Why do people hate the royals? Tune in to this episode of some random prick talk about it! If you liked the video, please validate my hobby by liking and subscribing. If I get 5 subscribers, I will run a naked mile high on acid.
Another fun fact; he wasn't called 'William' but Guillaume. Guillaume Le Batard. And if that isn't a case of Nominative Determinism, I don't know what is. Alan B'stard played by Rik Mayall in 'The New Statesman'..?
Divinely-Chosen ended with Princess Diana, the family knows it too well and vy for that power even though it can't be imparted or stolen, unless you want Britian to become a literal ashland and the rest of the world besieged by undead Britians.
@@XSilver_WaterXno monarch has ever been divinely chosen. They made that up to justify their power and stop people rising up against them. It’s mythology.
As a young child learning that a Monarchy still existed in the U.K., my first question was “Why? What is the purpose?” The British woman we knew responded “It’s tradition and posh”. 🙄
@@SanjaySharma-iq6we that may be so, but people love to bring up the past, look at winston Churchill, he made comments years ago 70 yo 80+ years ago and people got upset and so on and wanted him gone from history, what makes the Japanese monarchy during the war or 70 to 80+ years ago a pass, they might have done some stuff to the Americans during ww2
REPUBLIC NOW Versailles has the added bonus of Apparitions and Zombies! Who wouldn't wanna see that? I recommend Phil the Greek as head Zombie and Liz as head ghost! Oh and Nazi Edward also as a zombie! Ponce Andrew can remain a danger to children but with a tag and millions of taxpayer pounds to get him out of hot water! I wonder if King Charlie went slumming with his pal Savile?
nah, they should put every british citizens name into a hat, and then at the start of every year they pick a name out, and that guy is king or queen for the year
Why Do Some People Hate The Royal Family? I think the question is Why Do Some People LikeThe Royal Family? And for the vast majority of them, the answer is "because it's there"
They LOVE it because it is one of the very few aspects of British/English history & culture people like Sadiq Khan & the out of control WOKEY culture has not yet destroyed. About a 1/3 of Londoners are actually White British the rest of the 44% are Eastern European with a smattering of Australians, Americans, Canadians etc. British/English culture will be gone by the time my kids reach my age.
Not only are Brits subjects of a monarch, we are also de-facto members of an established church, of which the monarch is the head. The UK is a theocracy in which the established church exercises influence and participates in major matters of state, whether we like it or not. The upcoming coronation is an example of the church's role, when we will see a bishop anoint an unelected head of state in a very expensive pantomime full of pomp and displays of wealth, at a time when so many of us are struggling with a cost-of-living crisis.
So it goes when you have an imaginary institution propping up a contrived institution. Good thing neither of them is obtrusive or expensive. That would be really absurd.
Hardly a theocracy when you see how few people pay any head to the CoE and when the CEO has few fixed beliefs and is divided as to what it’s message should be. Then going fascination and obsession with the royal family is real and it is hard for foreigners to grasp.
Associated with this is the fact that UK is one of very few legally sectarian states in the world. It is not possible for a Catholic to be Prime Minister or Chancellor of the Exchequer. It shares with Iran the distinction of being the only countries where clerics get into parliament as of right,
Really? The same public that keeps pumping themselves up on tabloid hate to vote for the establishment party whose sole function is to pass wealth from the poor to the rich.
You know I here this don't know if true but the Inheritance of Soldiers who die in both or I think just ww2, if they did not have a family or next of kin the money whent to the Royal family witch years later turn out not to be going to any veds but to the pockets of the Royals could be rubbish plus my score is I here it off my dad 😂, but he really gets in to this shit, still thought it worth Bringing up, if any one can Correct me feel free to am happy to learn
Yep ! my family sat around a tiny black & white T.V. to watch the Coronation of Queen Elizabeth the second ,but since then they don"t seem to have done a lot for the ordinary man /woman in the street , they seem very good at making the Monarch relevant while any money they make they like to keep especially any massive death duties . If Charles costs the taxpayer a fortune while paying very little for his Coronation ,which sounds like a extravagant one ,questions may be asked ,but like the subject sheep they are we Brits. will sit back & carry on bowing ,scrapping and forelock tugging as normal . Is it any wonder Foreigners think we are weird when it comes to the Royals .
@@yorkiegilly4355 Charles and co .. Have inherited 16 billion pounds .. in art .. property.. land .. and shares in B.P.. Carlisle Group.. and many more .. all from mummy and daddy... That money should be given back to the government to pay of their loan interestdebts to the Rothschilds banks... Rich people don't pay income tax they don't get a salary or wage weekly or monthly.... its the working poor who they use .. to pay off governments debt with interest.. this family is a vermin .. they live of the hosts ..
Why don't you get your facts right .Royal finances are complex and it might do you some good to investigate how little each U K taxpayer contributes to the King and his family .I prefer King Charles to Joe Biden and Donald Trump and I guess many more of my fellow country end women might express a similar view .
On the “tourism argument”, note that the UK usually scores similar to Germany in the “money from tourism income” ranking, while Italy usually scores better. Both countries kicked out their respective monarchies, so I would guess it’s not really the point. And if the UK wants to top such ranking, it should copy the countries that’s always first: France. By the way, about that ranking, of the top 10 countries for tourism income only two are monarchies, Japan and the UK, all the rest had monarch they got rid of, usually with revolts or revolutions (I’m including the USA as they where created with a revolution seceding from a monarchy).
Even in US there is a royal palace to be seen- in Honolulu. The ousting of the Royal family of Hawaii is the story of fruit company colonialism, though- not as much fun as lopping the heads off European kings & queens.
Liz 2 wasn't without controversy. Her first speech upon accepting the crown was done at the same place a massacre occurred (which had happened shortly before).
Actually, Louis xiv of France reigned longer than Queen Elizabeth ii. 72 years to Elizabeth's 70. Mind you, he became king at the age of 5, so he had a bit of a head start. I suspect, however, that this video was made before Queen Elizabeth died.
Only decent argument I've ever heard for keeping the monarchy is that right now we have bigger problems to deal with and if we rush removing the monarchy then we're gonna loose a whole bunch of tax money due to the the laws surrounding the sovereign grant and royal estates.
I hate the royals, the only one I respect is Harry for quitting... the MSM really went after him instead of praising him for escaping and promoting the idea of ending all this fairytail nonsence. Chad move from Harry !
They're still pushed at us here in Australia too - the oldest European families to arrive here were indeed British, but since my family has been here since 1788 nobody in my family feels any sense of britishness. From memory, the reason we still have them as our technical head of state is because it's in our constitution and boy do those require a lot of work to change (also that we still have some dedicated royalists whereas the rest of the country either couldn't give a flying fuck about them or would rather like Australia to become a republic
Dude you are absolutely amazing. So factual without bias, you just tell the utter truth in such an intelligent yet, sadly morbid reality. Your eloquence and humour are truly awe-inspiring dude... Long live Just Some Geezer! ❤
@@justsomegeezer69 I can just imagine it. "The Chinese? Why they're nothing but dog eating, opium smoking schemers who will smile and bow to your face, but stab you in the back, butcher you, and sell your organs for a sixpence! Bloody coolies! The Devil take all of them!" Is that about right? On second thought, that sounded like a more British Richard Nixon. Pretty much the same, except Nixon actually had some serious responsibilities that he fucked up gloriously.
The Anglo-Saxons before William the Conqueror weren't exactly indigenious either to the British Isles. So it was Scandinavians kicking Scandinavians arses!
@@seankane8628 Modern groups descended from the North Germanic peoples are the Danes, Faroese people, Icelanders, Norwegians and Swedes. These groups are often referred to as Scandinavians. Also the Normans were Vikings. But for fairness sake let's agree that it was Germans versus Scandinavians with a French twist. :-)
@@samr8603 let’s not forget the romans, followed by jutes, angles and saxons and then the vikings. So indeed the ‘English’ were a mix of Danish and North German. Then came the Normans who were French-speaking but descended from Vikings and later the Dutch invasion of the so-called glorious Revolution and then the German monarchs.
Your content is spot on over all... I just want you to know that I will stick by you, I'll fight your corner, I'll wipe your tears, I'll be there every step of the way, as long as you keep making videos.
On tourism, the French royal estates contribute twice as much in monetary terms to the economy as the UK royal estates do. And that's with the French having terminated their royal family with extreme prejudice over two centuries ago.
@@catgladwell5684Apparently they also have better teeth, and wine 🤔 Though English women should have the largest boobs, while French the tiniest 😐 Lots of important issues to consider as tourist 🤗
Pulled me in with the Andrew Tate video, after watching this I’m convinced this guy is the next Jake Tran and will blow. You have indeed earned the like and sub: I’m just glad I discovered you early
Hiearchies have always existed. However Hiearchies do not need to be elitist nepotistic elitist shitfests, through effort we can try our best to reform via a public effort of the middle and lowers to enforce meritocracy and pro-laborer and pro-entrepreneur seizure and redistribution of wealth from the government and elite to the meritous and the needy among the peoples in order to ensure fair competition in the free market, and just suffering for the affluent malignant whom come from all peoples and have oppressed all peoples.
The makes no sense. Saxe-Coburg and Gotha became the Royal House of the UK through King Edward VII, being the son of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert. Queen Victoria was required to marry a Protestant, so eventually she married Prince Albert. No Catholicism there.
If we are still going to have royalty as head of state, It'd be preferable to keep them to a minimum. It's probably well past time that the institution was scrapped. It's an anathema to a modern even moderately socialist egalitarian democracy. In effect it's just the veneration of the descendants of the most successful local bully a thousand years ago.
Charlie has supposed too be cutting the size of them Down . But still wants a extra 50 million to do up a palace . Very greedy charlie when your subjects many are half starved hail the republic 👍👍👍👍
Imagine the Royal Court considering Prince Phillip as Johnny Foreigner because he was Greek and German? It makes sense when you see how they treat Meghan Markle
Her Late Majesty Elizabeth II wasn't the longest lived Reigning Monarch, that distinction goes to Louis XIV who was verifiably King of France for 72 years and 110 days.
Stupid : he was called king at 5 years old and , obviously , he was not able to reign : il was Cardinal Mazarin who held power .Louis XIV reigned by himself when he was 23 and he ruled for 54 years . Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II really was the longest living monarch
I love the picture of Charles with all his campaign medals on. He famously served in many wars. Princess Ann also wears campaign medals when she's dressed formally. Again she also famously served in many wars. Prince Andrew did actually serve in the Falklands but was infamously inept. He was there in name only. Prince Harry was in Afghanistan and said shooting foreigners was like "playing a computer game". These inbred geniuses are our hereditary rulers. Nice outfits though, I guess.
❤ THEY HAVE HAD A GOOD GIG GOING ALL THESE YEARS! THERE TIME IS JUST ABOUT UP! ASK COULD NEVER ANSCER WHAT HAPPENED TO THE 10 CHILDREN FROM A NATIVE SCHOOL IN CANADA! ASK YOURSELVES........WHY NOT? ❤
He was talking about Your favorite Andrew The pedophile harry he is not living on taxpayers money it should not be your business he is talking about people like you who have no bran there own move on stop talking nonsense toxic
It think it would be great if you did a collection of photos of some of the "royals" as they really look :: the menacingly joyful expression of Philip witnessing the execution of someone's auto-da-fa ; Charles' constipated look of annoyance ; Elizabeth's occasional face slip-ups where she is truly revealing her emesis ; even William has photos that reveal they got their fangs into him early on in spite of his mother's death ; Kate (?) I've seen photos of her where she looks like a medusa-in-training and would kill/eat a child that made her angry. These photos are rare, but revealing as to how they can't always control their inner bloodthirsty, merciless hee-bie jee-bies.
How about the People's Federal Republic of Anglo-Saxonia? Or New Saxony? We could change the name of our language from "English" to Newsaxon. Just a thought.
I wouldn't have known this was your first vid if you hadn't mentioned it! I'm trying to figure out if I like the (now passed) queen as a US person based on how Ireland and Jamaica and every other colonized nation are reacting. Like how much did Elizabeth II let slide?
Thanks so much! It's been a strange time the last day or two, but as a Welshman living in England I believe we are taught two different versions of English history. I am convinced that Elizabeth II was a kind and sincere person, but the wider family are certainly nothing to aspire to. I am always surprised at how little the English know about the brutality of colonialism!
@bigboyjonathansgarden7926 The Queen didn’t implement any policies, what are you talking about. She was a constitutional monarch. A representative and symbolic figurehead. Her duties were representative and constitutional, she had nothing to do with implanting policies or making laws.
I’m glad you’ve said that. Biggest mistake Americans make when looking at our country is that the monarchy make policies or dictate the lives of the British people.
No real evidence of hierarchy more than 5,000 years ago- kingship and hierarchy is a bronze age ide- there were people a long time before the bronze age. The royal family has at least 4 major breaks- the current royal family is less related to William the Conqueror than the average English person whose ancestors didn't move around much (most of us actually). I agree having a functioning Royal family really does nothing to boost tourism. The problem is, if you look at countries with a president , generally it is more expensive than the Royal family is-so that makes getting rid of it a principle thing, which is very problematic, personally if getting rid of them isn't cheaper I wouldn't do it- but they would be completely subject to the law, including tax law, if it was my choice.
I don't hate the Royal Family; I've long considered them a source of mild amusement but generally harmless in the broader picture. Is there REALLY any guarantee that an elected alternative would be any great improvement, given the full range of embarrassing prats we have elected to the Commons over the years? Royal succession may seem a bit hit or miss as a way of selecting a figurehead bur the alternative could so easily provide us with some elegant luminary like Rees Mogg/Braverman/30p Lee/Dorries, lordy, I could go on and I've only covered the tories so far! Taken in context as a foreign dignitaries meet 'n' greet figurehead monarch, I don't think the current Royals do a bad job and Charlie seems to be slimming down the civil list quite nicely, a job that Elizabeth II would have found difficult and painful. Give him a chance.
I personally think that we should “log into minecraft” and coordinate together to “destroy King Charles’s minecraft server” in “minecraft”. I think I got away with it.
This is the third video I've watched now and I am impressed by your eloquence. Your divinely inspired expletives must have come from the very arse of God himself. I shall now incorporate butt spud, beta cuck soy boy etc into my next speech at the Royal Garden Party.
The tourism argument is such bollocks. France, Ireland & the US are all very famously Republics (they fought wars about it) and they don't seem to have any problems with tourism. In fact, I was in Paris in October and naturally there wasn't another tourist in sight. Virtually empty. 🤣🤣🤣
@@FunnyCompanyYT Lots of people do actually like London as a city. They like the architecture and vibe apparently and England does have freaky beautiful areas to visit outside London too.Tourists find a reason
@@di7209 Whilst there are some very nice areas you can find them all over Europe. The UK already has a very low biodiversity which means there is not a lot to look at in terms of wildlife, the only people who would come for that would have to be very interested as it is very niche and almost all of the more unique species are found in Scotland. London does not have a unique "vibe" from what i have experienced and whilst some of the architecture is interesting most people would visit a place like Rome or Athens for that sort of thing. Face it, the royal family and "culture" around is what most people visit for.
The aboriginal spear thing is a bit of a bad example of bad things Philip did, considering he asked that because the tribe had the spear throwing as an athletic contest that he had heard about and he wondered if they were going to show him their tradition. The rest tho is valid
