What submission? It’s a constitutional monarchy, they can’t induce submission. Her point was that the same way you wear a tie, in the principle of uniformity, the monarchy serves that same purpose, in being a national symbol. Also, to address CosmicSkeptic’s point of referring to the sovereign as ‘your Highness’ to be indicative of a power imbalance… As it’s been stated, it’s a constitutional monarchy, it has no power, the “highness” is the dedication a sovereign makes from the moment of birth to the moment they die, in serving the nation. For example, Princess Diana never expressed any power, but made significant social/cultural changes. In terms of their funding, they are funded as a tourist attraction the same way funding goes to any other recreational institutions.
@@reedermusic3927 because one has a monarchy and the other doesn’t? If America were also a monarchy I’d have the same view. A head of state virtually basically has no power, it only makes sense for it to be monarchical because of cultural significance.
Exactly. This is how we justify the insanity. Because if we were to actually look into the “systems” that run these corporate enterprises known as America or England, without bias or any preconceptions, it would collapse ones reality and leave them with the knowledge that they (we) have been lied to, manipulated and heavily brainwashed/mind controlled since birth.
@@Nathan-rn7wl Follow the logic where it goes. My example is valid based on the argument provided. P1. Leaders should be bowed to. P2. My manager is a leader. C. Therefore my manager should be bowed to. I don't agree with premise 1 so the conclusion doesn't follow. I act as if the conclusion doesn't follow in my daily life. I don't bow to my manager. Therefore, it follows that the conclusion doesn't follow for any leaders if that's the only reason why people bow to them.
We fight war's for less of course not everyone supports all traditions but you don't have to all you have to do is respect to millions they are very important
@@davidevans3223millions have traditions of hating LGBTQ and women. I will not show an inkling of respect for these people or the traditions they stand for. Same goes for the monarchy. There is no reason to respect such an archaic system that elevates one family above not just other people but in many cases the law itself. How can one stand for people being equal, and still support a monarchy?
@@davidevans3223 when the queen died millions lost access to incredibly important services and places because it's tradition to shut down those services Respect goes both way, if your tradition impedes on my way of living i'm not going to respect it
@@davidevans3223there's a difference between 'respecting' someone's traditions, and a significant portion of the taxes you pay being used to support it.
@@tripweed you're just full of hate for other's born into a different privalige why don't you swap your life for someone born into Rwanda it's a suppose a far bigger drop but of course to you that must mean even more wrong to many having running water and food is living like a king
Widespread violence & crime have happened for practically all of history- it must be the ideal. Let us strive to be a wretch upon the Earth & all life! 🤦🏽♀️
I also think it particularly funny that a woman was so invested in appealing to tradition but I don't wanna get into how many traditions would not really make her happy to try to keep, as a woman. Unless she thinks her life is less important than a tie, which to bootlickers I'm never sure if it's clear.
Not in the west thanks to the British empire the international slave trader's all over the world have been stopped but outside the Christian world real slaves not modern day slaves there's more than any other time in history. Everyone in the UK is born with different privaliges only the royals comes with duties and the majority support them so it's evil to remove them that's what dictator do
Nothing is more important than culture and heritage nothing at all most people are willing to at least risk their lives for it if you don't have it you have nothing the royals have no power many obligations and make millions happy as long as they have majority support you'd have to be an evil dictator to remove them
@tonyschumacher-jones1540 Put it this way, I'm saying that tradition is irrelevant to the point. I only bring up handshakes and compare it to other traditions within context as a response to the woman in the video doing so. I don't think saying "but it's tradition" just wipes away all negativity affiliated with it otherwise. Edit: I assume you meant that comment sarcastically but on the now-noticeable chance that you didn't, sorry lmao
The difference is these are rituals that are universally done by the common people and by the rich aristocrats. Praising someone due to their prescribed status is really strange
@@dennisgoatimer1079that’s not really the argument though, is it? no one is accusing the queen of having been a bad ruler, but rather questioning the system that made her ruler in the first place
@@liamosborne6859 The system is perfect fella without it you would have to wait around every single time one of them dies and by the time that happens the tyrannical dictator can't be stopped like Germany in the 30s when President Von Hindenburg died. Plus it's stability in this trying times that many people look up to. Just look at the Christmas Speech during COVID and how that did help people mentally.
As someone who despises having to throw on a cumbersome suit in hot weather just to appease the norms of professional decency, I don't think the comparison is that crazy 😂
Amazing right. Hell! I know a lot of folks with that thought process. I just wanna shake em,haha wake up people that’s crazy talk. “That’s just the way it is”type shit, kills me. Glad! I’m not the only one who caught that, sure is reassuring haha😂
I love seeing his resurgence! I remember seeing him years ago when he was still just making videos as a kid in his parents’ house with a wobbly dresser, vanishing for years to focus on college, then recently EXPLODING! I love it!
He has no argument. Alex's main beef is trying to distance himself from his own gullibility and stupidity. The former by being anti-things that haven't been significant since around 1649 and the latter by talking in a silly voice which is a (failed) attempt to sound intelligent. You wasted a lot of time believing in religion Alex. Get over it. You're desperate to find someone or something else to blame for that but there really is no one other than yourself. Similarly whatever miserable existence you have has nothing to do with our ceremonial royal family. You're going to waffle about not voting for them but you didn't vote for at least 632 out of the 633 MPs we have. Most UK citizens won't have voted for any of them. If we did vote for a king or president or whatever head of state or representative to shake hands with other world leaders, then likely close to 50% wouldn't have voted for whoever wins. Which would make this supposed 'voted' leader less popular than the existing royal family by a significant amount. Perhaps the biggest laugh would be that, most likely King Charles would win anyway and it would be a complete waste of money - the exact thing you're complaining about. Not only that it's likely the need for constantly voting for new ones would increase the costs associated with it. Meantime the royal family would still continue to be a rich family - if anything without the ceremonial role they'd have significant political influence and greater wealth. Yes, in 1649 and prior they were complete shit stains - but remember that the person who replaced them didn't want the job and was just as bad. That's why we now have a political system where no one has any power and no one is in charge. If your life still sucks today then you have to fix it. Voting won't do that.
@@ericodell9069it's debate 101. Educate yourself or just don't have opinions about things you have no knowledge of, that way people don't know you are uneducated.
Alex is definitely right on this one. They correctly point out that some traditions are pragmatic and are worth saving. But, it does not follow from this that all traditions are pragmatic and worthy of saving. The tradition of the monarchy is not worth saving, even supports are in incapable of creating coherent arguments for their position. But I am an American….
Having a head of state which is a non-political entity is exceptionally helpful to the UK. Due to them not belonging to any political party, they can act as a neutral party, and unite people from across the political spectrum to do good for the country. Normally in the form of charity work and fundraising. Is that coherent enough for you? The UK's constitutional monarchy has been carefully cultivated so the monarch has zero power, restrictions on the rights of the ruling monarch were first put in place in the year 1215. And since then they have been steadily developed to the point where they are essentially a public servant in the country and they have no say over how it is run. Since you are from the US, is there a role/position of high social standing in the country that is a non-political entity? The monarch of the UK is unelected, but has no power. And in the vows, there is a reminder, that if the monarch betrays the people of the UK, they will be removed from their position. Even, the "tyrant" King George III had no ability to create laws. Everything was controlled by the government. George III was just the figurehead of the state, and the easiest person to blame by your Founding Fathers. But the laws they were unhappy about, the king had no control over. The US president effectively rules the country with the powers of a true monarch, you have counterbalanced this by making them an elected official. So you know, swings and roundabouts really. My King can't compel me to do anything. Your King can compel you to do everything.
"I don't think people realise how the establishment became established. They simply stole land and property from the poor, surrounded themselves with weak minded sycophants for protection, gave themselves titles and have been wielding power ever since." - Tony Benn
They stole the land of the poors... Right. I agree. And they profited of that land. But there are also good things that came with them.. they were one of the first countries to abolish death sentence, slavery and to give rights to women
well i like to point out that the declaration of human rights and the constitution both over - ride god laws. the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment, we didn't vote for god or a king.
@@redwire6315Only because a former wide load royal threw a tantrum and wanted to be able to sleep around unchallenged. Funny how there's a repeating historical theme in these people of tantrum throwing for self gain.
@@magtinfal7908 I guess "soft power" and the ability to issue royal commands, to say nothing of being the head of a state church... No. It still needs to be abolished. All of them do.
@@magtinfal7908 Just watch a Black Rod ceremony for the Commons. It might all be a farce, but never forget the influence they have regardless. A minute of ceremony every now and again adds up, you know. Then there's Sandhurst. How many royals have gotten there because of blood rather than merit? My list of reasons for despising the concept of inherited political authority is too long and too counter to RUclips's censors.
As a Brit this is really upsetting. A panel of educated individuals who still think like Bronze Age sheep herders. Well done Alex, keep fighting for intellectual freedom.
The people support the RF as millionaires with their taxes, and they don't even rule over them. They are a tourist attraction, they "work" doing volunteer work. But who gets paid like that to do volunteering and charity work??
@@gusgrizzel8397 the most common rebuttal is they bring in tourism and thus, income for the whole country. I have never found this convincing and I still don’t believe it’s true either. Regardless if it was, I don’t think it’s worth it on a moral nor ethical level.
@@TheStanDudley Agree. Any income they bring in is cancelled by the Brit's paying taxes to support them. Allegedly Charles got 500 millions, but is overall worth 24 billion, when the Queen died. They're just rich people. They don't rule over anyone.
@@TheStanDudleyBut Why be so against it? Its not harming anyone, But to be fair, the UK has a greater deal of space between Rich and poor, so money is a huge thing. But the monarchy holds no real power, and stands as a thing for people to unify over. I dont get Why people want a boring republic where the head of State changes every 4 or 8’th year, just to get someone like Boris in who seemed like a Raving lunatic.
"But hey we have all sorts of wacky traditions that don't really make sense so we should not question the one we're specifically talking about in this conversation" argument/10
@@shahdhussein4652Looking down from heaven (as in: she’s dead, and now looks from the heavens), as well as “looking down on someone (who is socially beneath you).”
@@filipedias7284Are you sure he isn't British? His apologising for inconvenience potentially caused is spot on, I could swear to the lord above (should one exist, which it doesn't) that he is totally British.
To be fair, most of the time, when people refer to a dead relative looking down on them, they are usually just implying that the person is looking down due to being up in heaven.
Alex, i really love what you do. Id love to be doing that, so i guess i watch your videos vicariously in a way. Thanks for being so pedantic, and so sane.
Royalists aren't dumb. We all have birth and genetic privileges, some have more, some have less. Every single person, including Alex, is where he/she is mostly because of the genetic lottery. If it weren't for the lucky crossing over and good genes from parents, they wouldn't be what they are now. Everyone also has non gene related birth privileges. Look at history, the average person has almost never become the leader of a nation. Most often, they are children of rich and powerful people. Monarchy isn't as stupid as Republicans claim, it's just that you guys rarely ever debate with actual Monarchists or Monarchist scholars.
@@holyromanemperor420 The funniest part about your comment is that you seem to be serious. Monarchism is dead, deal with it. Or don't and keep larping as "Holyromanemperor420". You do you
@@princepsbellum3413 Deeming something a "tradition" is lazy and sloppy. It's fashion, nothing more. There's nothing particularly 'moral' to consider about it. On the flipside, we've seen plenty of other 'traditions' that have far worse moral considerations: slavery, hazing, gender roles, etc (not sorted in any particular order) She's trying to strip that key element out with her absurd, intentionally stripped down "tradition." Just because you can lump them under a particular category, it doesn't mean it belongs in the same conversation. He's talking about something that's considerably more substantive than wearing a neck tie.
@@IRanOutOfPhrases sweetie, I literally only explained what she meant, as opposed to what you claimed she meant. It's obviously not a great argument by any means. Just calm down.
@@princepsbellum3413 Sweetie, I literally only explained what I meant as opposed to what you claimed I meant: That it was a horrific argument, which you agree with. Calm down.
@@IRanOutOfPhrases darling, that's just simply not true. You called equating, which it wasn't. Anyway, do you have any other hobbies than lying and trashing the monarchy? LMAO
@fleurdanon Someone in that position has the right to be offended but it does nothing to change the fact that Alex has the more important right to make the joke in the first place. Many people in that position wouldn't like it? So what?
I once worked in a place that receivec a royal visit. I bowed out - if I clearly was to get no work done that day, why be there at all? I mean - I didn't even have any warts that needed curing! One of my pathetic co-workers summed up my absence in a way that impressed even me. "But... but... what if people find out?" No slavery worse than the kind we volunteer for. I have hind legs. Even in old age, I reserve the right to stand on them...
Honestly, the balls needed to sit on a panel when everyone else is against you. That takes real courage and patience and dedication. Thank you for fighting the good fight Alex!
The traditions they bring up aren't comparable in the slightest. We're mixing turtles, chameleons and crocodiles under the premise they're all reptiles.
Right. Tradition should be respected to a certain degree, but it's not a religion. Questioning Tradition is not a sin. It's not like we wiwloose all cultural values just because someone questions the value of aristocrats in the 21.century.
People also "ran with" (some still do) sl@very and it "sorta worked." Just because something is a tradition doesn't mean it's good or should be defended. Appeal to tradition is one of the most well-known and transparent logical fallacies.
@@ihsahnakerfeldt9280yes but you're not offering us a fair choice. There's no world in which you can dissolve the monarchy without replacing it. The question isn't what's wrong with the monarchy, the question is what system do you think is so much better that we should invest the huge effort towards changing to it. How much of the government's money do you want to spend rewriting the laws and how are you going to make sure that it's fair? When all is said and done, what tangible benefit does that new system offer that's worth all the hassle? It's simply easier to not change unless you have a better argument that "tradition bad". Because capitalism bad and socialism bad and everything bad if you want it to be.
Well, few people question traditions without the intent to change it, so to be fair, kind of normal to react as though you'd want to change it. Because generally that's what happens.
These people... comparing undemocratic institution that rules over people, and still has great power, to "wearing ties", is ridiculous. But for that matter - yes, even wearing a tie is not something that should be enforced, just because it's "a tradition".
Well, Its not really enforced, if a majority of a population wants to keep it, isnt it undemocratic to try and Cut it away? Also, it holds no power over you, so Why so against it?
I feel like Alex is kinda being a shit here. The Monarchy is ridiculous and out dated and fair criticism of it is completely warranted. But he didn't need to go about it this way. When he is intelligent enough to know full well that is not what Harry meant by "looking down on us." He is just being a provacatour.
He admits that he's trying to be funny, but it's not like they let him elaborate or that he doesn't have a point. He's saying the dude had a very poor choice of words.
@@GiubileiFernandoit's not a poor choice of words though, it's a perfectly normal way to express that somebody has passed. It's actually completely unreasonable to interpret a personal expression of grief as intended to make a convincing argument in favour of a world view. It's pedantry, plain and simple. It's fine if they point was to make a joke, but it wasn't, it was to pursuade us of an argument. Since it feels like the joke is at our expense, since clearly nobody else interpreted the phrase in that way, it fails to convince the panel or the audience. In general it's considered poor form to make jokes when somebody is grieving. If you are very close, it could be seen as trying to cheer somebody up but when you're not even in the same room as them it's just coming off as callous. You don't have to start singing hymns when a Christian is grieving but it's absolutely not the time to debate the existence of an afterlife.
Its easy to criticise, much harder to offer valid solutions. So we disolve the monarchy, so what? What will replace their legal function in parliament? Will we go towards the US style republic? What about issues like corruption and lobbying? It doesn't appear to me that those issues have been adequately addressed by other republics. Isn't it better to have a bad system for dealing with corruption than none at all? Maybe we don't need to copy the USA, but I don't see anybody suggesting reasonable alternatives.
He points this out, he knows what Harry meant but he thinks the phrase can be very ironic when you associate it with how the moncarchs think they're above others.
Weird take to bring religion into it, but Catholics supposedly wouldn't recognize the validity of the British Monarchy since it separated from the Church and declared itself head of the Anglican Church.
I love that you point out something so obvious and so agreeable and they just cannot accept it. They just have to point a finger at all these other things rather than agree with you. I'm so glad that you are having a voice in more media over there. I appreciate your candor and rational perspective.
One person making a bad argument is not an indication that a good argument doesn't exist. All it tells you is that the person is bad at arguing. I seriously doubt any of the panelists care enough about the conversation, their jobs or their audience enough to take the debate seriously. I don't know who any of them are or why they're allowed on TV, but I'm guessing it's not for their slaient reasoning nor their ability to communicate clearly.
It just shows how they are not willing to think critically or reason about the subject, it's not a matter of reason but "a tradition", like suggesting as if something is "a tradition" then is exemt of any kind of criticism.
@@fimbulInvierno How would it not? Ultracrepidarians vs actual experts... it would kinda have to, no? The UK is not a true monarchy, so it's a very bad example when discussing the actual purposes and functions of the system in question.
@@scaryperi3051 Because I've seen a lot of similar scenarios on similar themes, for example: when it's said that an atheist should debate a professional apologist or priest or similar, just to end saying basically the same arguments that are already debunked. So I don't think it would change that scenario at all for this specific theme, since it is all based on tradition and indirectly based on divine right.
@@fimbulInvierno Yes, but monarchism is not really comparable to religion in this context, is it? Government systems are not supernatural creations being peddled without evidence or reasoning like religious apologism does and apologists do. There are monarchies without the divine right of kings and even with constitutions--while still maintaining executive power, albeit not absolute. Now it sounds like you're straw manning the government type just because you've been exposed to one version of it, and a poor one at that.
Well done Alex 👏 As a Swiss citizen I can only shake my head 😂 In our founding myth, Wilhelm Tell refused to bow down to the symbol of the tyrant Habsburg, thus starting our century long history of people's democracy 😊🙋♀️
Wow, that explains so much... it was never a lack of evidence in a Creator that draws people to atheism... it's the refusal to be humble enough to accept the truth for what it is. That makes so much sense.
But just for your information...and i'm not evangelist or anything, i don't like religious bs either, but there's a verse in the New Testament that says you guys are more justified before God than those religious losers. Luke 18:9. You might need to learn how to pray soon. (And you don't have to join a church or get baptised or anything.) Just a heads up.
Wearing a tie is a different sort of tradition. When your tradition is bowing down to a monarch chosen by birth, it's a little bit different. It's like a slave bowing down to his master.
Supreme executive power is derived from a mandate from the messes, not some farcical ethroning ceremony... If the Brits wand a monarchy, they can have one. I maintained they would be better without, however.
most of us Brits have no interest in the royals or the "institution". personally, id strip them of all power and stuff them in a low-income council estate so they can see what actual life in the UK is like@@Deridus
Communism was literally the Russians answer to replace the monarchy, so I suppose you've got a better plan for what to do when we're done with the guillotines?
So let me get this straight: the best argument for continuing the monarchy is "well we've been doing it for a while now so we might as well keep doing it"? Look, I'm American and don't even pretend to understand British culture, but it seems like a pretty good idea to follow the rest of the western world and get rid of a system that was outdated a hundred years ago.
It would be far different if the monarchy ruled over them, but they have Parliament. The Royal Family live in luxury because of the concept of being paid to do charity work and volunteering. People say they're "a tourist attraction", but I think the buildings and properties are more of an attraction.
true except that the Commonwealth nations, such as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand to name a few regard the RF officially the same as the British in our constitutional monarchies. Canada to your north was formed by those who did not side with the rebellion out of loyalty to their king.
So should we end Christmas? Should we end democracy? We’ve been doing both for a while now. The rest of the western world is FUCKED. The weird thing is, all Nordic countries are MONARCHIES, and is some of the best countries in the world. I mean who would’ve thought? We just had the most elegant monarch loved by all danes abdicate, where people fucking cried. Dont tell me monarchy dont work.
@@gusgrizzel8397 Royal Family live in luxury because they have inherited wealth and authority. Charity work and volunteering is just a circus they perform to keep the masses happy.
How to win a debate:keep talking to prevent your opposition from forming arguements
from the Piers Morgan handbook on 'winning' debates
@@nicholasbain2835Muhammed Hijab also does that
@@nicholasbain2835hahahahaha opened the replies to say at least thats what piers does! 😂
More like just let them keep talking til they destroy themselves, seriously she just said shaking hands is equal to worshiping a dictator
I want to see someone in that situation yell "Should I just leave? Because you can easily have a conversation with yourself without me."
Do you wear a tie? She asks the man not wearing a tie.
Well apparently not! 😂
xD
I no longer wear ties as it is cultural appropriation.... I am not french so I shouldn't wear one😂
Why stop at the tie? Clothing in general, or gender appropriate attire at the very least ....
Yes we all love wearing a noose around our neck. Surely a sign of subservience.
She’s comparing wearing a tie to submission to a monarchy. 🤦🏻♀️ 😂
What submission? It’s a constitutional monarchy, they can’t induce submission. Her point was that the same way you wear a tie, in the principle of uniformity, the monarchy serves that same purpose, in being a national symbol.
Also, to address CosmicSkeptic’s point of referring to the sovereign as ‘your Highness’ to be indicative of a power imbalance… As it’s been stated, it’s a constitutional monarchy, it has no power, the “highness” is the dedication a sovereign makes from the moment of birth to the moment they die, in serving the nation. For example, Princess Diana never expressed any power, but made significant social/cultural changes. In terms of their funding, they are funded as a tourist attraction the same way funding goes to any other recreational institutions.
@@lets_wrapitup Why do Americans get a say on who their head of state is ,but the british people get NO SAY on who is head of state?
@@reedermusic3927 because one has a monarchy and the other doesn’t? If America were also a monarchy I’d have the same view.
A head of state virtually basically has no power, it only makes sense for it to be monarchical because of cultural significance.
Lol those antimonarchist peasants are hilarious 😂
@lets_wrapitup they have no power, but they also can make significant cultural/social changes?
The mind of a monarchist everyone.
Show hosts: "THIS CRAZY THING ISN'T ACTUALLY CRAZY, BECAUSE THERE ARE *OTHER* CRAZY THINGS WE DO AS WELL!"
Exactly. This is how we justify the insanity. Because if we were to actually look into the “systems” that run these corporate enterprises known as America or England, without bias or any preconceptions, it would collapse ones reality and leave them with the knowledge that they (we) have been lied to, manipulated and heavily brainwashed/mind controlled since birth.
The Joker argument.
Whataboutism : One other thing is not right so let's proceed to not correct any situation!
"we bow to the position, not the person."
Great argument for a position you cannot take without being the right person.
An no actual reason offered other than, "because we always have."
@@RustyWalkerita because they are our or supposed to be our leaders
@@Nathan-rn7wlSo's my manager but I don't bow to them.
@@RustyWalker ok? he doesnt run the country
@@Nathan-rn7wl Follow the logic where it goes. My example is valid based on the argument provided.
P1. Leaders should be bowed to.
P2. My manager is a leader.
C. Therefore my manager should be bowed to.
I don't agree with premise 1 so the conclusion doesn't follow. I act as if the conclusion doesn't follow in my daily life. I don't bow to my manager. Therefore, it follows that the conclusion doesn't follow for any leaders if that's the only reason why people bow to them.
This is a perfect example of appeal to tradition
We fight war's for less of course not everyone supports all traditions but you don't have to all you have to do is respect to millions they are very important
@@davidevans3223millions have traditions of hating LGBTQ and women.
I will not show an inkling of respect for these people or the traditions they stand for.
Same goes for the monarchy. There is no reason to respect such an archaic system that elevates one family above not just other people but in many cases the law itself.
How can one stand for people being equal, and still support a monarchy?
@@davidevans3223 when the queen died millions lost access to incredibly important services and places because it's tradition to shut down those services
Respect goes both way, if your tradition impedes on my way of living i'm not going to respect it
@@davidevans3223there's a difference between 'respecting' someone's traditions, and a significant portion of the taxes you pay being used to support it.
@@tripweed you're just full of hate for other's born into a different privalige why don't you swap your life for someone born into Rwanda it's a suppose a far bigger drop but of course to you that must mean even more wrong to many having running water and food is living like a king
Don’t agitate the royalists, they’re already in poor health
Their scrambling and talking over him is extremely telling.
He’s also doing that as well there’s no winner here
His point was?
well slavery is a tradition and it happened for centuries. That surely justifies it.
Millenia actually. Many millenia.
Widespread violence & crime have happened for practically all of history- it must be the ideal. Let us strive to be a wretch upon the Earth & all life!
🤦🏽♀️
I also think it particularly funny that a woman was so invested in appealing to tradition but I don't wanna get into how many traditions would not really make her happy to try to keep, as a woman. Unless she thinks her life is less important than a tie, which to bootlickers I'm never sure if it's clear.
Yeah maybe we should just “run with it”.
Not in the west thanks to the British empire the international slave trader's all over the world have been stopped but outside the Christian world real slaves not modern day slaves there's more than any other time in history.
Everyone in the UK is born with different privaliges only the royals comes with duties and the majority support them so it's evil to remove them that's what dictator do
It’s not a ridiculous tradition, it’s a condescending one.
Both? Both!
Nothing is more important than culture and heritage nothing at all most people are willing to at least risk their lives for it if you don't have it you have nothing the royals have no power many obligations and make millions happy as long as they have majority support you'd have to be an evil dictator to remove them
And she had the audacity to compare a handshake to a bow 🤣
Not mutually exclusive :)
Being offended by irrelevant sht is much more ridiculous.
Imagine simping for a royal family in the year of 2024
“Gen z get offended at everything. They can’t even listen to opposing points of view without getting triggered”
It was a hot take. Clearly he was talking about the position of heaven.
Shaking hands is a gesture of equality, not submission. Tradition is fine, forced subservience to someone by their right of birth is disgusting.
Good point that. Some traditions good. Others not so. Thanks.
@tonyschumacher-jones1540 Put it this way, I'm saying that tradition is irrelevant to the point. I only bring up handshakes and compare it to other traditions within context as a response to the woman in the video doing so. I don't think saying "but it's tradition" just wipes away all negativity affiliated with it otherwise.
Edit: I assume you meant that comment sarcastically but on the now-noticeable chance that you didn't, sorry lmao
The difference is these are rituals that are universally done by the common people and by the rich aristocrats. Praising someone due to their prescribed status is really strange
Maybe she meant when one party is the first to offer a handshake within etiquette
shaking hands is also a test of basic dexterity and to show you don't have a weapon. That is what i was told anyway when discussing its roots
Never have I seen so many people clutch pearls in unison
Pearl clutching has got to be one of the most hilarious idioms out there lmao
They clutched each others pearls. You have to pay good money for that in Soho!
They all need to GET A LIFE. There's millions of other things to be upset about. You're never going to convert the world to atheism, just GET OVER IT.
@@Firegen1 lol
It's hilarious how you could send them all spinning in circles with a simple joke. It shows they don't have a leg to stand on
Alex just went straight in there 😂
Let me just talk over Alex as he offers reasonable justification for what he said. Can't have that shit! It makes sense, and that terrifies me!
Always. Every single time. Thought I was watching piers Morgan for a second
But it was so uncouth of Alex to be critical of those inbred elitist toffs.
"Stop it patrick, you're scaring him"
@@stinkygoat2686Underrated comment
Tradition is often the opposite of common sense. It’s what you do despite there being no reason to do it
So a country needs to look up to someone who's only qualification is the correct sperm and egg happened to meet? 🤔
One would question the word correct. Apart from that spot on.
She did a great job keeping this country together fella
@@dennisgoatimer1079that’s not really the argument though, is it? no one is accusing the queen of having been a bad ruler, but rather questioning the system that made her ruler in the first place
@@liamosborne6859 The system is perfect fella without it you would have to wait around every single time one of them dies and by the time that happens the tyrannical dictator can't be stopped like Germany in the 30s when President Von Hindenburg died. Plus it's stability in this trying times that many people look up to. Just look at the Christmas Speech during COVID and how that did help people mentally.
@@dennisgoatimer1079 man you are so condescending with this fella talk
I love that wearing a tie is somehow comparable to being ruled over by someone arbitrarily
Everyone is ruled so both sides are aimless. He's wife prolly cheated with some prince
Who did she rule over, really?
The government have the power, not the monarchy.
As someone who despises having to throw on a cumbersome suit in hot weather just to appease the norms of professional decency, I don't think the comparison is that crazy 😂
@@PUNKF001then why is tax payer money spent on them if they don’t actually rule?
@@psykochomp3640 there’s plenty of things the government spend tax money on that have no power. Not sure what your point is supposed to be.
'Do you wear a tie?'
'I forgot mine today'
Fucking badass
'we kind of run with it and it sort of works'. i have nothing more to add
Amazing right. Hell! I know a lot of folks with that thought process. I just wanna shake em,haha wake up people that’s crazy talk. “That’s just the way it is”type shit, kills me. Glad! I’m not the only one who caught that, sure is reassuring haha😂
@@joshjackson678Its a good system without we would be worse of
Typical collectivist idealism, lol.
I love that he backpedaled to that without Alex even really responding
@@obitouchiha6439feels more like the denialism than idealism
You probably never imagined you’d end up talking about this subject so much. I love it though
The more I hear him the more I love this man ❤
I love seeing his resurgence! I remember seeing him years ago when he was still just making videos as a kid in his parents’ house with a wobbly dresser, vanishing for years to focus on college, then recently EXPLODING! I love it!
One man talking sense and everyone else trying to prevent that.
I like how Alex starts his sentence 10 times because they won’t stop interrupting him 😂
You like that? It’s not funny it’s childish.
@@ericodell9069What? The mature thing is to let people steamroll you into silence? Alrighty.
He has no argument. Alex's main beef is trying to distance himself from his own gullibility and stupidity.
The former by being anti-things that haven't been significant since around 1649 and the latter by talking in a silly voice which is a (failed) attempt to sound intelligent.
You wasted a lot of time believing in religion Alex. Get over it. You're desperate to find someone or something else to blame for that but there really is no one other than yourself.
Similarly whatever miserable existence you have has nothing to do with our ceremonial royal family. You're going to waffle about not voting for them but you didn't vote for at least 632 out of the 633 MPs we have. Most UK citizens won't have voted for any of them.
If we did vote for a king or president or whatever head of state or representative to shake hands with other world leaders, then likely close to 50% wouldn't have voted for whoever wins. Which would make this supposed 'voted' leader less popular than the existing royal family by a significant amount. Perhaps the biggest laugh would be that, most likely King Charles would win anyway and it would be a complete waste of money - the exact thing you're complaining about.
Not only that it's likely the need for constantly voting for new ones would increase the costs associated with it.
Meantime the royal family would still continue to be a rich family - if anything without the ceremonial role they'd have significant political influence and greater wealth.
Yes, in 1649 and prior they were complete shit stains - but remember that the person who replaced them didn't want the job and was just as bad. That's why we now have a political system where no one has any power and no one is in charge. If your life still sucks today then you have to fix it. Voting won't do that.
@@ericodell9069it's debate 101. Educate yourself or just don't have opinions about things you have no knowledge of, that way people don't know you are uneducated.
Why do they even get offended? The woman in the clip is ridiculous
people love being offended, in fact the smaller the brain....
The woman is offended because if she wasn’t offended then she wouldn’t be able to think of anything else to say.
I think it was a guy in the clip. I believe it's James Hewitt's lad.
@fleurdanon did they just assume, they invited a random lad? The monarchy is a joke. We have one too in Denmark
The men are offended too.🙄
Alex is definitely right on this one. They correctly point out that some traditions are pragmatic and are worth saving. But, it does not follow from this that all traditions are pragmatic and worthy of saving. The tradition of the monarchy is not worth saving, even supports are in incapable of creating coherent arguments for their position. But I am an American….
Having a head of state which is a non-political entity is exceptionally helpful to the UK. Due to them not belonging to any political party, they can act as a neutral party, and unite people from across the political spectrum to do good for the country. Normally in the form of charity work and fundraising.
Is that coherent enough for you?
The UK's constitutional monarchy has been carefully cultivated so the monarch has zero power, restrictions on the rights of the ruling monarch were first put in place in the year 1215. And since then they have been steadily developed to the point where they are essentially a public servant in the country and they have no say over how it is run.
Since you are from the US, is there a role/position of high social standing in the country that is a non-political entity?
The monarch of the UK is unelected, but has no power. And in the vows, there is a reminder, that if the monarch betrays the people of the UK, they will be removed from their position.
Even, the "tyrant" King George III had no ability to create laws. Everything was controlled by the government. George III was just the figurehead of the state, and the easiest person to blame by your Founding Fathers. But the laws they were unhappy about, the king had no control over.
The US president effectively rules the country with the powers of a true monarch, you have counterbalanced this by making them an elected official.
So you know, swings and roundabouts really.
My King can't compel me to do anything.
Your King can compel you to do everything.
"I don't think people realise how the establishment became established. They simply stole land and property from the poor, surrounded themselves with weak minded sycophants for protection, gave themselves titles and have been wielding power ever since." - Tony Benn
They stole the land of the poors...
Right. I agree.
And they profited of that land. But there are also good things that came with them.. they were one of the first countries to abolish death sentence, slavery and to give rights to women
It's like a religion. Don't you dare insult the institute of power! Crazy
Isn't it. These anti monarchists with their refusal to consider themselves lesser than the king by virtue of birth
well i like to point out that the declaration of human rights and the constitution both over - ride god laws.
the first amendment conflicts with the first commandment, we didn't vote for god or a king.
@@HarryNicNicholasThat's true but not everyone is American, 1st amendment means nothing for me
Well, isn't the monarch the head of the church of England?
@@redwire6315Only because a former wide load royal threw a tantrum and wanted to be able to sleep around unchallenged. Funny how there's a repeating historical theme in these people of tantrum throwing for self gain.
"I must of forgotten mine today!" Hitchen Feelings LOL
I know I died at that remark 😂😭
Brilliant😂
End ALL caste systems. Down with the Monarchy!
They don't even marry other royals anymore.
The monarchy that has literally no power or authority of any kind?
@@magtinfal7908 I guess "soft power" and the ability to issue royal commands, to say nothing of being the head of a state church...
No. It still needs to be abolished. All of them do.
@Deridus What royal commands? They don't do anything lol. I can understand if you think it should be abolished because of how useless they are
@@magtinfal7908 Just watch a Black Rod ceremony for the Commons. It might all be a farce, but never forget the influence they have regardless. A minute of ceremony every now and again adds up, you know.
Then there's Sandhurst. How many royals have gotten there because of blood rather than merit?
My list of reasons for despising the concept of inherited political authority is too long and too counter to RUclips's censors.
As a Brit this is really upsetting. A panel of educated individuals who still think like Bronze Age sheep herders. Well done Alex, keep fighting for intellectual freedom.
The people support the RF as millionaires with their taxes, and they don't even rule over them. They are a tourist attraction, they "work" doing volunteer work. But who gets paid like that to do volunteering and charity work??
@@gusgrizzel8397 the most common rebuttal is they bring in tourism and thus, income for the whole country. I have never found this convincing and I still don’t believe it’s true either. Regardless if it was, I don’t think it’s worth it on a moral nor ethical level.
@@TheStanDudley Agree. Any income they bring in is cancelled by the Brit's paying taxes to support them. Allegedly Charles got 500 millions, but is overall worth 24 billion, when the Queen died. They're just rich people. They don't rule over anyone.
@@TheStanDudleyBut Why be so against it? Its not harming anyone, But to be fair, the UK has a greater deal of space between Rich and poor, so money is a huge thing. But the monarchy holds no real power, and stands as a thing for people to unify over. I dont get Why people want a boring republic where the head of State changes every 4 or 8’th year, just to get someone like Boris in who seemed like a Raving lunatic.
@@TheStanDudleyas a tourist, I’d actively avoid anything to do with the royal family. Theater in London was fantastic though!
I applaud your patience here my goodness they never let you get a word in
Because we dont give jerkoffs like him the time to speak.
Oh yes wearing a tie is same as being told you are subjects of a fellow human who is given devine right to rule over you by virtue of birth
They’re so brainwashed and they’ll never understand that. The indoctrination begins at birth so it’s really not their fault.
Lmao
Thee don't rule over you. That's the main crux here.
It is largely symbolic. The king has no political power.
and he's not even wearing a tie 😂😂
Are you referring to Judaic Ideology or British royalty? Lol
We need to start questioning these traditions, not pass them on for the sake of it. End the monarchy.
"But hey we have all sorts of wacky traditions that don't really make sense so we should not question the one we're specifically talking about in this conversation" argument/10
“I wasn’t just trying to be funny (although I was trying to do that), but I …” is such a great thing in a discussion like that, very disarming
If you don't mind me asking, what was he alluding to here?
(English is not my first language, and I am terribly sorry if I inconvenienced you)
@@shahdhussein4652Looking down from heaven (as in: she’s dead, and now looks from the heavens), as well as “looking down on someone (who is socially beneath you).”
@@shahdhussein4652bro already speaking british 🤯
@@filipedias7284Are you sure he isn't British? His apologising for inconvenience potentially caused is spot on, I could swear to the lord above (should one exist, which it doesn't) that he is totally British.
really? I thought he was implying she was looking up (from hell)
To be fair, most of the time, when people refer to a dead relative looking down on them, they are usually just implying that the person is looking down due to being up in heaven.
She ain't in heaven
@@deethwarrior I don't really know much about her, so I can't really agree or disagree with you.
Alex knows, he was just being a dick, regardless of how justified his criticism of the monarchy is
@@j0kerclash289 He made a joke
@@Mythical.History Yes, a bit of a dickish joke. No need for anybody to get upset over it though
Looking down on us assumes Harry has insight into heaven. That’s one hell of a gift 😅
Alex, i really love what you do. Id love to be doing that, so i guess i watch your videos vicariously in a way.
Thanks for being so pedantic, and so sane.
The smug a-holes loudly speaking over Alex only make the royalists look more ridiculous and expidite their doom. Good job!
:p
Royalists aren't dumb.
We all have birth and genetic privileges, some have more, some have less.
Every single person, including Alex, is where he/she is mostly because of the genetic lottery. If it weren't for the lucky crossing over and good genes from parents, they wouldn't be what they are now.
Everyone also has non gene related birth privileges. Look at history, the average person has almost never become the leader of a nation. Most often, they are children of rich and powerful people.
Monarchy isn't as stupid as Republicans claim, it's just that you guys rarely ever debate with actual Monarchists or Monarchist scholars.
@@holyromanemperor420 The funniest part about your comment is that you seem to be serious.
Monarchism is dead, deal with it. Or don't and keep larping as "Holyromanemperor420". You do you
okay? so? being born into royalty is just as ridiculous as being born into poverty. we were all monke at some point 🤷
that’s pedantic 😂. it’s like they’re too stuffy to even appreciate a well timed joke.
The same people harp on about how 'the left can't take a joke' and yet here they are
@fleurdanon poor taste how
@fleurdanon "She's looking down on all of us" THAT is a joke in poor taste.
@@karlschmied6218Royalty is in poor taste. Are you being intentionally ironic?
@fleurdanon Every can be made fun of, get over yourself.
Lol... Equating any of this to the tradition of "wearing a tie"
It wasn't an equation. It was just an example of a tradition that doesn't really make any sense.
@@princepsbellum3413 Deeming something a "tradition" is lazy and sloppy. It's fashion, nothing more. There's nothing particularly 'moral' to consider about it. On the flipside, we've seen plenty of other 'traditions' that have far worse moral considerations: slavery, hazing, gender roles, etc (not sorted in any particular order)
She's trying to strip that key element out with her absurd, intentionally stripped down "tradition." Just because you can lump them under a particular category, it doesn't mean it belongs in the same conversation.
He's talking about something that's considerably more substantive than wearing a neck tie.
@@IRanOutOfPhrases sweetie, I literally only explained what she meant, as opposed to what you claimed she meant. It's obviously not a great argument by any means. Just calm down.
@@princepsbellum3413 Sweetie, I literally only explained what I meant as opposed to what you claimed I meant: That it was a horrific argument, which you agree with. Calm down.
@@IRanOutOfPhrases darling, that's just simply not true. You called equating, which it wasn't.
Anyway, do you have any other hobbies than lying and trashing the monarchy? LMAO
One guy arguing how archaic and unnecessary it is to hold on to needless traditions and the rest arguing "but it's tradition to hold onto tradition"
Wasn’t Harry talking about figuratively “looking down on us” from heaven? Or am I missing something here?
Its what we learn as children. Heaven is up in thr sky.
He was, that was part of the joke
@fleurdanonBut then the would be no point to the yoke... Seems you didnt get the yoke in the first place and now wont admit it..
@fleurdanon Someone in that position has the right to be offended but it does nothing to change the fact that Alex has the more important right to make the joke in the first place. Many people in that position wouldn't like it? So what?
Harry is a moron. He thinks his mother is a living spirit and he thinks his wife has magic powers.
Decided a long time ago I’d never bow to another human being. My own personal tradition. 🙏
I'd bow if I was in Japan and the other person was bowing as well as a sign that we are respecting eachother as equals
I once worked in a place that receivec a royal visit.
I bowed out - if I clearly was to get no work done that day, why be there at all? I mean - I didn't even have any warts that needed curing!
One of my pathetic co-workers summed up my absence in a way that impressed even me. "But... but... what if people find out?"
No slavery worse than the kind we volunteer for.
I have hind legs. Even in old age, I reserve the right to stand on them...
I bow to nobody No god no master
@@spacewizard69you must be the ultimate sigma 😂
@@BobbyB24601 hell yeah , humans and puny gods
"Do YoU oWn A tIe?"
My tie doesn't have millions of pounds in offshore accounts, sweetheart
Honestly, the balls needed to sit on a panel when everyone else is against you. That takes real courage and patience and dedication. Thank you for fighting the good fight Alex!
The traditions they bring up aren't comparable in the slightest. We're mixing turtles, chameleons and crocodiles under the premise they're all reptiles.
"we kinda run with it and it sorta works" okay, but can i question it? Doesnt mean you need to change it, but god forbid i question tradition.
Right.
Tradition should be respected to a certain degree, but it's not a religion. Questioning Tradition is not a sin.
It's not like we wiwloose all cultural values just because someone questions the value of aristocrats in the 21.century.
People also "ran with" (some still do) sl@very and it "sorta worked." Just because something is a tradition doesn't mean it's good or should be defended. Appeal to tradition is one of the most well-known and transparent logical fallacies.
@@ihsahnakerfeldt9280yes but you're not offering us a fair choice. There's no world in which you can dissolve the monarchy without replacing it.
The question isn't what's wrong with the monarchy, the question is what system do you think is so much better that we should invest the huge effort towards changing to it.
How much of the government's money do you want to spend rewriting the laws and how are you going to make sure that it's fair?
When all is said and done, what tangible benefit does that new system offer that's worth all the hassle?
It's simply easier to not change unless you have a better argument that "tradition bad". Because capitalism bad and socialism bad and everything bad if you want it to be.
Well, few people question traditions without the intent to change it, so to be fair, kind of normal to react as though you'd want to change it.
Because generally that's what happens.
I don't think shaking hands and wearing a tie are on quite the same level as having an unelected head of state
Trump was elected.
As if Harry can speak for anyone who has died before him.
These people... comparing undemocratic institution that rules over people, and still has great power, to "wearing ties", is ridiculous. But for that matter - yes, even wearing a tie is not something that should be enforced, just because it's "a tradition".
You're aware the monarchy doesn't actually rule over the population, right? The king or queen no longer has political authority
The monarchy doesn't even rule over anyone. They just volunteer at charity events.
Well, Its not really enforced, if a majority of a population wants to keep it, isnt it undemocratic to try and Cut it away? Also, it holds no power over you, so Why so against it?
Ties are stupid and absurd, yes. But not offensive in the way the royal family is
@@SigFigNewtonI would argue that ties are more dangerous and far more upsetting when caught up in a lathe or woodchipper.
I feel like Alex is kinda being a shit here. The Monarchy is ridiculous and out dated and fair criticism of it is completely warranted. But he didn't need to go about it this way. When he is intelligent enough to know full well that is not what Harry meant by "looking down on us." He is just being a provacatour.
He admits that he's trying to be funny, but it's not like they let him elaborate or that he doesn't have a point. He's saying the dude had a very poor choice of words.
@@GiubileiFernandoit's not a poor choice of words though, it's a perfectly normal way to express that somebody has passed.
It's actually completely unreasonable to interpret a personal expression of grief as intended to make a convincing argument in favour of a world view.
It's pedantry, plain and simple. It's fine if they point was to make a joke, but it wasn't, it was to pursuade us of an argument. Since it feels like the joke is at our expense, since clearly nobody else interpreted the phrase in that way, it fails to convince the panel or the audience.
In general it's considered poor form to make jokes when somebody is grieving. If you are very close, it could be seen as trying to cheer somebody up but when you're not even in the same room as them it's just coming off as callous.
You don't have to start singing hymns when a Christian is grieving but it's absolutely not the time to debate the existence of an afterlife.
Probably the first time she has looked up to the rest of us
If their only defence is 'its a tradition based on things we don't believe' then they've already lost.
Well you were being pedantic
Alex is way too intelligent to even participate in a debate with such royal fools..
Its easy to criticise, much harder to offer valid solutions.
So we disolve the monarchy, so what? What will replace their legal function in parliament? Will we go towards the US style republic?
What about issues like corruption and lobbying? It doesn't appear to me that those issues have been adequately addressed by other republics.
Isn't it better to have a bad system for dealing with corruption than none at all?
Maybe we don't need to copy the USA, but I don't see anybody suggesting reasonable alternatives.
@@SineN0mine3 So the royal assholes are experts in dealing with corruption? Wow that's precious. LMAO 😂
Not really 😞
He reminds me of Hitchens, it gives me goosebumps, I love it!!!!
I like to imagine she's down there screaming up at us
He didn't mean it like that. He obviously just meant looking down from heaven.
Exactly. I don't believe heaven exists and neither does Alex, but it was obvious what Harry meant.
He points this out, he knows what Harry meant but he thinks the phrase can be very ironic when you associate it with how the moncarchs think they're above others.
It was a joke not a serious point jesus christ
@@GiubileiFernando Yeah, it was a fair comment.
@@matt69nice I never said it wasn’t a joke.
I am a Catholic and I find your videos on the monarchy very true and funny 😂
Weird take to bring religion into it, but Catholics supposedly wouldn't recognize the validity of the British Monarchy since it separated from the Church and declared itself head of the Anglican Church.
@@Dan_Caponeit's not weird to bring religion into it at all. Alex is mostly known as an atheist rather than an anti-monarchist.
love that Alex is unleashing his inner hitchens once in a while. its glorious!
Shaking hands is not the same is having to submit to royal people who are in no way better than a regular man
I love that you point out something so obvious and so agreeable and they just cannot accept it. They just have to point a finger at all these other things rather than agree with you. I'm so glad that you are having a voice in more media over there. I appreciate your candor and rational perspective.
Ah yes, the fallacy of appeal to tradition. You couldn’t watch a finer demonstration. 😂
One person making a bad argument is not an indication that a good argument doesn't exist.
All it tells you is that the person is bad at arguing.
I seriously doubt any of the panelists care enough about the conversation, their jobs or their audience enough to take the debate seriously.
I don't know who any of them are or why they're allowed on TV, but I'm guessing it's not for their slaient reasoning nor their ability to communicate clearly.
When you can't argue a valid point. "That's Pedantic!" 😏
I love this guy lmao, I still can't believe a modern country still has a royal family
It just shows how they are not willing to think critically or reason about the subject, it's not a matter of reason but "a tradition", like suggesting as if something is "a tradition" then is exemt of any kind of criticism.
Alex should debate with an actual, educated monarchist, not just random people who know next to nothing about the subject.
@@scaryperi3051could be, however I don't think it would do much a difference thou.
@@fimbulInvierno How would it not? Ultracrepidarians vs actual experts... it would kinda have to, no?
The UK is not a true monarchy, so it's a very bad example when discussing the actual purposes and functions of the system in question.
@@scaryperi3051
Because I've seen a lot of similar scenarios on similar themes, for example: when it's said that an atheist should debate a professional apologist or priest or similar, just to end saying basically the same arguments that are already debunked.
So I don't think it would change that scenario at all for this specific theme, since it is all based on tradition and indirectly based on divine right.
@@fimbulInvierno Yes, but monarchism is not really comparable to religion in this context, is it? Government systems are not supernatural creations being peddled without evidence or reasoning like religious apologism does and apologists do.
There are monarchies without the divine right of kings and even with constitutions--while still maintaining executive power, albeit not absolute. Now it sounds like you're straw manning the government type just because you've been exposed to one version of it, and a poor one at that.
Well done Alex 👏 As a Swiss citizen I can only shake my head 😂 In our founding myth, Wilhelm Tell refused to bow down to the symbol of the tyrant Habsburg, thus starting our century long history of people's democracy 😊🙋♀️
And then refusing to do anything about the Nazis while storing their stolen riches! How glorious!
Long live the Swiss! Much love from the American West Coast.
"Do you wear a tie?". Checkmate, Alex!
Mufasa:"Everything the light Touches is Our Kingdom"
Simba:"Wow"
Mufasa:"But not the UK,they have Cosplay Royals there"
Never let the reasonable person finish a sentence, everyone gang up and talk over him...
Don’t expect reasonableness from most people.
Expect it least of all from people who have been taught that they have some kind of divine right to rule
I think it's the atheist in us. The thought of bowing, worshipping, and/or submitting to someone else is just weak and creepy.
Unironic "Amen'" from me, a *very* confident atheist.
It’s disrespectful to most humans to bow to a random person called queen.
Since I don’t like being disrespectful, I have disdain for royalty.
Yes atheists are immune to being oppressed, ask the communists.
Wow, that explains so much... it was never a lack of evidence in a Creator that draws people to atheism... it's the refusal to be humble enough to accept the truth for what it is. That makes so much sense.
But just for your information...and i'm not evangelist or anything, i don't like religious bs either, but there's a verse in the New Testament that says you guys are more justified before God than those religious losers. Luke 18:9.
You might need to learn how to pray soon. (And you don't have to join a church or get baptised or anything.) Just a heads up.
Down with the monarchy 🔥
Looking down on people is something she did her entire life.
Get em, Alex. 😂
British Panels when you criticize an outdated hierarchy:
( •̀ ᴖ •́ )
British panels when you twist the positive words from a grandson about his grandmother into a anti-monarchy jab.
@@j0kerclash289the monarchy deserves more frequent jabs
@@j0kerclash289can’t think of much else that I harbor disdain for about you brits
@@SigFigNewton sure, but doing it at that moment was inconsiderate and rude.
@@SigFigNewtonPreferably with a specific brand of the coof vax?
Honest and real !! Against programmed minds . This young men his what the world needs !
This specific bizarre thing is good because we sometimes generally do other weird things
Who actually watches this?
You apparently.
You me and God
@@harman1957Which one, Zeus?
@@TheAxeterBa'al Hadaad, in my case.
I am amazed how everyone just tries to interrupt you. Are they so afraid of what you're going to say? A rhetoric question...
Wearing a tie is a different sort of tradition. When your tradition is bowing down to a monarch chosen by birth, it's a little bit different. It's like a slave bowing down to his master.
"I must have forgotten mine today." I love the humor.
Royalists trying not to look ridiculous challenge (impossible)
Supreme executive power is derived from a mandate from the messes, not some farcical ethroning ceremony... If the Brits wand a monarchy, they can have one. I maintained they would be better without, however.
most of us Brits have no interest in the royals or the "institution". personally, id strip them of all power and stuff them in a low-income council estate so they can see what actual life in the UK is like@@Deridus
Twisting a comment about someone looking down on us from Heaven into a negative comment is ridiculous
@@igorlopes7589I disagree. changing the subject with a pun while pointing out the ridiculous of others isn’t ridiculous
They would look less ridiculous if they were legitimate hairs, like Simon Abney Hastings.
She blundered there asking you if you wear a tie
really grasping at straws isnt she
wearing a tie is obviously the same has having a family who rules because some f**king sky-nonce said so
Thought he was refuting heaven but nah even funnier
It's always so fun watching this knowing nearly every other country on earth finds this to be a ridiculous debate
I find it interesting that they didn't say "Looking up at us"
Communism under Stalin was a "tradition" and sort of worked too 😂
Something I never tired of reminding people: It was conservative Communists who tried to overthrow Yeltsin.
Communism was literally the Russians answer to replace the monarchy, so I suppose you've got a better plan for what to do when we're done with the guillotines?
There is no better way to win an argument than to loudly talk over EVERYONE else in the room.
weather you are trying or not I'm dead 😂😂😂😂
I am grateful that my English, Irish, and Scottish ancestors left those lands to immigrate to America centuries ago.
Mine too as they ended up in Canada which has the same RF. Some of them got stuck in the states some escaped to the great white north.
yeah we might have to put up with pompous royal nonsense...but at least 100% of our children survive a school day
Yes, and Christianity stayed with them and spread to all the world while atheism has dwindled.
So let me get this straight: the best argument for continuing the monarchy is "well we've been doing it for a while now so we might as well keep doing it"? Look, I'm American and don't even pretend to understand British culture, but it seems like a pretty good idea to follow the rest of the western world and get rid of a system that was outdated a hundred years ago.
It would be far different if the monarchy ruled over them, but they have Parliament. The Royal Family live in luxury because of the concept of being paid to do charity work and volunteering. People say they're "a tourist attraction", but I think the buildings and properties are more of an attraction.
true except that the Commonwealth nations, such as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand to name a few regard the RF officially the same as the British in our constitutional monarchies. Canada to your north was formed by those who did not side with the rebellion out of loyalty to their king.
@@timothyirwin8974 Britain was stupid to give up its colonies and empire.
So should we end Christmas? Should we end democracy? We’ve been doing both for a while now. The rest of the western world is FUCKED. The weird thing is, all Nordic countries are MONARCHIES, and is some of the best countries in the world. I mean who would’ve thought? We just had the most elegant monarch loved by all danes abdicate, where people fucking cried. Dont tell me monarchy dont work.
@@gusgrizzel8397 Royal Family live in luxury because they have inherited wealth and authority. Charity work and volunteering is just a circus they perform to keep the masses happy.
Lovely how they all talk over him without allow for a discussion
😮😮😮🔥 the right to rule by birthright is a crazy key 🔐
By the order of spaghetti monster , I'm your king. Y'all bow down to me from now on.
It was pedantic, it was funny, and it was 100% correct
Defending an archaic symbol of tyranny and oppression as just a "wacky tradition" is actually hilarious.
I love this guy more and more, just seems to be spot on on everything