As a Brit, the monarchy should be abolished.
As another Brit you are in the minority with that. Personally I don't mind them really.
Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
651–660 of 693 posts
Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
#652Just wanted to remind people that the funeral of the Queen isn’t until next Monday. These people are getting arrested for shouting at royal proclamations and ceremonies of remembrance. The Police here seem to have a zero tolerance to any form of protest, and that is indeed concerning. For those who object to public sycophancy and pomp whilst ordinary people here have to use food banks to survive (me included this las…
Living in central London we have several protests per week pretty much all of which are tolerated by the police unless they go violent or piss off the general public too much. This recent stuff kind of goes in the pissing off the public category.
Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
#653Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we're reaching some insane point in this discussion when a funeral of one of the most well known people in the world, where leaders of literally every major superpower are coming over to pay their respects is called an extravaganza.
> where leaders of literally every major superpower are coming over to pay their respects Is Putin coming?
Considering they've failed to take Ukraine I'm not Russia gets to keep it's "Superpower" status anymore. Even if they eventually managed it in the following weeks/months/years, that's still just pathetic. I'm not saying I wanted Russia to invade or beat Ukraine, I think the war was beyond stupid and unnecessary but it sure has made Russia look weak and dumb. Not the kind of thing that "projects power on a global scale."
Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
#654Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this exact same comment did pretty well on Reddit too: https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/xckw5v/comme... 1. Not all of the arrests have been made at a "funeral" 2. It wasn't a funeral 3. If you're going to have a very public precession, parading a body through the streets with all the obedients lapping it up, surely you have to have a level of tolerance for dissenting voices? I imagine the disrupt…
If the Scottish independence referendum was called for today, after Brexit, Boris Johnson and the Queen's passing away, it would probably have an entirelly different outcome.
Wait, what? Boris Johnson passed away? I know The Queen's death is overshadowing a lot of other news, but I'm surprised I hadn't heard.
Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
#655Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what legal sense is the YouTuber with the pug less protected by the "art form" argument than the movie production? Did the latter get a permit for Nazi jokes? (Sincere question, maybe they did: UK speech norms and laws are incredibly alien to me)
In terms of legal sense, since you asked about that specifically - all films shown in the UK(in theatres or released on home media, or for streaming/download) have to be approved by the British Film Commission. If something is approved for release, anyone would have an extremely hard time getting the author arrested for the content - they can still be sued for a number of different reasons, but making a nazi salute i…
> Yes to American ears it might sound weird - that there is a topic that cannot even be joked about or you risk getting arrested. I don't really have a reply for that, other than the fact that it feels right to me
Sure, this is a difference in norms (and law) that I'm intentionally taking for granted, and trying to further understand. If equally-applied, it's a little more comprehensible to me (eg Germany requiring massive game studios to censor Nazi symbolism in WW2 games).
But I have a much stronger revulsion reaction to the idea that the govt should be in the business of deciding whose expression is "actually" art, and inconsistently allowing well-connected creators latitude that nobodies aren't privy to. I don't doubt that there are many people find the Nazi pug funnier than the Father Ted joke (and vice versa); the idea that the latter is uniquely acceptable because a _British govt agency_ decided it was funny is astonishing to me.
Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
#656Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article describes an activist who specifically took pains to avoid any disparagement of the outgoing Queen, limiting his protest to the incoming coronation. If that falls under the rule you're describing, doesn't that render it impossible to protest a ceremony, as long as it happens after a funeral? It seems you're defining away the protest of hereditary succession as unacceptably rude?
> limiting his protest to the incoming coronation. The coronation is months away, he was protesting the ascension at the Queen's funeral procession . That does not avoid disparagement of the Queen. I certainly don't think he should be arrested but he's clearly boneheaded. He'll have plenty of time to protest both the ascension and the coronation, of someone who is a much softer target that the Queen, especially consi…
The coronation has not happened, but the proclamation has: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-62873235
Symon Hill was arrested for protesting at the regional proclamation in Oxford: https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/21275817.photo-gallery-pro...
Where did you get the impression that this was a funeral procession?
Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
#657Earlier quoted context omitted.
If so, then you singling out W seems... a bit slanted. But if those three did, then did earlier presidents, and they just weren't documented? Or weren't made a big deal of when they did?
W did it first. So, no, citing W doing it first is not "slanted". Instead, claiming that Obama and Trump also violating their public trust makes my observation "slanted" is actively dishonest: I said that W did it first, and W did it first. Period.
https://theculturetrip.com/asia/japan/articles/to-bow-or-not...
HW, not W. And maybe others before; HW is just the first I found a reference to. (Also Clinton.)
So it seems to have happened a lot more than I thought...
Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
#658Earlier quoted context omitted.
Americans too. https://www.npr.org/2022/09/06/1121322520/a-black-protester-...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Haha, because the referenced 'right to free speech' has clearly no connection to the U.S.?
Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
#659Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way? Precedence of what? "What happened before" in the UK has for thousands of years favoured (to put it mildly) the incumbent powers-that-be. Seems like a convenient way to perpetuate inequality.
> In what way? Precedence of what? I don’t get what you’re finding confusing. For example the Accession ceremony we just had - why was it like that? Because that’s how it happened last time - that’s what precedence is. Why does writing it down make it more equal?
I'm not confused :)
The argument is circular: "Why do these things? Because we've always done them!"
That's just daft, it doesn't leave any opportunity for change.
You suggest:
> The UK constitution is based on precedence.
It's clear from the discussion here that even the existence of a constitution in the UK is debatable, let alone it's contents.
It's been pointed out here that precise meaning in written constitutions can still be debated. This is a very weak argument against writing a constitution; instead it's a strong argument for public debate of how a constitution should be interpreted, and possibly updated.
Basing anything exclusively and wholly on what has gone before guarantees anachronism and a failure to adapt.
Basing an unwritten constitution on the say-so of monarchs and their bloody disputes with revolutionaries over centuries is patently bananas. It would be laughable if it didn't have real consequences (various of which have been pointed out in the contents here).
Why not write it down?
Imagine running a project like this.
Dev: "Boss, remind me why we're developing an Android app in MATLAB?"
Boss: "We've always used MATLAB."
Dev: "I don't think this will work, could we try Python instead?"
Dev gets bundled into a police van
Re: Anti-royal protesters are being arrested in the U.K. as 'Not My King' tag grows
#660Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't think anyone has this kind of mindset Oh I think they do. They won't admit it when you put it like that of course, many probably don't even admit it to themselves because they simultaneously see themselves also as resistance fighters raging against powerful established interests, on behalf of the oppressed. > I don't find this funny at all, I wasn't talking about the content of the joke. I think nazi jokes…
>>I believe you probably genuinely think a pug doing a salute is glorifying nazis, that nobody else could reasonably disagree, and that society needs to be protected from this and stamping it out by locking up commoners who dare to defy the state edicts. I think the society needs to be protected from trivialization of Nazi gestures and symbology, not from pugs on youtube specifically. I know you are trying to reduce…
> think the society needs to be protected from trivialization of Nazi gestures and symbology, not from pugs on youtube specifically. I know you are trying to reduce it to absolute absurdity so my argument can be easily dismissed, but I'm sure you can also see how it wouldn't be appropriate to have a short Tik Tok video of someone making a Nazi salute and then saying "it's just a joke, everyone relax". No one got hurt, they only did it for the views, but it still wouldn't be ok - not because we want to live in a society of oppresion and censorship, but because using a nazi salute as a joke in itself without any context(context like in all the examples you posted) is poor taste at best. Can we at least agree on that?
No, I don't agree with anything you said in that paragraph. As I said, the mindset is alien to me. My attitude is not one of subservience to the government and I don't look to the ruling class as my savior, protector, my better, wiser, or even inherently good.
And taste is entirely on the tongue of the beholder.
> I also live in the UK, and I think we are arguing about two separate things.
I don't think so. You said "making Nazi salutes even as a joke is not acceptable in European societies", which is wrong as I provided evidence for. nazi salutes as a joke is in fact acceptable even in Germany -- at least when it is the rich and powerful doing it. If you are revising your position now, don't paint it like we were just arguing past one another.
> What I'm pointing out is that I don't believe European societies accept Nazi salutes as jokes pretty much anywhere outside of art/comedy/standup context.
What you are also pointing out is that you believe it's okay for rich and powerful people and corporations to make said jokes and anoint themselves "deciders" about who may make jokes and who should be punished for making jokes.
Teaching a pug to do nazi salutes is a joke. Really. Handwringing about the raw horrors of the war or the threat of the reich rising again if this is allowed just isn't credible. It's the same fearmongering and denouncements and threats that the powerful have always used to silence the people and justify their oppression.
The nazis did not rise because Germans were permitted to make tasteless jokes. They rose because Germans were able to be convinced that their fellow citizens posed a grave threat to them, and that they needed the government to protect them and save their society by oppressing this menace.