab0lic meant it as an expression, not literally 🙂
@@JasonGoodfellowPerhaps, but it's language like this which enables politicians to tell half-lies all the time (granted, he's not a politician).
@@lochnessmunster1189What’s wrong with the statement “worship the ground they walk on”? I don’t believe it’s as exaggerated as you suggest.
Most monarchists I know (coming from one of the “colonies” myself, and from a family of “Loyalists” I have a substantial personal familiarity with monarchist fandom) had an outsized intellectual interest and emotional investment in the castles and palaces and gardens inhabited by the British Royal Family now and throughout history. You could almost say the relationship they felt as “subjects” of the British Crown is so reverential, and their own identity as people so contingent on their relationship to the Crown and the Royal Family and every part of the history of these hierarchical institutions, it almost defined them as people and as a class within the society they lived in. It’s not an unreasonable stretch to say these true monarchist “subjects” I grew up knowing were so wedded to the hierarchical social structure all of this left them with a state of awe about persons and the property and habitual residences and places the Royal Family conduct their lives they “worshipped” the ground the Royals walked on. I know how aghast they were at the thought or mention of “dirty commoners” (people identical to themselves keep in mind) walking around in the royal gardens like common tourists, or the opening of many of the palaces and other royal haunts to guided tours for the public.
One event in particular I recall that left a real impression was how scandalized they all were when the Michael Fagan got into the Queen’s bedroom back in 1982 while she was asleep in it and sat on her bed chatting with her for a while about his family’s diminished life under decades of misrule that favored growing enrichment of the monarchy, the British wealthy establishment and their American partners while the 95% sank into poverty. Of course he didn’t put it in those terms. But that’s what he was talking about. How theyd won the war almost forty years earlier but people like him were never really better off afterwards and how could that have happened? At least they got the NHS (which has since been gutted by tax cuts for the rich) … but that’s another story.
All the monarchists in my life could see back in 1982 about the Fagan story was the despoilment of the Queen’s person and the inner sanctuaries of their Royal Lives. How unjust this was to dirty and insult the nobility of the Queen and her palace in this way.
My own feelings about Monarchy quickly diverged from my working class family’s during the late 70s and 80s as I grew a brain to think in terms of the interests of my own economic class and learned more about the real history of Monarchy and the methods of creating and enforcing hierarchical societies.
But it certainly wasn’t then, and even today it still persists even if quite diminished, the capacity, the world view, the ideology among monarchists to “worship” the ground the Monarchy habitual walks upon. It’s a grotesque combination of the radical private property tradition of Europe, combined with the mystical BS the monarchies of Europe surround themselves with, but there’s truth to the saying that ideological monarchists of the lower classes have such reverence for the Monarchy they worship these places and the ground the monarchy habitually walks on.
The idealist, non-material nonsense is of course got to go. But it’s persistent precisely because the Monarchy knows that the magic show is all they have to separate them from the successful bourgeoisie class (and thus … gasp … Republicanism), so they play it up for all it’s worth, even now, if more subtly and cagily.
Guys keep continue to do what you do. You are all amazing ! Just found out your channel today. Will do my best to spread it as much as possible.
Thanks for the kind words! Would you like to get involved in our organisation too? You can sign up here: socialist.net/join
@@revolutionarycommunists I'd like to be a Socialist too. I'd like to ignore the lower wages and severe restrictions on human freedom which existed in every attempt to implement Socialism, in history
@@lochnessmunster1189
1.Lower wages were due to the fact that revolution happened in developing regions. Once they had the revolution HDI, wages grew massively. Even capitalist countries had low wages during their developing phase.
2. Most of the restrictions were due to the fact that there was a danger of sabotage by imperialist countries. Documents are available nowadays showing all the ways they imperial countries tried to sabotage revolutions and freedom struggled by planting fake news, infiltration, terrorism etc.
Solidarity brothers and sisters ✊
£196 Billion to implement starmers 10 pledges. Get real.
It is slightly disadvantageous to a Capitalist economy, to have a Royal Family. The Family will have to be paid for by taxation, which a) leaves employers and the wealthiest poorer, and b) makes it more expensive to hire employees (I won't say 'workers' as Marxists do), because if their wages will be reduced by paying for Royalty, the wage (price of labour) will need to be increased slightly to compensate.
Yeah, monarchy is rudiment of feudal past
@@gagikgrigoryan6534 Absolutely right. The video's title is nonsense.