Has This Forum Changed Your Opinions?

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

Now it's getting even more ludicrous. Yes there were a number of Civil Wars, beginning with a dispute between the descendents of Edward III and ending with William of Orange what's your point? That the monarchy is founded on murder? What a laughable assertion. How exactly has the Windsor family itself ever gained land through murder? Your intense disliking of the monarchy is leading you to espose fallacies.

So you're telling me that since the moment William of Orange was victorious, there has been no in-fighting?

And the Windsor family are on the throne due to their ancestral bloodline. If their ancestors gained the throne through murder then that is the reason the Windsor family currently sit there. (Due to the actions of their ancestors)

 

[Zero Cool]

So you're telling me that since the moment William of Orange was victorious, there has been no in-fighting?

And the Windsor family are on the throne due to their ancestral bloodline. If their ancestors gained the throne through murder then that is the reason the Windsor family currently sit there. (Due to the actions of their ancestors)

In-fighting, yes. Murder? Absolutely not. The Windsors (formely known as Saxe-Coburg-Gotha) are descended from George I of Hanover who did not gain the throne through murder or pillage but rather after Queen Anne died childless in 1714.

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

The Windsors (formely known as Saxe-Coburg-Gotha) are descended from George I of Hanover who did not gain the throne through murder or pillage but rather after Queen Anne died childless in 1714.

Don't try & school me on this shit. In the very same thread which your initial quote was from I referenced this shit, although granted not in this expanded form.

Btw, how in the fuck do you think the Windsors got their position/status in Germany?

Somehow I don't think they asked.....

In-fighting, yes. Murder? Absolutely not.

No murders? Damn that's a low crime rate.....& how do you know?

And just for clarity, do you deny that the lineage that put the Windosr family where tehy are today had traces of murder, deceit, corruption etc?

 

[Zero Cool]

Don't try & school me on this shit. In the very same thread which your initial quote was from I referenced this shit, although granted not in this expanded form.

Btw, how in the fuck do you think the Windsors got their position/status in Germany?

Somehow I don't think they asked.....

I have no idea how George's forefathers came to be the royal family of Hanover and to be honest I don't particularly care as it has nothing to do with this topic.

No murders? Damn that's a low crime rate.....& how do you know?

And just for clarity, do you deny that the lineage that put the Windosr family where tehy are today had traces of murder, deceit, corruption etc?

How many family's, be they royal or not, do you know that have a high crime rate vis-a-vis each other? Think a second before you post up foolish comments. From George I to Elizabeth II there has been no murder of any monarch if you studied English history you would realise that. When you educate yourself on this topic and stop making baseless assertions I will be happy to debate with you, until then I shall not bother wasting my time.

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

I have no idea how George's lineage came to be the royal family of Hanover and to be honest I don't particularly care as it has nothing to do with this topic.

My point is that everybody who was anybody, up until recently gained power through violence.

How many family's, be they royal or not, do you know that have a high crime rate vis-a-vis each other? Think a second before you post up foolish comments. From George I to Elizabeth II there has been no murder of any monarch if you studied English history you would realise that. When you educate yourself on this topic and stop making baseless assertions I will be happy to debate with you, until then I shall not bother wasting my time.

How fucking slow are you? I ain't talking about murdering family I'm talking about murdering people to gain/maintain power. The victims being rivals for the throne & fucking millions worldwide. Ever heard of the British Empire? I know you have...

And to limit this shit to English history is a fucking joke! A lot of those who were murdered were Scots & Irish



Btw, I wish to retract this comment

Don't try & school me on this shit. In the very same thread which your initial quote was from I referenced this shit, although granted not in this expanded form.

I made a mistake here. I still maintain you shoudln't try to school me on this shit but, the thread in question was actually the 'Prince Harry Nazi' one.

 

[Zero Cool]

My point is that everybody who was anybody, up until recently gained power through violence.

Put bluntly, that's rubbish.

How fucking slow are you? I ain't talking about murdering family I'm talking about murdering people to gain/maintain power. The victims being rivals for the throne & fucking millions worldwide. Ever heard of the British Empire? I know you have...

And to limit this shit to English history is a fucking joke! A lot of those who were murdered were Scots & Irish

Again where is your evidence to support this. Who exactly did the Windsors' ancestors murder to "maintain power"? You treat it as if the Royals launched a systematic holocaust to expand their power base. The British Empire was founded on expansion of ideals not murder although obviously that was a regrettable part of it as it is in all wars. If you want a dynasty founded on pillage and murder look no further than the Nazi's. To attempt and equate the Royal family to them would be quite far-fetched, wouldn't it?

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

The British Empire was founded on expansion of ideals not murder although obviously that was a regrettable part of it as it is in all wars.

How the fuck can you say this yet a second before you were saying that I was talking rubbish for saying, & I quote, 'My point is that everybody who was anybody, up until recently gained power through violence.'

In your opinion, how did families gain power in the past?

If you want a dynasty founded on pillage and murder look no further than the Nazi's. To attempt and equate the Royal family to them would be quite far-fetched, wouldn't it?

Jesus Christ!

Do you actually think the British Empire was better than what the Nazis were doing? Sure we weren't killing a particular race out of hate, we were killing just about anybody to satisfy our own greed.

You treat it as if the Royals launched a systematic holocaust to expand their power base.

Once again, wasn't any better. Check how we murdered Indians who were protesting peacefully man, check that.

 

[Zero Cool]

How the fuck can you say this yet a second before you were saying that I was talking rubbish for saying, & I quote, 'My point is that everybody who was anybody, up until recently gained power through violence.'

In your opinion, how did families gain power in the past?

I rebutted your ludicrous assertion that "everyone who gained power in the past achieved it through violence" while admitting that the Crown forces have killed people in war, as obvious as that is.

Jesus Christ!

Do you actually think the British Empire was better than what the Nazis were doing? Sure we weren't killing a particular race out of hate, we were killing just about anybody to satisfy our own greed.

I'm incredulous. To equate the British Empire with Nazi Germany is beyond stupid. The aim of the British Empire was to expand British culture and influence for the benefit of all people (conquered as well as conquerors) although admittedly it didn't always turn out that way, the aims of the Nazis on the other hand were very, very different.

 

[not really ken]

The Magna Carta was proclaimed by King John in 1215 after a rebellion by his barons, nothing whatsoever to do with the Cromwellian revolution. If you understood the history behind the Long Parliament and Cromwell's subsequent reign you would realise to make an assumption like "the monarchy would declare war on parliament when threatened with anykind of power shift away from them" is plainley false.

aight cool, I was just skimming from the top of my head and failed miserably with my history

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

I rebutted your ludicrous assertion that "everyone who gained power in the past achieved it through violence" while admitting that the Crown forces have killed people in war, as obvious as that is.

I accept what you say here but as I still believe people were killed outwith war I will slightly alter the question,

In your opinion, excluding violence, how did families gain power in the past?

The aim of the British Empire was to expand British culture and influence for the benefit of all people (conquerors as well as conquered)

Well, I've got to concede, if it is to the benefit of the conquered to be oppressed, enslaved, murdered, beaten, raped, stole from & generally treated like shit then yeah you're right.

However, if these things aren't good, (& there were very few things we the British brought to these countries that could be seen as productive against that horrific background), then we, the British, were as repulsive as I thought.

Btw, to take someone's freedom is very rarely a good thing, do you agree?

 

[not really ken]

Well, I've got to concede, if it is to the benefit of the conquered to be oppressed, enslaved, murdered, beaten, raped, stole from & generally treated like shit then yeah you're right.

However, if these things aren't good, (& there were very few things we the British brought to these countries that could be seen as productive against that horrific background), then we, the British, were as repulsive as I thought.

Btw, to take someone's freedom is very rarely a good thing, do you agree?

:thumb: I liked this!!

 

[Zero Cool]

I accept what you say here but as I still believe people were killed outwith war I will slightly alter the question,

In your opinion, excluding violence, how did families gain power in the past?

In any number of ways; inheritence, enoblement, marriage, war etc. etc. Violence was obviously a part of it, as it is up to this day, but it wasn't the only part.

Well, I've got to concede, if it is to the benefit of the conquered to be oppressed, enslaved, murdered, beaten, raped, stole from & generally treated like shit then yeah you're right.

However, if these things aren't good, (& there were very few things we the British brought to these countries that could be seen as productive against that horrific background), then we, the British, were as repulsive as I thought.

Btw, to take someone's freedom is very rarely a good thing, do you agree?

The achievements of the Empire were manifold. It brought infastructre, western ideals to backward societies, democracy, capital development etc. etc. Clearly there were times of exploitation and atrocities but that shouldn't detract from the overall achievements of the British Empire. Because of it over 400 million people now claim English as a mother tounge and it is the most widely learned second language in the world.

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

In any number of ways; inheritence, enoblement, marriage, war etc. etc. Violence was obviously a part of it, as it is up to this day, but it wasn't the only part.

OK, maybe this is my fault for poor word choice. When I say 'gain' I mean for the throne to actually change hands, & for a new family to sit on the throne.

The achievements of the Empire were manifold. It brought infastructre, western ideals to backward societies, democracy, capital development etc. etc. Clearly there were times of exploitation and atrocities but that shouldn't detract from the overall achievements of the British Empire. Because of it over 400 million people now claim English as a mother tounge and it is the most widely learned second language in the world.

This is the classic view of those who believe the British Empire was good. 'Backward societies'? That's a little fucked up. Bringing more, in Western eyes, 'advanced ways' to other parts of the world actually resulted in a lot of traditional skills being lost.

I mean, for example, I believe that there are medicine men in this world who hold just as much power as our doctors. While our doctors can cure things like polio & these medicine men may not, these men can cure things like fevers without expensive medicine. If we showed these people our Western way of doing things with tablets & pills chances are some of these cures would be lost.

A similar type of thing has happened with many of the countries which have been immorally (that is conquered) introduced to the Western way.

And while you see it as a good thing that 400 million people speak the same language, as their first, there are many who believe the languages that were lost are a tragedy.

I actually agree with you, that this is a good thing, but, once again, put against what had to be sacrificed to get it this way, I can honestly say I would rather this wasn't the case & the pain felt by these people could be retracted.

 

[Zero Cool]

OK, maybe this is my fault for poor word choice. When I say 'gain' I mean for the throne to actually change hands, & for a new family to sit on the throne.

Again there are any number of ways. Indirect inheritance (as happened with James I and George I), marriage, war etc. Obviously the throne can change hands through violence but to say it always does is rubbish. Since the Glorious Revolution there have been 2 changes in dynasty neither of which have been violent.

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

Since the Glorious Revolution there have been 2 changes in dynasty neither of which have been violent.

How did these changes occur then?

 

[Zero Cool]

How did these changes occur then?

After Anne's death the Crown was offered to the elector of Hanover (George I) he then became King, with Victoria's accession in 1837 the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha was born (reflecting her marriage to Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha).

 

[CalcuoCuchicheo]

After Anne's death the Crown was offered to the elector of Hanover (George I) he then became King, with Victoria's accession in 1837 the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha was born (reflecting her marriage to Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha).

Alright that's cool.

Peace.