Oliver Cromwell Appreciation Thread

[JackRiddler]

Not to endorse a dictator, but at least he understood that the only proper place for a head claiming the status of a hereditary monarch is in a basket. May the Third Charles be at least as historic as the First.

Understanding that they can't help being what they were conditioned to be, I'd advocate more humane treatment for today's royals. I'd put'em on generous lifetime pensions -- 30,000 quid a year should suffice, subject to the same cuts everyone else might get. Maybe even let'em keep one palace so the whole lot can escape the papparazzi on occasion.

As for the tourism argument, just imagine how many more tourists Buckingham Palace will attract as the future home for the Museum of Deposed Royalty. Thousands will line up to see Brenda's former boudoir. (Brenda would be a certain Elizabeth, in case you don't know.)

As for the popularity argument (democrats for royalty!), let's keep in mind this was an international crime family. Twenty million starved Indians, the Fenian martyrs and the whole population of Kikuyu Kenyans who were kept in concentration camps should have a say in their fate, too. Among countless others.

I'm with Tom Paine. A fancy wedding is nice, which is why families choose to pay for themselves out of their own pockets. They don't have taxpayers doing that for them. The tradition of the British Crown is no more worthy of tribute by 8,000 fawning journalists and two billion gawkers than that of the Confederacy. Their history is one of genocide, imperialism, war and apologetics for racial supremacism.

[Skidmore]

1. Dude, it's none of your business if you're are not British.

Chill. Aren't there other topics to discuss? Why are you in such a tailspin?

[JackRiddler]

4. The history of the world is everyone's business.

The Saxe-Gotha-Windsors were the symbol of a vast murderous empire that, as you probably know, ended and violated millions of human lives all around the world.

To celebrate them in this fashion is just as bad as expressing pride in the Confederate flag.

[Skidmore]

Saxe-Gotha-Windsors???

Wow! Did the English have the only "vast murderous empire" in history on this planet?

[JackRiddler]

28. Did the English have the only "vast murderous empire" ever?

Certainly not.

I'm happy to answer any other irrelevant questions you may have, if I can.

When the world including the entire US media is enraptured with a ceremony celebrating the massacres of Genghis Khan, I'll start a thread on that one too, okay?

[Skidmore]

Well some acts of protest are simply hollow and nonconsequential...

I fail to see how screaming and yelling about this wedding, something of consequence to another nation not our own, accomplishes anything in the real world. The British have the option to change their government if they choose. It is not up to you or to me. They also have the option of observing any traditional ceremony in their nation or not.

Knock yourself starting threads. I fail to see what it accomplishes other than containing overwrought outrage to a small number of bytes on the internet. It looks pretty foolish.

[JackRiddler]

41. Skidmore, sir, who's yelling and screaming?

As you're not in the room with me, lay off the remote characterizations. Fact is, I'm laughing through this whole thread at all these Americans (for the most part) coming up with justifications for a celebration of the medieval barbarism their own country was born by overthrowing. (It's not a wedding. No one would care about a wedding. It matters because they're a certain bloodline and absurdly considered the heads of state not just of the UK but Canada, Australia and many other places.)

[a la izquierda]

48. Yeah, well American governments of the 20th century...

haven't been the saints of history either. Ask any Latin American or Southeast Asian.

[JackRiddler]

50. And by the way, here's a map of the British Commonwealth in 2011.

Even by your false argument (is it any of YOUR business what Kim Jong-Il does if you're not North Korean?), it's the business of all the people in the countries on the map above.

[Skidmore]

55. I do think you need to read a little on the history of the Commonwealth

and what the term currently means. My husband grew up in the Bahamas, which was part of the British empire and is a member of the Commonwealth. The Bahamas became an independent nation with its own government and currency. It negotiates its own treaties. The Commonwealth of Nations is not under British rule but is made up of former colonial territories.

But if flinging crap around makes your day, have fun.

[JackRiddler]

58. Who's on the Canadian money?

I get it. There are people who support being nominally part of the successor organization to the British Empire. A lot of people in the very same countries do not. So take your condescension and...

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. I believe the wedding was not publicly financed...

:eyes:

[GomezLives]

13. I'm sure the security is however as well it should be.

[Starry Messenger]

3. Sucked if you were Irish though. n/t

[JackRiddler]

9. True, true. We're not appreciating the Puritan fundamentalism, or the invasion of Ireland...

or the massacres of Anabaptists and Levellers.

Just the bit about putting hereditary kings in their proper place.

[KoKo]

5. Oh....get over yourself..

:P

[Peregrine Took]

6. Good points. My dad was a Fenian.

He always said he had nothing against the ordinary English people but he hated the monarchy, government, etc.

[End Of The Road]

7. Our history is also one of genocide, imperialism, WAR and apologetics

for racial supremism.

[JackRiddler]

10. Correct.

Which makes it doubly disgusting to see Americans so ignorant that they're participating in this celebration of the British version.

[cali]

8. what the fuckity?

really?

how stupid.

[JackRiddler]

12. O, once again you slay me.

How do you do it? So fucking smart!

[GomezLives]

11. Dude. They just want to do the hokey pokey.

[JackRiddler]

15. Nothing against them doing it, if you read the OP.

The problem is with the culture elevating them, by virtue of birth and despite the bloody history of the throne to which they lay claim, as beings superior and worth the public expense compared to the sorry commoner asses of everyone else who wants to do the hokey pokey.

If you want to ignore all that, okay. Then you can say, "Hey Posterity: These are trifles with which we filled our collective mind as we burned the planet."

[GomezLives]

17. Its a public event. Like fireworks displays.

[JackRiddler]

23. A fireworks display celebrating a history of racism and genocide. Yes.

Very pretty dress.

Well worth the attention and resources expended.

[GomezLives]

26. And all of that is Prince William's fault??

[JackRiddler]

30. Nope. Which is why I advocate putting him on a decent, humane lifetime pension.

As I wrote above.

[GomezLives]

31. Except the British people dont want that.

They like having a monarch.

[JackRiddler]

35. They might not always, you know...

Right now 20 percent of them would get rid of it. It was a much bigger number back during the Diana aftermath. The democratic ideal may yet take hold. That would happen in a process involving argument. I have advanced one. I like expressing my opinions, got a problem?

The history of the Windsor crime family and the empire they serve as symbol is international, not British.

There are plenty of people around the world who are not British but nominally have them as a monarchy, and they can ALSO get rid of them, for example the Canadians and Australians (they will, sooner or later, very likely in our lifetimes).

By the way, did you even read the OP before you posted a half-dozen arguments that were already dealt with in the OP?

[GomezLives]

42. You kind of glossed over the points

And made general statements about responsibility for really old crimes as a reason to hate on a kid that really doesn't deserve being hated on.

I guarantee you it is an argument I've heard before and I'm sure its one you've bored your friends with before.

[JackRiddler]

46. Sir, do not tell me who I "hate."

You're the one who just introduced that verb.

I don't hate these children. I reject the institutions that are elevating them as quasi-divine by reason of birth.

The history of British imperialism is not old. It continues to this day. It will only be "old" when it's over. I didn't see them rejecting the history of the crown, the empire it began, or its countless crimes. They're still living off what they plundered from the world.

This institution is still a symbolic bulwark for militarism today. The royal wedding kiss was accompanied by a military flyover. Not fireworks, see? Warplanes. That's what you seem to want to endorse.

[GomezLives]

49. Oliver Cromwell beheaded a king.

That is hate. No one is calling them "quasi-divine" except you. British Imperialism? Those days are over. The US took that over after WW2. They have military flyovers at football games. Will you stop watching those too??

[JackRiddler]

51. Gomez, let's make a deal...

you don't project the "hate" on me, and I won't project the "stupid" on you. Okay?

[GomezLives]

52. Now you're boring me.

[JackRiddler]

54. Sorry if I can't keep you entertained. I hear there's a pretty good wedding show on TV.

Go watch it, scoot!

[GomezLives]

57. I can't. I'm too busy mindlessly supporting genocide.

[JackRiddler]

62. Care to argue that this institution doesn't have a history of it?

I didn't say anything like that. I said people are mindlessly celebrating an institution with a history of it. Like the Confederacy. If they could actually figure out that it's an institution with a history of genocide, then it would no longer be mindless, now, would it?

[Canuckistanian]

14. Things have never been the same since the Norsemen invaded

Ever since, it's been going downhill.

[JackRiddler]

18. Actually, the current bozos are unrelated to those.

They were brought in from Germany to start a new line after the old ones got deposed or ran out of progeny. So the key battle was some Germanic tribe beating up on another back in 900 or so.

[GomezLives]

20. No. Lets refight the Battle of Hastings.

[whoneedstickets]

16. Of course, Cromwell did claim the role of Lord Protector and tried to pass it..

..to his heir, so he probably wasn't so opposed to monarchy once he completed his coup-d-etat. Although he was smart enough to avoid the hypocrisy of actually accepting the crown when it was offered.

[JackRiddler]

21. Very very true. You know this thread is what's called a polemic, right?

As in, I couldn't think of anyone less odious than Cromwell who had, however, done the public service of chopping off the head of the English king. Maybe I missed somebody in history lessons?

[CJCRANE]

19. I'm beating myself up right now.

I'm both English and Irish Catholic (on my mother's side).

I'll punch myself, then celebrate with a Guinness.

:beer:

[simonisme]

25. Even though.

I don't understand history i liked that one..Brilliant and it also breaks the ice and people here can relax and be happy..i think.

[CJCRANE]

29. Thank you. It gets complicated

when you're descended from both oppressors and oppressed.

An anarchist friend of mine always says: "there's only one race - the human race". I think he's right.

[JackRiddler]

32. I'm raising a toast to your anarchist friend right now!

[sfpcjock]

22. Of course, Cromwell got his reward...

as well. The bloody history is true, and the old empire notion took more prisoners in Iraq in 2003. I view it as a PR device that Brits feel fuels tourism now, which surely it does.

[JackRiddler]

27. Tourism? I told you already above...

You can turn Buckingham estate into a beautiful new public park and convert the palace into a Museum of the Deposed Monarchy. THAT will bring the tourists!

[GomezLives]

24. Dont hear a lot of this stuff when they do a funeral.

[Odin2005]

33. Cromwell was a RW Puritan asshole and a brutal tyrant.

The British Monarchy was purely ceremonial after the Stuarts were driven out in 1688.

[JackRiddler]

39. Yes, yes, that's even in the first sentence of the OP.

The British monarchy to this day serves as a symbol and legitimation of racist doctrine and imperial dominance.

[Odin2005]

40. Oh bullshit. People are not guilty for the sins of their ancestors.

They are ceremonial heads of state now, nothing more.

[JackRiddler]

43. Who's talking about the people?

The institution remains as a symbol and legitimation.

The people are just fine. If they rejected these "ceremonial" positions and said, this is bullshit, then they'd earn our respect. Not by being born. And in case you didn't notice, my argument is aimed mainly at the million millions who are brainlessly going along with this global brainwash in bloodline supremacy.

[Odin2005]

45. That institution brings in lotsa tourism dollars for the Brits.

And keeps the head of state apolitical. It harms no one now, unless you are one of those LaRouchie nuts that think Queen Liz trades in heroin.

[JackRiddler]

47. No, it doesn't.

Turning Buckingham Palace into a museum, and the estate into a lovely public park... now that would bring hordes of tourists, who'd pay extra to photograph Brenda's boudoir.

(Since I said that already in the OP, I expect you to read it before posting. Thanks.)

Actually, of the top 20 tourist destinations in Britain, only one of the royal palaces and other sites makes the list. A nearby Legoland is more popular... therefore Legoland should be declared the Sovereign, by the logic of the "tourism" argument.

[CBGLuthier]

34. That isn't the reason Cromwell did what he did

It was not the hereditary nature of Kings. He was fine with that.

He did not believe that Kings got their authority from God but rather the people. Charles I disagreed. Charles I refused to change to a more modern interpretation of the monarchy insisting on divine right. Cromwell sent him to be with his god.

Now me personally I can't stand the idea of kings and queens and such. A modern world has no use for such things. But Cromwell had no problem at all with royalty. But, boy did he fucking hate catholics. So no, can not applaud Cromwell.

[JackRiddler]

38. Agreed, agreed, fuck Cromwell.

It's just a fun and provocative headline for the thread, which isn't about Cromwell but the disgusting display of honoring an institution that historically has done far more damage than he managed in his one generation. No?

[H2O Man]

36. Recommended.

I much prefer the United Irishmen.

[fasttense]

37. It is disgusting to see a supposed democracy droll over themselves over a bunch of lucky sperm club

winners. Really America, didn't we throw off the rule of royalty over 200 year ago? Why do we need to continue to fawn over each of their useless life milestones.

And why does the corporate media have to have their pointless wedding (you know they are going to get divorced before 10 years is up) front and center over all the news stations? Is it subtle conditioning for the acceptance of an American corporate aristocracy? Is it any more spectacular the the bushes wedding?

I'm with the grumpy little flower girl, I'm tired of seeing and hearing about it.

[JackRiddler]

44. Bravo.

[WinkyDink]

63. Bwah! AS IF Americans don't love our "lucky" scions! JFK, Jr., anyone?

[Bluenorthwest]

53. Cromwell attempted to pass his office to his offspring so your

point is like a steaming pile of Corgi droppings on a 400 year old lawn.

[JackRiddler]

56. Literalist & humorless reading.

Provocative titles are a trade-off. People click, but then they don't even read the OP, or get what it's actually about. If you think this OP is about Cromwell, then please, and thanks for the kick.

[Bluenorthwest]

70. If you were trying to make another point, you failed. Sorry.

Your opening line "at least he understood that the only proper place for a head claiming the status of a hereditary monarch is in a basket." Cromwell wanted his monarch like office to be hereditary. For satire to work, it needs to be true, not false. Cromwell did not 'understand' that, he was trying to get the same thing for himself. He was also a mass murderer and other lovely things.
Provocative titles and false premises are not a 'trade off' they are techniques used by hacks and hyperbole artists. Or, of course, both.

[JackRiddler]

71. Apparently I did fail to get you to read 80-90% of the above.

But you know what? It is my failure then, since I wrote it. So thanks for pointing it out.

[Bunny]

59. Yawn.

:boring:

[GomezLives]

66. He's great at parties. Really.

[JackRiddler]

72. Doubt we'd be showing up to the same party.

But you never know.

[redwitch]

60. No fan of Oliver Cromwell here.

Nor the death penalty.

[WinkyDink]

61. Well, feel free not to enjoy Christmas celebrations or anything else "fun"!

[JackRiddler]

64. Hey, if you think that junk is "fun," be my guest. We probably have different tastes.

[CJCRANE]

65. Machiavelli said...

that the perfect government was a combination of a principality, an aristocracy and a democracy (in equal measure).

Both the the US and the UK have a combination of these but they have a different way of going about it.

[provis99]

67. Machiavelli also thought Cesare Borgia was a great guy.

[JackRiddler]

69. Hey, if that's your resort to authority, I'm happy to let it stand.

[CJCRANE]

73. Well...

in the US, there is the Executive branch, the Legislature (the House and the Senate) and the Judiciary (the Supreme Court etc.)...

In the UK, there is the Monarchy, Parliament (the House of Commons and the House of Lords) and the Supreme Court etc...

Neither country's system is a total democracy (i.e. majority rule), they both both have checks and balances against that.

They both have systems to accommadate the majority but also to protect minorities (the minorities in both cases being the very rich and the very poor).

I'm not saying that either are perfect systems but they seem to correspond to Machivalli's theory of government.

[Marr]

68. I've no interest in the British royal family, positive or negative.

[JackRiddler]

74. A fate for Brenda more humane and fitting than the guillotine...