Fao Red Goblin

[WessexPest]

Gobbers,

Just wanted to get your thoughts on the suggestion that has been mooted to reinforce our sense of Britishness by pledging allegiance to Her Maj?

A pathetic last-ditch attempt, not only by royalists, but by unionists t try to reinforce something that doesn't exist!

Like the archaic monarchy, the union is obselete. The Scots are going on their own path and the English have thrown off the shackles and stigma of Britishness.

Last year was the 300th anniversary of the union, but it passed with barely a mention. What kind of country doesn'tcelebrate it's 300th birthday??? It's finished.

As for the Saxe-Coburg Gothas, they know their reign is over. A few weeks in Afghanistan for one of their number is fooling nobody.

Rant away my good man....

[Mr Mosquito]

Gobbers,

Just wanted to get your thoughts on the suggestion that has been mooted to reinforce our sense of Britishness by pledging allegiance to Her Maj?

A pathetic last-ditch attempt, not only by royalists, but by unionists t try to reinforce something that doesn't exist!

Like the archaic monarchy, the union is obselete. The Scots are going on their own path and the English have thrown off the shackles and stigma of Britishness.

Last year was the 300th anniversary of the union, but it passed with barely a mention. What kind of country doesn'tcelebrate it's 300th birthday??? It's finished.

As for the Saxe-Coburg Gothas, they know their reign is over. A few weeks in Afghanistan for one of their number is fooling nobody.

Rant away my good man....

First and foremost, I consider myself to be English and not British.

I've heard a lot about this oath of allegiance caper. Top Royalist Toff - Lord Peter Henry Goldsmith (Baron Goldsmith, PC, Queen's Council) - apparently wants school-leavers to be forced to swear an oath of allegiance to his Queen. Lord Goldsmith was once the Attorney General and as such he was the head of this country's hopelessly corrupt and class based criminal justice system. So why the hell is this unelected Toff - Lord Goldsmith - lecturing us on such issues as allegiance and upholding the law of a class based criminal justice system that has kicked so many of us in the teeth for various minor misdemeanors ????!!!!

If I had my way we'd have another public holiday in May to celebrate the founding - by Act of Parliament - of the Republic of England in May 1649.

God Save England from the Royalist Tyranny

[Philip Belgrave]

Gobbers,

Just wanted to get your thoughts on the suggestion that has been mooted to reinforce our sense of Britishness by pledging allegiance to Her Maj?

A pathetic last-ditch attempt, not only by royalists, but by unionists t try to reinforce something that doesn't exist!

Like the archaic monarchy, the union is obselete. The Scots are going on their own path and the English have thrown off the shackles and stigma of Britishness.

Last year was the 300th anniversary of the union, but it passed with barely a mention. What kind of country doesn'tcelebrate it's 300th birthday??? It's finished.

As for the Saxe-Coburg Gothas, they know their reign is over. A few weeks in Afghanistan for one of their number is fooling nobody.

Rant away my good man....

[Philip Belgrave]

Gobbers,

Just wanted to get your thoughts on the suggestion that has been mooted to reinforce our sense of Britishness by pledging allegiance to Her Maj?

A pathetic last-ditch attempt, not only by royalists, but by unionists t try to reinforce something that doesn't exist!

Like the archaic monarchy, the union is obselete. The Scots are going on their own path and the English have thrown off the shackles and stigma of Britishness.

Last year was the 300th anniversary of the union, but it passed with barely a mention. What kind of country doesn'tcelebrate it's 300th birthday??? It's finished.

As for the Saxe-Coburg Gothas, they know their reign is over. A few weeks in Afghanistan for one of their number is fooling nobody.

Rant away my good man....

I hate to intrude on what appears to be a private conversation, but for this particular benighted Colonial would you please elaborate on the phrase "shackles and stigma of Britishness ?"

[Mr Mosquito]

PHILIP BELGRAVE, Bristol has a long and proud tradition of resisting Royalist tyrants such as present day Lord Goldsmith and his edict that we should be down on our knees to inbred Toff lowlife. From Bristol's support for the army of the English Parliament against the tyrant King in the 1640's and Bristol's support for the right to vote in the 1830's the people of Bristol have done England and the world proud. Some of our Bristolian ancestors were hung and some were transported to Australia !!!! for their part in trying to gain the right to vote during the 1830's.....

Queen Square Riots, Bristol 1831

The Bristol Riots of 1831 took place after the unelected Toff and Snob ridden House of Lords rejected the second Reform Bill, which aimed to get rid of some of the rotten boroughs and give England's fast growing industrial towns such as Bristol, Manchester, Birmingham, Bradford and Leeds, greater representation in the House of Commons. Bristol had been represented in the House of Commons since 1295, however by 1830 only 6,000 of the 104,000 population had the vote.

Local Toff/Snob Royalist lowlife magistrate Sir Charles Wetherall - a strong opponent of the Reform Bill - visited Bristol to open the new Royalist Assize Courts on 29th October. He threatened to imprison participants in a disturbance going on outside, and an angry Bristolian mob chased him to the Mansion House in Queen Square. The magistrate escaped in disguise but the Mayor and officials were besieged in the Mansion-house.

The rioters numbered about 500 or 600 young men and they continued rioting for three days, during which the palace of the Bishop of Bristol, the mansion of the Lord Mayor of Bristol, and unpopular citizens' private homes and property were looted and destroyed, along with demolition of much of the prison (Royalist prison camp). The prison was a particularly hated symbol of Royalist authority as it had been used by corrupt Royalist Magistrates and Judges to subjugate, coerce and control Bristolians found 'guilty' of the most menial offences.

Lieutenant-Colonel Thomas Brereton of the Royalist Dragoons led a charge with drawn swords through the mob in Queen Square. Hundreds were killed and wounded and the mob dispersed. Brereton was later court-martialled for leniency because he had refused to open fire on the crowds, but shot himself before the conclusion of the trial. Four men were hanged despite a petition of 10,000 Bristolian signatures which was given to the German descended imposter Monarch - King William IV.

King William's Royalist Dragoons attacking a crowd of Bristolians on 31st October, 1831.......

[Philip Belgrave]

PHILIP BELGRAVE, Bristol has a long and proud tradition of resisting Royalist tyrants such as present day Lord Goldsmith and his edict that we should be down on our knees to inbred Toff lowlife. From Bristol's support for the army of the English Parliament against the tyrant King in the 1640's and Bristol's support for the right to vote in the 1830's the people of Bristol have done England and the world proud. Some of our Bristolian ancestors were hung and some were transported to Australia !!!! for their part in trying to gain the right to vote during the 1830's.....

Queen Square Riots, Bristol 1831

The Bristol Riots of 1831 took place after the unelected Toff and Snob ridden House of Lords rejected the second Reform Bill, which aimed to get rid of some of the rotten boroughs and give England's fast growing industrial towns such as Bristol, Manchester, Birmingham, Bradford and Leeds, greater representation in the House of Commons. Bristol had been represented in the House of Commons since 1295, however by 1830 only 6,000 of the 104,000 population had the vote.

Local Toff/Snob Royalist lowlife magistrate Sir Charles Wetherall - a strong opponent of the Reform Bill - visited Bristol to open the new Royalist Assize Courts on 29th October. He threatened to imprison participants in a disturbance going on outside, and an angry Bristolian mob chased him to the Mansion House in Queen Square. The magistrate escaped in disguise but the Mayor and officials were besieged in the Mansion-house.

The rioters numbered about 500 or 600 young men and they continued rioting for three days, during which the palace of the Bishop of Bristol, the mansion of the Lord Mayor of Bristol, and unpopular citizens' private homes and property were looted and destroyed, along with demolition of much of the prison (Royalist prison camp). The prison was a particularly hated symbol of Royalist authority as it had been used by corrupt Royalist Magistrates and Judges to subjugate, coerce and control Bristolians found 'guilty' of the most menial offences.

Lieutenant-Colonel Thomas Brereton of the Royalist Dragoons led a charge with drawn swords through the mob in Queen Square. Hundreds were killed and wounded and the mob dispersed. Brereton was later court-martialled for leniency because he had refused to open fire on the crowds, but shot himself before the conclusion of the trial. Four men were hanged despite a petition of 10,000 Bristolian signatures which was given to the German descended imposter Monarch - King William IV.

King William's Royalist Dragoons attacking a crowd of Bristolians on 31st October, 1831.......

[Philip Belgrave]

PHILIP BELGRAVE, Bristol has a long and proud tradition of resisting Royalist tyrants such as present day Lord Goldsmith and his edict that we should be down on our knees to inbred Toff lowlife. From Bristol's support for the army of the English Parliament against the tyrant King in the 1640's and Bristol's support for the right to vote in the 1830's the people of Bristol have done England and the world proud. Some of our Bristolian ancestors were hung and some were transported to Australia !!!! for their part in trying to gain the right to vote during the 1830's.....

Queen Square Riots, Bristol 1831

The Bristol Riots of 1831 took place after the unelected Toff and Snob ridden House of Lords rejected the second Reform Bill, which aimed to get rid of some of the rotten boroughs and give England's fast growing industrial towns such as Bristol, Manchester, Birmingham, Bradford and Leeds, greater representation in the House of Commons. Bristol had been represented in the House of Commons since 1295, however by 1830 only 6,000 of the 104,000 population had the vote.

Local Toff/Snob Royalist lowlife magistrate Sir Charles Wetherall - a strong opponent of the Reform Bill - visited Bristol to open the new Royalist Assize Courts on 29th October. He threatened to imprison participants in a disturbance going on outside, and an angry Bristolian mob chased him to

the Mansion House in Queen Square. The magistrate escaped in disguise but the Mayor and officials were besieged in the Mansion-house.

The rioters numbered about 500 or 600 young men and they continued rioting for three days, during which the palace of the Bishop of Bristol, the mansion of the Lord Mayor of Bristol, and unpopular citizens' private homes and property were looted and destroyed, along with demolition of much of the prison (Royalist prison camp). The prison was a particularly hated symbol of Royalist authority as it had been used by corrupt Royalist Magistrates and Judges to subjugate, coerce and control Bristolians found 'guilty' of the most menial offences.

Lieutenant-Colonel Thomas Brereton of the Royalist Dragoons led a charge with drawn swords through the mob in Queen Square. Hundreds were killed and wounded and the mob dispersed. Brereton was later court-martialled for leniency because he had refused to open fire on the crowds, but shot himself before the conclusion of the trial. Four men were hanged despite a petition of 10,000 Bristolian signatures which was given to the German descended imposter Monarch - King William IV.

King William's Royalist Dragoons attacking a crowd of Bristolians on 31st October, 1831.......

[Philip Belgrave]

Well done Red Goblin, I never really doubted Bristol's radical credentials but it's good to be reminded of them. The Bristol riots tended to be overshadowed, I think ,by the Chartist riots, particularly the march on Newport in 1839. But the west in general: -apart from Cornwall which has impeccable Royalist credentials ( "impeccable" the wrong word perhaps?)- has always been progessive politically. The Tolpuddle Martyrs of Dorset, of course, the Parliamentarian Volunteers of Shepton Mallet and Chewton Mendip, even the misguided men who turned out for the Duke of Monmouth at Sedgemoor, all have sought to overturn the established order.

But what intrigued me- and I rather stuffed-up my contribution -was the denigration of Britain and the British by the other correspondent. It would appear that being British is now deemed something to be ashamed of and ,from where I sit, I frankly don't know why.

[Eddie Hitler]

Well done Red Goblin, I never really doubted Bristol's radical credentials but it's good to be reminded of them. The Bristol riots tended to be overshadowed, I think ,by the Chartist riots, particularly the march on Newport in 1839. But the west in general: -apart from Cornwall which has impeccable Royalist credentials ( "impeccable" the wrong word perhaps?)- has always been progessive politically. The Tolpuddle Martyrs of Dorset, of course, the Parliamentarian Volunteers of Shepton Mallet and Chewton Mendip, even the misguided men who turned out for the Duke of Monmouth at Sedgemoor, all have sought to overturn the established order.

But what intrigued me- and I rather stuffed-up my contribution -was the denigration of Britain and the British by the other correspondent. It would appear that being British is now deemed something to be ashamed of and ,from where I sit, I frankly don't know why.

England is a nation. For 700 years or so it ruled the other nations within the British Isles and, because this was beneficial to the English, we were happy to subsume our national identity inder the banner of Britishness.

Now the relationship has changed and the benefit is to the other nations with England paying the price. This is most pronounced in Scotland: free care when you're old, free university places to anybody from the EU (except the English of course).

The Westminster government, with Scots filling the top two posts, is perfectly happy about this and encourages the other nations to express their identity and spend money whilst the English are told to shut up and pay up. Attempts have even been made to break-up England by bringing in regional assemblies but fortunately the first one where this was attempted, the North-East, rejected it in a popular vote and no more have been tried.

So finally the English have woken up to what Scotland and Wales have known for centuries. Britain is a geographical, legal and political convenience but not a reality. And when that convenience ceases to benefit you then you ditch it.

[Philip Belgrave]

England is a nation. For 700 years or so it ruled the other nations within the British Isles and, because this was beneficial to the English, we were happy to subsume our national identity inder the banner of Britishness.

Now the relationship has changed and the benefit is to the other nations with England paying the price. This is most pronounced in Scotland: free care when you're old, free university places to anybody from the EU (except the English of course).

The Westminster government, with Scots filling the top two posts, is perfectly happy about this and encourages the other nations to express their identity and spend money whilst the English are told to shut up and pay up. Attempts have even been made to break-up England by bringing in regional assemblies but fortunately the first one where this was attempted, the North-East, rejected it in a popular vote and no more have been tried.

So finally the English have woken up to what Scotland and Wales have known for centuries. Britain is a geographical, legal and political convenience but not a reality. And when that convenience ceases to benefit you then you ditch it.

Fascinating stuff- many thanks. Mind you,there are a lot of people, either still resident in the British (sorry- I have to say it) Isles or outsiders (like me) who have a joint heritage. My father's family were English .my mother's Welsh, so where would I sit in your balkanised Island ? If you start trying to put people in watertight national boxes you have trouble, witness the former Yugoslavia.

You mention" the English" as if they were a homogeneous whole. Is that correct then ? Do the people of Northumberland have more in common with the Cornish than they do with the people just across the Tweed ?

Further, my question was why being British is, or was ,something to be ashamed of . Regardless of the historical imperatives of unity within the Island(s) the resultant combination was not all bad, was it ?

Or do you have what the former Prime Minister of Australia termed "The Black Armband View of History?"

[Eddie Hitler]

Fascinating stuff- many thanks. Mind you,there are a lot of people, either still resident in the British (sorry- I have to say it) Isles or outsiders (like me) who have a joint heritage. My father's family were English .my mother's Welsh, so where would I sit in your balkanised Island ? If you start trying to put people in watertight national boxes you have trouble, witness the former Yugoslavia.

You mention" the English" as if they were a homogeneous whole. Is that correct then ? Do the people of Northumberland have more in common with the Cornish than they do with the people just across the Tweed ?

Further, my question was why being British is, or was ,something to be ashamed of . Regardless of the historical imperatives of unity within the Island(s) the resultant combination was not all bad, was it ?

Or do you have what the former Prime Minister of Australia termed "The Black Armband View of History?"

Yugoslavia's a nice laboratory example. Forced together by the repression of Tito and not allowed to gradually break-up Yugoslavia exploded into conflict. The whole experiment lasted just 50 years.

Turning to your question I wouldn't say Britain is something to be ashamed of, just that it doesn't really mean anything anymore. It's an historic concept. I regard myself as English, I'm proud of that and would be happy to stand up and say so. However I am told by Westminster that I am a British citizen, by Brussels that I am a European citizen, and by the UN that I am a world citizen. All unarguable but all pretty meaningless; I'm in these categories automatically because I'm English but they are all supra-national groupings. As soon as you start pushing together diverse groups the whole loses its commonality and so its identity.

I do think there is a sense of Englishness sufficient to define England as a nation state, but because the warfare between England / Wales / Scotland is something from the history books then there is no need to talk about watertight boxes or balkanisation. If Scotland and Wales want independence good luck to them, as long as they don't expect England to keep funding them, I would however like the option of English independence.

Without funding though Wales and Scotland will struggle. The Welsh I think recognise this. The Scots however seem to have a lack of awareness of the state of North Sea oil, which is in rapid decline.

[Barrs Court Red]

The sooner we scrap the Union with the other home nations the better.

[Mr Mosquito]

A pathetic last-ditch attempt, not only by royalists, but by unionists t try to reinforce something that doesn't exist!

Like the archaic monarchy, the union is obselete. The Scots are going on their own path and the English have thrown off the shackles and stigma of Britishness.

The British Government's coat of arms, shown below, offers an explanation of the type of Royalist regime we live under. The Bristolian Unicorn is shackled, there's a huge Royalist Crown in the centre, and the unhappy looking lion - representing the British Army? - also wears the Royalist crown to show that the Royalists control our armed forces.

Even more interestingly........

"Dieu Et Mon Droit" .....emblazoned across the Government's coat of arms.......

Originally it was spelled "Dieut et mon droict", the early Modern French spelling, but later the 't' in "Dieut" and the 'c' in "droict" were taken out in accordance with present French orthography. To this day, this motto is emblazoned on the Royalist Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom.

A French motto rather than English was chosen because the English language had only recently replaced French as the language of the 'English' ruling classes. These 'English' ruling classes - from the time of the Norman Conquest of our English ancestors - still run this country today.* King Henry V, though of English parentage, spoke French and had claimed the title of King of France, which claims were acceded to after his military campaigns in France. The motto of the Order of the Garter, Honi soit qui mal y pense (shame upon him who thinks evil of it), is also in French, though the spelling does not match modern French.

* after years of inbreeding the ruling class half-wits that still blight England are easily identifiable by their Toff/Snob accents and love for hunting foxes and stags with vicious packs of dogs. Crown Prosecution Service lawyers and judges are often of this inbred ruling class - note their Toff accents when in court.

[Philip Belgrave]

Yugoslavia's a nice laboratory example. Forced together by the repression of Tito and not allowed to gradually break-up Yugoslavia exploded into conflict. The whole experiment lasted just 50 years.

Turning to your question I wouldn't say Britain is something to be ashamed of, just that it doesn't really mean anything anymore. It's an historic concept. I regard myself as English, I'm proud of that and would be happy to stand up and say so. However I am told by Westminster that I am a British citizen, by Brussels that I am a European citizen, and by the UN that I am a world citizen. All unarguable but all pretty meaningless; I'm in these categories automatically because I'm English but they are all supra-national groupings. As soon as you start pushing together diverse groups the whole loses its commonality and so its identity.

I do think there is a sense of Englishness sufficient to define England as a nation state, but because the warfare between England / Wales / Scotland is something from the history books then there is no need to talk about watertight boxes or balkanisation. If Scotland and Wales want independence good luck to them, as long as they don't expect England to keep funding them, I would however like the option of English independence.

Without funding though Wales and Scotland will struggle. The Welsh I think recognise this. The Scots however seem to have a lack of awareness of the state of North Sea oil, which is in rapid decline.

Fair enough, I can accept all that.

Actually the Welsh appear to have been sensible , they have an Assembly without the pointless conceit of a "Parliament" which seem to me only an excuse for navel gazing and self-justification -while dunking their Haggis sandwiches into their goblets of Chivers Regal. What do the Scots get out of it apart from an extra tier of bureaucracy?

[double-trouble]

The sooner we scrap the Union with the other home nations the better.

then we can look at Europe .

[Mr Mosquito]

To get this topic back on track, it is my firm belief that no one should be forced to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen. At the end of the day, Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is of a foreign ruling class and she represents a foreign ruling class - i.e. the now hopelessly inbred Norman/French aristocrats that have subjugated, coerced and controlled England for almost 1,000 years since the Norman conquest.

The Royalists and their hopelessly corrupt and class based legal system have been the bane of England for centuries. We've already seen in this thread the efforts of resistance put up by our English ancestors such as the Tolpuddle Martyrs of Dorset - transported to Australia for belonging to a trades union; and our Bristolian ancestors that were hung for wanting the right to vote.

No way should school children be forced to swear an oath of allegiance to this corrupt regime as super Toff Lord Goldsmith is suggesting.

[CiderEagle]

To get this topic back on track, it is my firm belief that no one should be forced to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen. At the end of the day, Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is of a foreign ruling class and she represents a foreign ruling class - i.e. the now hopelessly inbred Norman/French aristocrats that have subjugated, coerced and controlled England for almost 1,000 years since the Norman conquest.

The Royalists and their hopelessly corrupt and class based legal system have been the bane of England for centuries. We've already seen in this thread the efforts of resistance put up by our English ancestors such as the Tolpuddle Martyrs of Dorset - transported to Australia for belonging to a trades union; and our Bristolian ancestors that were hung for wanting the right to vote.

No way should school children be forced to swear an oath of allegiance to this corrupt regime as super Toff Lord Goldsmith is suggesting.

Ever read the comics "The Adventures Of Luther Arkwright" and "Heart Of Empire" by Bryan Talbot ? You'd love 'em ...

[WessexPest]

@ Philip Belgrave:- Sorry, maybe I should have expanded on this at the time, but what I meant is that 'British' has unfortunately conntations of slavery, repression, imperialism etc (although these were by no means the sole preserve of Britain) and as the biggest nation in the union, this has often been mistakenly in the world at large been attributed to England.

Highly unfair, as England as a political entity has no recent history to speak of. I've lost count of the number of times I've heard someone talking of 'the USA getting independence from England', and recent protests in Tehran by Iranian students over British foreign policy included chants such as 'Death To England'.

You live in Australia I believe? Having never been to that wonderful part of the world myself, would be interested to hear your take on this - for instance, the word 'Pom' once meant any British person, now it seems to be a specific nickname for English people.

So what I meant is, England often gets saddled with the negative traits associated with Britain and in terms of identity, it's the English who have suffered most from the union.

That's not to say britain hasn't served a purpose - for the past 300 years it clearly has. But, in my opinion, it is no longer fit for purpose. There is a growing clamour in Scotland for independence - and that's fair enough. In answer to someone earlier in this thread, the point of the Scottish parliament, with its limited powers, was as a means to an end.

The mistake (Scottish Labour) made was thinking Scottish devolution was an event, but clearly now it is becoming evident it was a process. A process which will inevitably lead to full independence for Scotland, although I'm not sure over the timescale.

The Scots have it easier than us in this regard - tey only have to break away from one country whereas we are tied to three. I detect no groundswell of support for full independence in Wales (Plaid Cymru enjoy nothing like the support of the SNP) and Northern Ireland of course is very much of a problem. The only realistic alternative to being part of the union for them is reunification with the ROI, which would not go down well with the vast majority of the populace. And I can't see England just dumping Wales and NI if they are reluctant to leave. It just wouldn't be cricket.

With the way things are going though, I can see England being a separate entity once again within 30 years. And while we're at it, let's go the wole hog and free ourselves of the archaic concept of monarchy. Why should I sing British anthem God Save the Queen when I am an English, republican atheist? I do accept tough, that I'm probably in the minority in this respect at present, but I think the tide is turning.

Finally, Philip, don't fret. Although there are some dolts who use English, Scottish or Welsh nationalism as an excuse for aggression and belligerence, there are a great many more who merely want to reclaim their nation and feel the time as come for an amicable parting of the ways. There are thousands, possibly millions like you who are of mixed heritage. Don't worry that you'll need passports or have to wave teary-eyed to relatives across a Berlin Wall-like Offa's Dyke or Hadrian's Wall.

I have more respect for a Scottish nationalist than I do for an English unionist.

As anoter poster said on this thread, Britain is an artificial invention; a marriage of convenience in which neither partner is especially happy any more. Unfortunately since the Victorian era (those pesky royals again), Britishness has been promoted and Englishness frowned upon. But it's time to change all that.

[WessexPest]

To get this topic back on track, it is my firm belief that no one should be forced to swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen. At the end of the day, Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is of a foreign ruling class and she represents a foreign ruling class - i.e. the now hopelessly inbred Norman/French aristocrats that have subjugated, coerced and controlled England for almost 1,000 years since the Norman conquest.

The Royalists and their hopelessly corrupt and class based legal system have been the bane of England for centuries. We've already seen in this thread the efforts of resistance put up by our English ancestors such as the Tolpuddle Martyrs of Dorset - transported to Australia for belonging to a trades union; and our Bristolian ancestors that were hung for wanting the right to vote.

No way should school children be forced to swear an oath of allegiance to this corrupt regime as super Toff Lord Goldsmith is suggesting.

Well put RG - I'd love to bump into you in the boozer, would be fascinating to chat with you over such topics over a Scrumpy or ten.

[fka dagest]

The concept of the oath of allegiance is absolutely repellent. It's symptomatic of a police state that many in govt appear to want to set up.

Personally, I believe all nations have a large degree of artificiality about them. There are some very interesting books about concepts of nationalism about. Two of the more famous are by

Benedict Anderson

and

Ernest Gellner

After reading Andersons's Imagined Communities I doubt anyone could get too excited about concepts of nationhood, a bit like me.

[Mr Mosquito]

The concept of the oath of allegiance is absolutely repellent. It's symptomatic of a police state that many in govt appear to want to set up.

Excellent point fka dagest, symptomatic of a NAZI police state at that. The German army were forced to swear an oath of allegiance to Herr Adolf Hitler and not the German State after the death of German field marshal Hindenburg......a warning to us all.......

Though 84 years old and in poor health, Hindenburg was obliged to run for re-election in 1932 as the only candidate who could defeat Adolf Hitler, which he did in a runoff. In his second term as President, he did what he could to oppose the NAZI Party's rise to power, but was eventually obliged to appoint Hitler as Chancellor in January 1933. In March he signed the Enabling Act of 1933 which gave special powers to Hitler's government. Hindenburg died the next year, after which Hitler declared the office of President vacant and made himself the "Führer" (German leader), or the combination of the president and chancellor.

We all know what happened next !!!!!!!!

[Eddie Hitler]

We all know what happened next !!!!!!!!

Germany hosted the Olympic games.

The true sign of an undemocratic society happy to waste a fortune in public money on a pointless propaganda event.

See also Moscow 1980, Peking 2008, London 2012.

[Philip Belgrave]

@ Philip Belgrave:- Sorry, maybe I should have expanded on this at the time, but what I meant is that 'British' has unfortunately conntations of slavery, repression, imperialism etc (although these were by no means the sole preserve of Britain) and as the biggest nation in the union, this has often been mistakenly in the world at large been attributed to England.

Highly unfair, as England as a political entity has no recent history to speak of. I've lost count of the number of times I've heard someone talking of 'the USA getting independence from England', and recent protests in Tehran by Iranian students over British foreign policy included chants such as 'Death To England'.

You live in Australia I believe? Having never been to that wonderful part of the world myself, would be interested to hear your take on this - for instance, the word 'Pom' once meant any British person, now it seems to be a specific nickname for English people.

So what I meant is, England often gets saddled with the negative traits associated with Britain and in terms of identity, it's the English who have suffered most from the union.

That's not to say britain hasn't served a purpose - for the past 300 years it clearly has. But, in my

opinion, it is no longer fit for purpose. There is a growing clamour in Scotland for independence - and that's fair enough. In answer to someone earlier in this thread, the point of the Scottish parliament,

with its limited powers, was as a means to an end

The mistake (Scottish Labour) made was thinking Scottish devolution was an event, but clearly now it

is becoming evident it was a process. A process which will inevitably lead to full independence for Scotland, although I'm not sure over the timescale.

The Scots have it easier than us in this regard - tey only have to break away from one country whereas we are tied to three. I detect no groundswell of support for full independence in Wales (Plaid Cymru enjoy nothing like the support of the SNP) and Northern Ireland of course is very much of a problem. The only realistic alternative to being part of the union for them is reunification with the ROI, which would not go down well with the vast majority of the populace. And I can't see England just dumping Wales and NI if they are reluctant to leave. It just wouldn't be cricket.

With the way things are going though, I can see England being a separate entity once again within 30 years. And while we're at it, let's go the wole hog and free ourselves of the archaic concept of monarchy. Why should I sing British anthem God Save the Queen when I am an English, republican atheist? I do accept tough, that I'm probably in the minority in this respect at present, but I think the

tide is turning.

Finally, Philip, don't fret. Although there are some dolts who use English, Scottish or Welsh nationalism as an excuse for aggression and belligerence, there are a great many more who merely want to reclaim their nation and feel the time as come for an amicable parting of the ways. There are thousands, possibly millions like you who are of mixed heritage. Don't worry that you'll need passports or have to wave teary-eyed to relatives across a Berlin Wall-like Offa's Dyke or Hadrian's Wall.

I have more respect for a Scottish nationalist than I do for an English unioni

As anoter poster said on this thread, Britain is an artificial invention; a marriage of convenience in which neither partner is especially happy any more. Unfortunately since the Victorian era (those pesky royals again), Britishness has been promoted and Englishness frowned upon. But it's time to change all that

:englandfla :englandflag

[/quote

Thank you for your fullsome-and comforting amplification.

But we are bidden to return to the topic:- Oaths of Allegiance.

As a matter of interest,here's the present Australian version is taken upon the granting of Australian Citizenship

From this time forward, under God, I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.

Nothing wrong with that, I would have thought:- theunder God bit is optional

Prior to 1994, mention was allegiance to Elizabeth II ,The Queen of Australia ,and her heirs and Sucessors according to law..

No longer: but this country lacks a Cromwell.

[Eddie Hitler]

From this time forward, under God, I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.

Nothing wrong with that, I would have thought:- theunder God bit is optional

Prior to 1994, mention was allegiance to Elizabeth II ,The Queen of Australia ,and her heirs and Sucessors according to law..

No longer: but this country lacks a Cromwell.

Well rights & liberties smacks far too much of the Human Rights act to me which is a criminals' charter and a gravy train for lawyers including the witch Cherie Blair so I'll scrap that.

There are also a lot of laws that I fundamentally disagree with, so no to that too.

And democracy, hardly works does it? We'd have been out of the EU decades ago if we had a genuine choice.

So scrapping those bits but bringing back in her majesty (God Bless Her!):

From this time forward, under God,

I pledge my loyalty to England and the English people,

And allegiance to Elizabeth II, The Queen of England and Australia, and her heirs and Sucessors

That'll do, <salutes>

[Mr Mosquito]

From this time forward, under God,

I pledge my loyalty to England and the English people,

And allegiance to Elizabeth II, The Queen of England and Australia, and her heirs and Sucessors

That'll do, <salutes>

That oath of allegiance is far too Royalist for my liking, what about this oath of allegiance from 1649 .....

"be true & faithful to the Commonwealth of England, without a King or House of Lords"

.....this "Oath of Engagement" was the declaration of loyalty to the Commonwealth of England first proposed by Henry Ireton after the execution of King Charles I in 1649. Ireton wanted all members of the Council of State to sign a declaration expressing their approval of the King's trial and execution and of the abolition of the Monarchy and House of Lords. When several Councillors objected, a compromise was reached whereby they were required to declare loyalty to the English Republican Commonwealth, but did not have to declare their approval of its past actions.

In October 1649, the Engagement was extended to all Members of Parliament, all clergymen, all members of the armed forces and to all officials in the courts of law, in municipal government and at universities and schools.

[KevinC]

As a matter of interest,here's the present Australian version is taken upon the granting of Australian Citizenship

From this time forward, under God, I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.

Rights and liberties are fine, but what about responsibilities too???

[bucksred]

England is a nation. For 700 years or so it ruled the other nations within the British Isles and, because this was beneficial to the English, we were happy to subsume our national identity inder the banner of Britishness.

Now the relationship has changed and the benefit is to the other nations with England paying the price. This is most pronounced in Scotland: free care when you're old, free university places to anybody from the EU (except the English of course).

The Westminster government, with Scots filling the top two posts, is perfectly happy about this and encourages the other nations to express their identity and spend money whilst the English are told to shut up and pay up. Attempts have even been made to break-up England by bringing in regional assemblies but fortunately the first one where this was attempted, the North-East, rejected it in a popular vote and no more have been tried.

So finally the English have woken up to what Scotland and Wales have known for centuries. Britain is a geographical, legal and political convenience but not a reality. And when that convenience ceases to benefit you then you ditch it.

What about us "immigrants" in your brave new world, and the hundreds of thousands if not millions who are of mixed British races then? The Scots, and Irish are good enough to fight your wars for you, but aint good enough to be part of the country.

What are you going to do with us? Throw us out, perhaps a bit of ethnic cleansing? Whos going to do the crappy jobs you lot don't want to do then? which is why blacks, Asians, and now East europeans are now doing?

[Philip Belgrave]

Rights and liberties are fine, but what about responsibilities too???

Oh, but there are. For example ,voting is COMPULSORY here. Therefore the "Don't give a Toss" brigade don't exist, and thus politicals can't take any of the electorate for granted.

[Eddie Hitler]

What about us "immigrants" in your brave new world, and the hundreds of thousands if not millions who are of mixed British races then? The Scots, and Irish are good enough to fight your wars for you, but aint good enough to be part of the country.

What are you going to do with us? Throw us out, perhaps a bit of ethnic cleansing? Whos going to do the crappy jobs you lot don't want to do then? which is why blacks, Asians, and now East europeans are now doing?

I don't quite see what that has to do with my posting. I didn't suggest who can or can't live in England which is a wholly different argument to what is being covered in this thread.

I suppose my argument can be summed up quite simply. England is the basic nation-state unit that I belong to. It is currently part of the following supra-national groupings:

Britain

The UK

The EU

The Commonwealth

The UN

There have, in the past, been good benefits to England from signing up to these associations. I now regard membership of these groupings as a liability and would leave them all tomorrow.

[bucksred]

I don't quite see what that has to do with my posting. I didn't suggest who can or can't live in England which is a wholly different argument to what is being covered in this thread.

I suppose my argument can be summed up quite simply. England is the basic nation-state unit that I belong to. It is currently part of the following supra-national groupings:

Britain

The UK

The EU

The Commonwealth

The UN

There have, in the past, been good benefits to England from signing up to these associations. I now regard membership of these groupings as a liability and would leave them all tomorrow.

Wonder how many pure bred Englishmen there are nowadays? I'm sure some English Nationalists would welcome the chance to get rid of all foreigners. I have made the acquaintance of a couple of that breed. Couldnt say a f u cking thing when I said I'd served the country for 12 years. That threw their limited (Shared) braincell into overload.