Loved the video. Want to point out that though that in the passing of the Parliament Act, it is worth mentioning that the Lords broke a constitutional convention (an unwritten source of law in our constitution) by rejecting the people budget. Apart from that the rest of it was sound & have really loved this little series as a law grad.
Enjoyed this series. Personally I would include the various Scotland and Wales Acts, and the Good Friday Agreement as part of "The Constitution". Maybe something to consider for Part 4, the bonus Devolution episode.
You should make a video about Britian's Vietnam aka The Malayan Emergency fought by British Commonwealth troops from Australia, New Zealand, Rhodesia, Fiji and Kenya against the MNLA (Malayan national liberation army) from 1948-1960. This is not your typical Vietnam style war this is more of a guerilla war mostly fought in the jungle.
@@JohnnyAnthrax1214 And unlike Vietnam the British technically won that war. To this day Malaysia is in the Commonwealth and has a Westminster-style government with very little in the way of communist influence.
Indeed, as has been proven in court, the Good Friday Agreement and the Withdrawal Agreement featuring the Northern Ireland protocol supercedes UK constitutional law. Certainly something interesting to explore in a future video.
As an American, I never related to British people until you said they “might be lunatics, but they were patriotic lunatics.” Maybe we aren’t so different after all?
American who’s fascinated by world governments. This series has been more helpful than anything on Britain’s parliament RU-vid channel . Not even close . Thank you
Nice to see the struggles of the UK in their development of their "constitution". Canada had a similar development. With the Constitution act of 1867 being the main foundation of the Canadian "Constitution" and (through many constitutional conventions and laws added) the next major piece of development was the Constitution act of 1982 with it combining the Constitution act of 1867 (plus the other tiny but important constitutional conventions and laws) with the new Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Though The Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not explicitly copy/paste the UN Human rights code, it has a lot of sections similar to it and just recently (2020 or 2021) Canada became the first nation to fully adopt the UN charter of the rights of Indigenous peoples (so, Canada is keeping up with the Mother Country)
@@rickyboii5971 yeah, well. During the negotiations, it only needed 1/2+ of the provinces, with a total of 1/2+ of the population to agree to the deal in order for the 1982 deal to be passed. Quebec retroactively is in the constitution even though they did not agree.
The funny thing about the Canadian Constitution though is that no one knows exactly what's in it, because the 1982 Act was broad, all-encompassing, and a bit vague. Sorry about that one guys, us Brits again messing up colonial legacies. I'm sure it'll be fine
@YourGayOverlord we also don't know how big our constitution is. Their is a preambule that says our constitution includes all constitution documents of England and Britain. So technically the Magna Carter is apart of our constitution
The transition to the war part was gold. The fact that you chose to use Mars, Bringer of War there is also awesome because 1. Appropriate name lol 2. Great song
Interesting though to think about how a lot of modern UK constitutional laws started as happenstance, then happened regularly, eventually always, and were only *then* put into law. Like the thing about the PM having to resign when parliament votes him out. At some point parliament voted him out, but he asked the King to call a general election instead, so what was parliament going to do? He won, and ever since that was an accepted part of the de facto constitution for centuries
When humans first arrived in the Britain it was a lush rainforest island, however the House of Lords employed a hunting tactic called firestick farming. As a result the British Isles are now a desert continent.
I think it's worth mentioning given your portrayal of the Suffragettes that, by your own words, actual violence & the threat of revolution brought about the abolition of rotten boroughs and the enfranchisement of the middle class
Technicly you can change the Constatution of the US it is just super hard. You need 2/3 of the house of Represtitves (witch has 435 members in total). You then need 2/3 of the Senate to approve (whitch has 100 members in total). It then needs to be approved by 3/4 of the states (50 states in total). Or you need 2/3 of the states to call for a constitutional convention to propose an ammendment and then that ammendment needs to be approved by 3/4 of the total amount of the states. Again I say it is super hard to get any ammendments passed.
First time watching your content, but as a Polish person, it helped me a lot to understand the British history for my upcoming school test. Thanks a lot!
whats crazy is i legit just started watching this series and actaully just finished the last episode like 1min ago and i was like "maaaaaan now i gotta wait god knows how long for the next one" lmaooooo
Another great video. I remember going through your channel a while ago and clicking on all the thumbnails that usually seem too boring to watch to see if that was actually the case. Suffice to say this series is my favourite on your channel. Really interesting and way better explained than in school. Wouldn't be the same without those sarcastic jokes as well.👌
11:20 In fact, amendments can and have been made to the constitution, granting such things as freedom for slaves, suffrage for women, and at one point, prohibition.
Also state constitutions pretty much list the rights and liberties that most modern constitutions do anyway, not to mention the many federal acts granting certain rights and liberties
the united states constitution is entrenched, meaning the process of amending it is a separate and more difficult process than just passing an act of congress (as you probably know) here in the uk, our constitution is not entrenched as constitutional laws are on the same level as any other law, meaning from our perspective, the US constitution is effectively untouchable
@@maddie_1122 But it's not, mostly. Except for the part about each state having equal representation in the Senate. That literally cannot be amended without the unanimous consent of every state (including the ones who would lose basically all of their influence by doing it) and is therefore effectively untouchable. But the rest can be amended by two different pathways, one running through both Congress and the States, and one running through only the States but requiring a higher margin. The reason that both require the states is that the states are the original sovereigns in the US and the federal government derives its power from them.
11:15 While your proposal for a codified constitution would give it a democratic mandate, having, keeping, and adding documents through history also gives it a democratic mandate, but not only from the people who make the rights now, but also those in the future who keep these documents, and for us the documents we have taken from the past is a democratic mandate from those in the past as well.
@@dingo1547 there are ways to avoid this 1) Vote of No Confidence. Any party can call a vote of confidence for their party leadership with just 15% of their MPs. It is then put up to a vote, and if passed, the outed Party Leader cannot run. 2) House of Lords. Lords can block any legislation that affects the fundamental rights of the British people indefinitely. 3) Monarch. The Monarch can dissolve parliament whenever they want, which has been used once since 1689 in Australia to solve a Constitutional Crisis. 4) The British people get pissy, and get pissy often. Cite the Civil War, Glorious Revolution, Great Reform Act, People's Budget, and Suffragettes movement. It seems we like our rights, especially when they are clearly being abused.
I hope theres part 4 on the constitutiom, but i think your next video is the part 2 of INSANE PROJECCTS THAT WE SHOULD TRY also shoutout or mention me thanks. I love the middle part where women work in a factory in the military and men are in germany to fight in the war, i dont know i think i should call this Gender Equality or Unity. one more thing, I watched this video in a Jumbo TV that i connect my laptop so i can feel what 90s tv's look like.
Its funny looking at the Liberal Democrats now compared to the liberal party with labour and Conservatives being the 2 parties going at each other now.
Can't help but disagree, the reason all these rights and democratic changes have been able to occure is because of Parliamentary soveignty and the flexibility of the constitution. Any codified document would grind change to a halt just like America and result in originalist squabbling and a covoluted amendment process. Regardless, great video , great animation and very comprehensive despite our seperate conclusions- love the channel :)
Yet if they had a single unified document like us yanks, it wouldn't have taken all that "originalist squabbling" and also you don't need amendment approval for every single law. No offense but do you even know how the US constitution works?
@@CarterHancock but this is about constitutional change, If the UK had a codified Constitution from the outset, organic developments like the Commons supremacy and the Sailsbury convention would never have happened. The fact that constitional changes can occur simply by law as shown is BECAUSE of the uncodified nature of the UK constitution.
@@CarterHancock and because of the US codified constitution, relics such as unfaithful electors and the electoral continue to exist despite dislike from the majority of the living populous.
@@repippeas And yet those things could be changed despite unfaithful electors not being a factor in any election. You seem to forget that the UK doesn't have a separation of executive and legislative branches. Also you should really research why the electoral collage is actually good. It works for our system.
Perhaps have a more eye catching thumbnail to attract more viewers. Even though I subscribed with you, it took me multiple refreshes to realize it was your video.
Hey man. Can you please make a video on scandanavia. I do not have to tell you that this countries are getting a lot of attention recently supposedly for their outstanding performance on many parameters. Please make a video on why scandanavian countries (Denmark, Norway and Sweden) are so *progressed* even though they are not that rich and their pros and cons.
Maybe, I am guessing it out of my ass so take it with a grain of salt, he is reffering to: Rich = High GDP or similar Like between the United States/China/Germany you have like more than 1/3 of the world's GDP while if you combine all of scandinnavia you won't come close to that
8:00 that clause existed at 30 due to men having to serve in the army, 21. so when lowered to 21 later, women had MORE rights than men. Because they are not dependant on the responsibility of defending the country
If you Disagree with the Human Rights Act you disagree with the UN declaration of Human Rights, That puts you in the same boat as Stalin's Soviet Union, Aparthied South Africa and Shari'a Saudi Arabia.
If you disagree with the union of fascist, you disagree with the suffradettes. That puts you in the same boat as misoginists, wife beaters and the muslim fundamentalists. These kinds of arguments are shite. Every document has to be respected on merit alone. And if there is a flaw in ether of these two documents, one has the right to say so.
Long time admirer of your vids, love to see a northern youtuber killing it. One point though, the Human Rights Act 1998 is a copy into British law of the European Convention on Human Rights, not the Geneva Convention. Blair went on to say that he regretted it as well but that’s a different video… keep gaining them subs
In sweden we have a constitution and it's split up in four parts which are Regeringsformen, Successionsordningen, Tryckfrihetsförordningen and yttrandefrihetsgrundlagen. I think this system works well.
As long as conscription and the draft is not universal neither is sufferage. If young men are expected to die for their country and woman are not how is there equality.
