Charlie Mackintosh: We SHOULD fight for King And Country - 2/6 | Oxford Union
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 окт 2024
- SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► is.gd/OxfordUnion
Oxford Union on Facebook: / theoxfordunion
Oxford Union on Twitter: @OxfordUnion
Website: www.oxford-unio...
On 9th February 1933, Oxford Union members voted 275 to 153 in favour of the motion 'This House will under no circumstances fight for its King and Country', a result met with outrage from the political establishment. Sir Winston Churchill described the vote as an 'abject, squalid, shameless, avowel', citing it as a reason for Adolf Hitler's later brinkmanship. Ninety years to the day after this motion was first put to the House, would this house still not fight for its sovereign and kingdom?
ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY: The Oxford Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. Since 1823, the Union has been promoting debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.
![Chino Pacas - Modo Capone (with Drake & Fuerza Regida) [Video Oficial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zjv8TQ0gBkg/mqdefault.jpg)
Can't fight for King and country anymore when that King and that country no longer truly exist in any kind of meaningfull way
I hope the Oxford Union heed UK Column's advice that Parliament has sequestered power all to itself and is now running amok (esp since the beginning of Boomer Truth). Stuffed full of Midwits, Vipers, Nest-Featherers and chained to Party Politics as well led by nose by NGOs, Consultants and Globalists it is sinking into inevitable Tyranny. Thanks French Revolution for all your bs about the State granting us all rights.
When this king is loyal to the man in Davos
What? lol
Oh yes they do.
nobody in that room would be fighting for king and country! all talk no action!!!
I think the fact that three of the opposition speakers are veterans, including *General* Sir Richard Shirreff, says otherwise.
This snob with not last a minute in the field. He thinks his too good for it
They speak figuratively... The ppl take them literally
Well, it is a DEBATING society, after all.
What is it with Oxbridge and being filled with Scottish people with English accents
They're trying to work their way up, mate.
Why not? They are UK citizens and hard working too. They have every to be there.
They have never lived in Scotland
that's when you know something's fishy
George Galloway does not have an English accent! He also lives in Scotland. Scotland has given the world a lot - by people with Scottish accents! As an English person living in Scotland, I can assure you that many Scots have got very nice accents which are a lot superior to many English accents - not all English people sound like this guy! It’s no wonder that some Scots want to leave the Union when they read nasty comments like the ones made here!
The only speaker who spoke from his heart without following a paper was George Galloway
I came here to find the opposing speaker to George, I don't need to watch this video , Georges speech should be enough to enlighten the whole country.
he is truly a one of a kind man
everyone who speaks against the King and for the abolition of the monarchy is a traitor.
Shameless Western Imperialists still living in their past glory.
The clean shaven pretty boy in a kilt telling us to fight and die for nothing
😂🤣🤣🤣💀
Always heartwarming to see new generations bringing new fresh faces, intellects, talents and perspectives, regardless of the relative merit or lack thereof of those perspectives.
I agree wholeheartedly. It’s a shame when you hear some such as this gentleman not only maintain defunct historical perspectives on Monarchy (there are fresh takes in support of a monarchy - of which I disagree - still the argument is fresh) but even use the very attack tactics practiced by supporters of what he called an “illegal war” in his insinuation Mr. Galloway would fight for Putin. Tony Blair would be proud as he liked to say Mr. Galloway was a puppet of Sadam.
😂😂
as opposed to what we saw in this video, a child with no concept of war, repeating state propaganda.
All kilt and no knickers. Bonnie Prince Charlie should have been red carded out of this debate. In an act of sheer and staggering moral dishonesty he slid the debate from 'This House would NOT FIGHT for King and Country to THIS HOUSE WOULD NOT SUPPORT a fight for King and Country. These debates need a referee to ensure this kind of intellectual dishonesty cant be employed by a chancer with nothing in his sporran apart from a Kipling ditty and membership card to the Conservative Party..
You are seething
@tinyloonavebaby70thstreet King Charles the III will have you molested for treason.
5:34 This chap needs to look at who our armed forces actually fight for.. take a look at who funds the Royal Institute of Foreign Affairs (Chatham House)
10:51 actually a soldier should likewise refuse to fight in an unjust war. Not to put too fine a point on it, to fight in an unjust war is to participate in murder
You are welcome to stick Your name on one of the memorial plaques. Its golden opportunity in Ukraine. Go on. But don't forget to take off Scottish kilt. Scottish people will not forgive you for disrespecting kilt.
Something tells me that Mr. Mackintosh would be among the first - if not actually _the very first_ to enter the front line as cannon fodder for the elite in a potential war, and all for the absurd anachronism - his oh so _''Beloved King''. . . .
In _reality,_ I don't think so . . .
He makes me feel that you want to puke on him or stick a Bayonet up his kilt!
Soy opinion.
The casualty rate of British Army officer's in the great war was noticeably more than that of enlisted. This was at a time when those of Mr Mackintosh's background were pretty much the only men who could become officers.
@@bradysylvester4371lol ridiculous 😂 the meat grinder only accepts poor saps from the north not caviar eating Tory lizards, don't b.s us with the reality of the world.
Dear me, probably doesn't know a working class person either..
"By recognizing that they too died for their king and country, we restore to them the humanity that the war robbed off them".. that's an absolutely fantastic example of wordsmithery , Kipling-esque, Charlie is a very convincing orator. And after the two opening statements I'm edging heavily in favour of the motion . Do all speakers write their own speeches? or can/do, the debate participants employ ghostwriters/scriptwriters ?
The stench of privilege is ever more palpable on this debate. There's no way any of those present wouldn't be draft dodging at the first opportunity, like toff Neos limboing under the rhetorical bullets of duty, patriotism and just war. "They worry about it so that we don't have to"...are we really surprised that Mr Mackintosh (tosh, I think, is operative) is such a staunch defender of the status quo? It won't be his sons dying in the kinds of war he is advocating here.
Does it make any difference that both Mr Elwood and Sir Richard did indeed fight for their country? Did YOU?
@@qboxer fine, fair point. Two people in the room have served. I'm referring to the bulk of the Union's membership, and the speaker in this video.
That’s just not true. Park your resentment at the door. Private schools are disproportionately over represented among those enlist in the armed forces. Half of the intake at Sandhurst come from private schools. Im from what you’d call an underprivileged background, the army saved my life. Some of the bravest and brightest men I served with were all from these types of institutions.
@@lade_edal exactly, they are overrepresented at institutions like Sandhurst--which funnel rich kids into the higher ranking army positions eg officer. Until 2016, Eton had an onsite officer paid for by the army to guide Etonians to Sandhurst. The rich kids join the army, sure, but they are fast tracked to better positions.
The army also pays for private education for the children of officers. Could you see this creating a feedback loop of sorts, perhaps?
I accept your suggestion that some private school kids have noble aims when they enlist. However, they are clearly given cushier army positions via unfair access to Sandhurst and the like. This leads me to doubt the notion that they are overrepresented at Sandhurst because of some superior grit, bravery, or patriotism. Their path to Sandhurst is easier. That's well documented.
The existence of a few hundred private schoolers at officer academies doesn't mean that the upper class, on the whole, bear the brunt of war. Quite the opposite. And if we continue to talk about the people in the Oxford Union, remember that its members often go on to become politicians who, as I say, will advocate for war without directly taking part. No quantity of Etonian officers changes that power dynamic.
@@lade_edal By the way, I'm glad the army saved your life. I'm sure your admiration for your fellow soldiers is justified. But do stop to consider why those Sandhurst statistics may be as they are.
If I were the parent of this Charlie guy, I'd definitively ask Oxford to refund my tuition money.
Why is that? Did the school spoil him?
Because Oxford dared to teach this Charlie guy how to express himself eloquently i.e the difference between definitively and definitely instead of spoon feeding him political ideas that makes some people equate different view points to education.
Another kid/leader, heck!
You to can fight for every immigrant . Illegal or otherwise. As a member of Nato you can fight anyone anywhere. Forfuckingwhat.
Blundering on about the just war in Ukraine is sickening
*_This is actually insufferable. Children born 2002 and later speaking in such an honorable room. Truly this is the end of the United Kingdom and the beginning of the Chinese satrapy of England_*
If Charlie uses the balloon as part of his argument . It shows how bankrupt his argument is . Fight and die for a weather balloon . NOT ME
Why is this perk dressed liked nicola sturgin?
He should have asked for advise as to how the Kilt should be worn. lol. Charles the king of the WEF
I would enjoy sticking a Bayonet up his Kilt and watching his facial expressions
Just becareful what you wear. If Ian Blackford becomes SNP chairman he'll take it back from you, leaving you standing naked. He will not stand for this disrespect to Scottish Kilts.
It would be a safe bet that Charlie would not be in the front line trenches.
The king of England’s purpose is primarily to protect the British people! Being a major signatory of the WEF indicates he works against our best interests. Therefore, he might be your king & royal family, but at almost 73 I can see through this tyranny so I’m a republican & feel much better!!
Great speech. Inspiring spirit.
Wow been a while since I heard someone sounding so fascist at such a young age
Their dialects constrict their thoughts.
King and country, not Zelensky
Zelensky is the messenger boy of the current Emperor, who is surely a more worthy and glorious cause than a mere monarch....
@@twangbarfly Emperor Klaus?
@@smacwhinnie Well I was thinking of Ole' Joe Caesar, but as you point out, he is merely a laughable puppet playing out a pathetic see-through comedy on behalf of those pulling his strings...
I came to see george calloway competition but disappointment.
Englishman cosplaying as a Scotsman
While I appreciate the youth of the speaker, his argument here as presented make no logical sense. (A listener unaware of which side of the debate the speaker was advocating would be hard-pressed to work that out based only upon his speech.) The Kipling quote in particular is taken from a poem which is commonly thought to highlight reasons why soldiers should NOT fight for King and Country. The idea the speaker proposes in that soldiers should fight in illegal and immoral wars despite those wars illegality and immorality, indeed despite any personal beliefs or convictions by the soldiery, makes no sense whatever. The "We Were Only Following Orders" argument was debunked at the Nuremberg War Crimes trials. (This young gentleman is the President of the Oxford Union? How bad were the other candidates?) Moreover, if the University of Oxford represents the best and brightest of the Nation's young thinkers and the Oxford Union among the brightest of those, is this young gentleman really representative of the best, the cleverest, the clearest thinkers among the Nation's young people? (I sincerely hope not...) Mr Macintosh is a student of PPE, (usually seen as a 'stepping-stone' toward a career in politics) and upon graduation he is set to embark upon a career as a British Army Military Officer. (So he will upon 'passing out' at Sandhurst, one day command men, possibly in combat. He may well go on to pursue a political career after that?) Of course, Mister Mackintosh is still but 20 years old. It's more than highly likely that his skills in analysing and presenting a cogent, logical and clearly-stated argument will develop as he matures. (Let us all hope so, for on this evidence I'd question his ability to properly understand a simple grocery shopping list...) xx SF
Absolutely bloody hilarious!!! Jolly good speaker.
Of course he's wearing a fucking kilt
This particular speaker didn’t add anything knowledgeable to this debate. Waste of my time. Very disappointing from an Oxford debate
Charlie are you dressed as a true highlander? I wonder 💭 I disagree with everything George Galloway says. But I admire and respect the ways he says it, as an orator and someone whom has a sound mastery of the English language. If the shit hypothetically ever did hit the fan and a national coalition would be needed to fight a general war against China and Russia. Galloway and Blair like them or not would be the best we could field. There is no natural churchillian warlord type figure waiting in the wings to hold the country together come what may. Galloway and Blair 😂 tragic
4:20, the problem with debates right there, mock the other person
Chuck Hackintosh? LOL!!!😂
No man should fight for mammon. Its just a handout for thieves. Soldiers dont grow on trees. Want someone elses stuff? Get a 2nd job. McDonalds is hiring.
*_4:05_**_ Ew_*
Yeah lame joke very twitch.
yeah, a right Charlie !
That posh little lady Rambolina in the kilt would never go to war himself,the rich and privelidged never do.
This is, of course, objectively untrue. It is hard to defend the position that, say, Henry V was not 'rich and priviledged [sic]'- he went to war.
expected some valid points over emotional blame game
Anybody know how the vote went?
I imagine nearly 60% of the room were women, so what did we really expect?
@@SirHargreeves in other words, you don't know. Further, you have little contribution other than some snide assertion that all the women involved would vote a certain way. Strange!
@@user-fy9fr3bc7v GG had a vid on it immediately after this. He lost. The twats in the room, they with their trust funds, wealthy parents and lucrative futures voted to support war.
@@user-fy9fr3bc7v You honestly believe that on a motion that says ‘We’ should fight, not ‘Britain’ or ‘Men’, but ‘We’, that young women would say yes to picking up a gun and going over the top? Also, considering men are the ones who get conscripted, I don’t think women should get a vote on this. That’s what they say about abortion and men. What’s good for the goose…
@@SirHargreeves Though conscription only affects men, war as a whole affects everyone in a nation--economically, politically, socially, and symbolically. Women therefore should have a say in whether we go to war, even if they're not in the trenches. They've done plenty of the fighting in our most recent wars (conscription hasn't been relevant for decades in the UK), and did plenty of the metaphorical 'fighting' on the home front in WW2. With that said, I'd agree with the claim that past models of conscription were super sexist to the detriment of men.
Women may say that men shouldn't talk on abortion, but men do vote and talk on it. Disproportionately, in fact. So I think a revenge banning of women from this debate would be a bit silly. Also, I don't think that a medical procedure terminating cells is comparable to warfare. You have a right to talk about abortions. Women have a right to talk about war.
"' ALL WARFARE IS BASED ON DECEPTION "' (sun tzu) 4th century BC.
" History Teach Us that Man Learns Nothing from History " (HEGEL) 1770-1831.
You dare not go to Afghanistan wearing this skirt, which you call kilt. 😂😂😂 Can't fight for the King who himself can't stand straight 😂
The brunette lady in black behind the speaker is so infatuated with the speaker. The idea for"King and country" doesn't make sense to me till now, because what is the country?
On the one hand somebody should be able to answer yes or no without a suspiciously long winded answer. On the other hand it may be useful to define the term. When I taught multiculturalism and fascism the textbook used to distinguish between racism - an attitude - and racialism - a policy. Perhaps, I think now, it was hinting at the difference between different Englush speaking states. Otherwise the 'I despise what you are but I'll defend your right to exist etc' sounds unacceptable when applied to different cultural attitudes and behaviours. As someone who grew up in mainly white environments I would say that one maybe takes risks in what one says when one is less nervous of one's own attitudes . Oh they meant 'r.....'.
I remember someone saying, the most stupid people are in universities.
I hear lots of people say that, mainly those who didn't go to university. However, stupidity is not the exclusive province of university students, graduates and staff.
Nevertheless, I must admit that this guy is making a pretty good case for your assertion.
Will he fight for king and Country. Probably not
The clown in the kilt is no fighter and has no business wearing one.
I guess for many oxford uni would just a dream
🧐 I have only one thing to say: grow up young man maybe one day you’re going to wake up to the reality of life. Good luck!🧐
Almost every if not all of his arguments can be proven wrong through empirical observation and as well historical outcomes... Too much use of empty words
The thin red line allusion is unsatisfactory - WWI was a Total War (which is the current history proposition, and I don't think the first two debaters have gleaned the nature of this); in WWI (and II) all of the British empire was at war, everyone rationed their food and energy, everyone worked longer hours, skimped and saved, collected metals for recycling and so on --- and a generation of boys-come-men died then. In this coming conflagration we will all serve corporate power, bald and with puppets we will see through - as happened at the end of WWI, I expect revolutions against these warrior states, across the alliance rather than just in one or two.
*_I thought that the one time I would be in a room full of femboys in skirts it would be under other circumstances. Alas life is not as cheerful as I would've hoped._*
We live in the age of #notinmyname . The bubble of empire floated up and away out the open window, eh??
We will do it because it's right. Not because we want to be run over.
All those calling to fight..will hide and never visit the frontline
These are some chippy introductions.
Hear hear GOD save the king!
Our current king is loyal to the man in Davos not me and you
How about that bit where he insulted the Scottish gentleman who had loudly protested the war which he himself described as being an illegal war? Perhaps he was unconsciously paying tribute to the dolts and feeble minded war mongers who supported the illegal invasion of Iraq when he copied their “playbook” of attacking any opposition. Back then they immediately tried associating George Galloway with Sadam and called him a puppet whereas this nitwit insinuated Mr. Galloway would somehow fight for Putin.
The speaker might have acknowledged “war is not sweet” but the only arguments he made in favor of his view felt more like emotional propaganda to weaponize patriotism or, as he ended his ‘argument’, an attempt to guilt participants into supporting his side. I’m guessing he is a prime candidate for the Rhodes Scholarship.
GOD SAVE THE KING!
What’s he on about? Terrible orator.
You must to distinquise... Who the king is...? If your king always fear to God and always follows his kind heart...you must fight with him with your country if your king does opposited ... Don't follow him... That's all, i wanna say... Tell your king to always fear to God then follow his kind heart... The true king is not an arrogance or jealousity or hateness because those feeling are the true demon... 🌐🇬🇧👑❤️
Let's send the king to his death instead.
I think we just watched a future PM
🤮
🤣
Didn’t realise rabbie burns had an English accent