“You might get away with calling it EuroClub Express” got a big laugh out of me. People generally hate mandatory licenses, but we LOVE belonging to exclusive clubs.
The Brexiteers are still trying to break the EU from outside, the only difference is that the Europeans are much smarter now. Probably the Europeans have learnt the ‘Divide and rule’ policy and they are preparing to give Brits a taste of their own medicine.
Which would work just long enough for some anti-government conspiracy theorist to try to resist joining. The government would insist on full cooperation, the number of resisters would grow, and there's no way that ends well.
I remember when “Yes, Minister” was aired in the United States. I was a teenager, and assumed I would NEVER understand the show. It only took me thirty years of life experience to understand and appreciate the show.
You guys get that in the US?? I'm texan but I've lived here all my life so I didn't really expect the folks back in the homeland to get British programmes
@@ProbablyNotLegit - I haven’t had a TV in twenty years, but PBS used to broadcast a bunch of British shows: Blackadder, Jeeves & Wooster, Monty Python, etc.
I had the same experience in 1995, when I was 10 years old and watched a Sylvester Mccoy episode of dr who. The difference being, of course, that while I have had 30 years to grow appreciate the show, I certainly don't actually understand any of it.
It is a show that is appreciated only with life experience. makes little sense when you are 18 and an idealist ( most 18 year old are idealists as they should be)
@@jbosco3970 "most 18 year old are idealists as they should be" If you don't vote Labour when you're 20, you have no heart; If you don't vote Tory when you're 30, you have no head; If you don't vote LibDem when you're 40, you have no hope.
00:27 - 00:41 "The Foreign Office is quite ready to go along with it as a quid pro quo for a deal over the Butter Mountain, The Wine Lake, and Milk Ocean ... the Lamb War and the Cod Stick." The *Butter Mountain* and *Milk Ocean* are based on the dairy industry surpluses that were happening in Common Market countries during the 1970s and 1980s. The *Wine Lake* refers to the glut of wine production in the EU, especially in France. The *Lamb War* refers to the different definitions of lamb versus sheep (the age periods of the animal) and lamb vs mutton (lamb meat is different than mutton; lamb meat is usually from young male sheep and mutton is from either older female or gelded male sheep) used by the EU, UK and US. Britain is also a big producer of lamb and mutton and has to compete with European and American production. The *Cod Stick* refers to UK vs EU fishing quotas and the definitions of what is or is not codfish (there are different species that could be classed as cod and the US/Canada, UK and EU had different classifications).
@@tedthesailor172 Now now, it’s actually really useful to have this explanation on hand. I actually thought Humphrey was being sarcastic when he said that line, but having it be explained that these were actually real issues that the UK had back then makes the line make more sense!
@@tedthesailor172 I wouldn't be able to remember all of this to google it and my will to do so would flee as soon as I left the video. This gave welcome context and is much appreciated.
Just goes to show that anti EU sentiment has been strong in the UK for decades, not something created by Twitter bots in the last few years. That's why John Major signed up to the Maastricht Treaty without giving the public a referendum. He knew the people would vote against it. The Irish got a referendum, and did vote no. So their government and the EU made them vote again the next year, to get the "right" decision.
@@karlbassett8485 Nonsense. The EU has no power to make any member have a referendum. And it's had plenty of referenda change its course. This here is comedy because the UK was self-confident and committed to Europe. It wouldn't be funny if the UK had been as scared, uncertain of itself and disappointed in itself as it is now.
@@lacdirk Firstly, Ireland had a referendum because their constitution legally required one for any decision that affected their sovereignty, such decisions are too important to be left to politicians or parliament, the people must decide, so having voted against the treaty the EU put enormous pressure on the Irish government to have another referendum because otherwise the whole thing would have had to be abandoned. Secondly, I'm a brexit supporting leave voter and I'm not scared or uncertain at all. Who thinks we are? It is the Remainers who are predicting doom and gloom and disaster. We're happy. These anti-EU jokes were in Yes Minister because they resonated with the public, which is something all comedy has to do. Dara O'Brian talks about this when he explains why he doesn't make jokes about Muslims. The majority of Brits wouldn't find it funny because they wouldn't get the references. Yes Minister joking about the EU is funny because the public recognised the anti EU sentiment.
@@karlbassett8485 I think most brexitters are very uncertain about their place in the world, and scared because of it. That's why they hang on to concepts that are wildly out of date, like the idea that sovereignty means domestic law trumps everything, or pure myths, like the idea that the UK was ever a trading nation. Prediction is the essential part of planning. Some brexitters are happy because they don't have much of a connection to the real world anymore, and think that they can simply think their way to a better tomorrow. Optimism doesn't change the world, good planning does. The UK was very pro-EU at the time of Yes Minister. That was the late eighties, under Thatcher, who had campaigned heavily to join the customs union and who was pushing exceedingly hard to get the single market off the ground, which would literally create the EU out of the EC. What was funny is the idea that there was a civil service underneath, working cynically against official government policy, training ministers in the process. It was funny because no one believed it.
@@jack36afc18 You realize that is a UK problem and not an EU problem? Maybe UK should restart at 0 and draw up a constitution etc. When it finally arrives in the 21th century like the rest of the EU they could rejoin (assuming is does not crumble on the way).
Benjamin Meusburger find me when I said it was an Eu problem? We need to leave with no deal. EU is falling, their economy is slowing, and they also helped sabotage the deal because they HAD to. If the overpaid unelected old bureaucrats in Brussels who are trying to destroy European culture, nation states and national identity gave Britain a good deal, every other country would follow. Keep your European army and United States of Europe and shove it up your arse 🖕🏻
Back when my wife worked in the private sector, she merely thought it was funny. It was only when she joined the civil service, where I already worked, that she realised it was a documentary! 😊
@@user-wq9mw2xz3j a perfectly functional union. And the UK was not the strongest member, Germany, France or even Belgium might contend that title, but the UK wasn’t committed to the union enough to be a strong member
When Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser was in hospital in 1982 he was visited by some of his Cabinet colleagues to discuss the plans for an early election. The discussions were halted until that evening's episode of Yes Minister had finished. Messrs Jay and Lynn held the fate of our country in their hands!
@@rfichokeofdestiny generally speaking, I think politics nowadays is all 'slogans first' and ideology later. And then seeing what it does to the polls.
Nigel Hawthorne was pure class. This is the comedy we were once famous for, I listened to a few episodes on a plane that was audio only. It still worked beautifully
Nigel Hawthorne was an absolute demigod of an actor. You can't think back to shows like this then look at Love Island today and not despair. Really how low can the bar go?
But a bit antiquated giving that the UK has the highest number of surveillance cameras in Europe. The UK has managed to become a surveillance state without help from the EU. In fact the EU's privacy laws are probably preventing some of it from becoming even worse.
Have you lost your memory? Brits rejected totally the idea of a national ID card. Introduced in 2006 and scrapped in 2010, by the lib dem tory coalition government
@Yeshua is Lord. In fact the ID card would essentialy be a requirement of Britain rejoining because its obligation of Schengen space, - its unlikely that Britain could rejoin with opt-out on it. thus well...
I return to this series every few years and it never disappoints. If anything it seems to improve with age. The best written and acted sitcom there's ever been.
@Alexander_the_Great.&. @Max_Anderson = This sketch is absolutely brilliant and there is definitely a whiff of reality in it. The wonderful paradox is that the “divide & impera” policy has effectively been an almost official policy for England, not only towards European nations but also towards its Empire. But this policy has started to have undesirable side effects post-1918: the propping up of Germany to counterbalance France has resulted in an unrestrainable Germany careening enthusiastically towards war under Hitler ! Post-WW II, it is true that the UK has stayed aloof of the EEC/EU for a decade and - seeing that it was ‘missing the boat’ - has spent about ten years of efforts to join. And it is also true that - after having joined - the UK has exerted a considerable influence on the EEC/EU, notably for pushing towards enlargement and for hampering (or opting out of) ‘federalist’ initiatives and initiatives off the ‘liberal mantra’. But this was not necessarily an effort to “dynamite” the EU from within: my belief is that, while UK diplomats and UK Brussels functionaries have often been a ‘pain in the neck’ for other Europeans and have restrained many EU initiatives, they have also had a contributive role in steering the EU policies by argumentation and compromises (“quid pro quos”). In effect, the UK representatives had blended into the Brussels woodwork, and the “divide & impera“ policy had become “ducere per compromissis”. This wonderful situation, which for Whitehall may have seemed “just like old times”, has been totally upended by Brexit. Now Britain has a choice of following EU decisions (without having much say) to achieve favorable compromises with the EU or of diverging substantially - which in effect will make the UK an opponent of EU policies, i.e. an objective economic adversary of the EU. Thus, divergence would make the UK a kind of sparring-partner against which the Europeans would progress into unity and perfect their practice of power politics! Definitely the opposite result of « divide et impera »… __ .
@@christianfournier6862 Its wishful thinking on a grand scale, to believe that Europeans are going to unite against a Britain pushing against divergence with the EU, or unite over anything much. The early vaccination debacle is proof of the opposite, which was just infighting. 'When push comes to shove', every country looks out for itself, whatever the Maastricht treaty might indulgently idealise. Ask the Poles and Hungarians.......
Writing a 10,000 word dissertation on Brexit atm. I might quote this as an academic source because it makes more sense than actual Brexit negotiations at the moment.
Well despite my personal distaste for the outcome and being a person from the Republic of Ireland, not to mention a lover of the Union, I believe that Brexit has to go ahead because I value democratic principle over personal gain. Otherwise we'll end up overturning every referendum or vote that recieves a sizeable protest and backlash.
Chris' #1 Fan 10,000 words should be a breeze with all of the available material. Keep going though and you could end up with next series of ‘Yes Minister’
@@leelicayan2180 It sounds like although you're pro EU you haven't lost your common sense. I'm guessing you will eventually come to see it for what it is.
Halfway through I wanted to dismiss this a typical British delusion about scary EU while they have voluntarily became the biggest surveillance state in Europe... and then I had to eat my own unwritten words
"Now that we're inside, we can make a complete pig's breakfast of the whole thing !" I swear this scene makes me ROFLMAO completely. Nigel Hawthorne's comedic acting is masterclass
@@georgplaz Basically, it was his opinion that the UK was not committed to the European idea and only saw it from a purely economic angle. That it would cherry pick which rules it wanted to follow and which it wouldn't. And that they weren't really interested in making it work, just concerned about opening up new markets. Sadly enough, De Gaulle's predictions were mostly vindicated.
@@sebprice He 'caused' nothing in Vietnam, he stayed in power less than a year after WW2, and the Indochine war started ten months after that (and had been over for a long time when he came back). And while he expressed the possible need to divide Germany during the war (which, frankly, is an opinion most Frenchmen would have given they had been invaded thrice by it in 70 years), he had already changed his opinion about before the war even ended. (not sure what you're talking about with 'western Italy'. There's actually no such thing.) And no, it's certainly not simplistic to say he feared the Uk would ruin the EEC. While he had his own reservations toward the European construction, he nonetheless believed in its potential, and expressed quite clearly the feeling that the UK would not mesh well into that project.
@@sebprice Frankly, it's your rebuttal that seems overly simplistic to me. First, you seem to take the fact that "De Gaulle wanted to keep French possessions after the war" as proof for... what, exactly? Yes, he had France's interests at heart, and little time to think on whether or not trying to keep colonies through force was the way to go - and as your own source notes, he changed opinion on that by 1953, so hardly a hardcore imperialist at that - just ask any Pied Noir. As for Aoste (seriously THAT's what you call 'western Italy'?), yeah, he thought about it, and then didn't push for that option. You could argue why, I suppose, but I fail to see how that is supposed to demonstrate anything. And finally, sure, you can claim "he didn't mean what he said" about the UK, but frankly, in that case you're the one who must prove that claim. And since his stated fears pretty much came true, it lends his words at least some credence.
@@sebprice It is absolutely the last time there was even the beginning of a territorial difference with Italy, and even calling it that is stretching, as there wasn't even an official attempt at claiming Val d'Aoste, just musings. As for the Indochine, now you're conflating attempts at exerting economic influence and straight out colonialism. You can argue that one isn't much better than the other but that's still completely different things, and economic jockeying is something every country engages on, to some degree. So yes, he definitely changed his opinion in 1953 - and again, I'm using your own sources for that claim... ... the same way that I will use the link you provided, who ALSO support my claim. While De Gaulle hesitated in his answers toward Algery, he still made the call to leave it against the opinion of the local generals. So thanks for your attempts at "informing myself", but you actually didn't teach me anything new. As for the poll you're quoting, that's once again shifting the goalposts. Yes, Euroscepticism is on the rise. But only one country decided to politicize the belonging to the EU in order to shut the right wing of his own party. My advice though would be to stop looking at the world in such black and white tones. You keep using the word "imperialism!!!" as a hammer (and forgetting it has NOTHING to do with the starting discussion), as if it should be the end to all debate and critical thinking. Reality, as always, is a lot more nuanced than that. Did De Gaulle try to defend France's interests, or at least what he believed them to be? Obviously, that's kind of what was expected of him. That doesn't actually contradict the fact that he believed UK's presence to be in France and Europe's best interests.
@igeto12 Not really, Britain never wanted to rule Europe they just wanted to not have the power or the will to attack Britain. That's why Austria wasn't allowed to join with Germany after WW1, so long as they don't have the power to interfere with the Empire then they won't...
@James Chris And now, once they've left the EU, they will be a tiny island nation with few resources. No longer commanding an empire or being apart of the world's largest economic bloc. Bullied by the rest of the world. Desperately cosying up to former colonial holdings who've far surpassed them in economic, military and political might and influence. Hats off, sir. :D
Zotan Inoron 5th Largest Economy, One of the only permanent security council members which holds a UN Veto and the closest ally to the largest superpower in the world. I highly doubt we are irrelevant
@@dancal4387 About to be over taken by India. And you'll no longer operate as the English language port to the EU. A quite lucrative position to be sure. Planning to leverage that UN veto for trade considerations are you? :) I'm not sure how far that will get you when your economic health depends on two other permanent members of the security council, the U.S. and China. And what happens when Scotland follows your lead and you lose those wonderful North Sea fossil resources?
"Yes Minister" and "Yes Prime Minister" weren't just TV comedies - they were factual, accurate, depictions of how this world is actually run by our "statesmen" (and "women" too!!). Thanks for the superb humour you two gave us - RIP Sir Nigel Hawthorne CBE and Paul Eddington CBE. 👍
Its sad to see that the British think it didn't work. What if Europe had been united in 1930? That would have been worse than WW2. At least the allies won. What kind of nation would Europe be with the 1930's Austrians and Germans and Italians making up a huge portion of it? Spain wasn't much better.
@@Arigator2 i dont understand the question. Are you trying to say that if the EU had existed in 1930 ww2 wouldnt have happened or that if the EU had existed, ww2 would have been much worse?
@@Arigator2 "What if Europe had been united in 1930? That would have been worse than WW2." Sure, much worse than 70 million deaths (the most conservative estimates), destruction, fear and six years of war economy.
This was one of the very best scenes from the Yes PM series. The cynical and almost flippant commentary regarding a funny kind of "fifth columnist" civil service quietly opposing any structured European alliance. Absolutely brilliant!
We have a similar issue in the US: Part of the paranoia of a preventing a police state means sacrificing government efficiency, even if it ends up being the case that no identity card would be a detriment to the very people who did not want it. If tomorrow, a legislator proposed an identity card for all US citizens, there would be national outcry. Yet, all US citizens, with only a tiny amount of exceptions, Carry a social security card. The Social Security Administration required that everyone can everyone so that they could associate people a Social Security number so as to administer their benefits upon retirement. This was all well and good, until the Internal Revenue Service which handled taxes had a need for their own identity card. Unable to create one or use a national identity card, they began using Social Security Cards. The problem is that social security cards do not have an attached photo, and the numbers are not random. the Social Security Administration has said even on the card that it should not be used as a form of ID. But the IRS and even other government organizations continue to use it as such because they need some form of identification for people. In short because Americans did not want a national ID card, they got a national ID card in all but name, only less secure and dumber.
For anyone needed a photo-id, they can use a car liscense which removed the part of population that never has nor can afford a car, driving lessons or ever need to. Which is how voter-id, another commonsense measure, became another tool of voter-suppression and political shit-throwing.
@@yourmum69_420 Of course, it is much dumber and far less secure. Any citizen that can carry a passport to a foreign country, a Driving License or a wallet with them, can carry an extra card. A social security card is not safe to carry in your pocket, wallet and it contained access to your retirement savings, bank accounts, and classified info.
Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn's writing was extraordinary, the acting superb, even despite the real relevance and accuracy of the script only becoming apparent years later.
He has a most appalling and yet ingenious manner of breaking the conversation down to its essentials. The brilliance of a typical megalomaniacal civil servant such as Sir Humphrey, and yet a keen eye for the common perspective.
I remember his remark about how you can't multiply divisions because then you end up where you started 🤣 it's like this guy has Aspeger's, and as an aspi I mean it as a compliment.
there are still incredibly good shows and documentaries, but you have to find them first. Thanks to the advance in the internet you don't even need to relay on a couple of studios anymore. Sure shows like Yes Minister are far and few between, but only a complete fool would still actively choose to watch broadcast television... and only a moron would complain about it. The "dumb people down" policy is not a thing, it's simply a matter of cheap tv production and pumping out as much content as possible to fill in the air time. there's plenty of fools and morons, so they keep making a shit load of money off that. But still if you bother to look around you'd see that there's hundred of not thousands of really good shows and talented actors/writers/producers out there. What you are doing now is like bitching about RUclips has a "dumb people down" policy after watching what is on the front page.
@@mooseyman74 yep, it's all our fault. no, you're the problem! you're the reason the for all this crap music! you're the reason the last season of GoT was trash! you're the reason for all the woke movies! you're the reason they're brianwashing the kids! you're the 13th reason why someone's gonna off themselves! you're the reason china's gonna nuke your town first! how dare you acknowledge all the shit in the world! you're the problem! lol
In the 60s De Gaulle sunk two attempts by the UK to get into the EEC (EU). He said Britain was incompatible with Europe and had a deep-seated hostility to Europe. If it wasn't so f-ing depressing it would be funny.
De gaulle never got over having to live here in the war, at britains charity Never got over Dunkirk being a success, Eisenhower hated him, Churchill, God knows why, supported him,
The real reason behind rebuffing our admission was because he needed the CAP in place before we joined. If we joined before it was set then we could negotiate and water it down. France needed us to accept it in its entirety because we not only be contributing to it directly, but we'd also be locked into the Common Market and be forced to pay the higher prices the French could charge (as we'd lose direct access to Commonwealth goods). We've been hideously out-manoeuvred and lied to repeatedly, and then also done over by our own civil service & MPs who gold-plated EU directives and waved them through HoP with almost no debate or scrutiny (because we didn't realise / acknowledge that the EU is an emergent superstate). We also seemed to enforce those directives with a zeal that is not generally mirrored elsewhere: us during the foot & mouth outbreak; France blocking our exports; France & Germany with repeated budget violations, etc.
@@caractacusbrittania7442 The man had an army of 300k by 1944 that was willing to fight, that would be reason enough for Britain to deal with a difficult personality
connla What is the point in that? So it's a passport for travelling through Europe, but you can't use it outside of Europe? Why not just use your actual passport?
'We had to break the whole thing up so we had to get inside. We tried to break it up from the outside but that wouldn't work. Now that we're inside, we can make a complete pigs breakfast of the whole thing'. Notice how jolly he looks when he says those words. Best comedy ever.
One program which aged beautifully. I have watched and listened to Yes Minister (and Yes Prime Minister) multiple times. From the days when writing was intelligent and acting was perfect. A program based on dialogue, with sublime comedic timing. There are many more scenes like this, that suit the modern situation perfectly. Shame the actor who played Hacker didn't live longer.
Isn't it, though?!? And, you can give the same reasons why the Russians and the Communist Chinese joined the United Nations, too - they'd rather be INSIDE, keeping it impotent that way....than dealing with it from the OUTSIDE. Sure, you might call this outlook cynicism, but I think there's a much better word for it: REALPOLITIK! And, it's the reason the United Nations was doomed as soon as the ink dried on the founding document! The US should NEVER have joined, or supported this idea! What SHOULD have happened is, we should have formed an organization of countries with similar values and cultures to ours. When you have Iran, of all countries, heading up the UN Human Rights Commission - then someone's sitting in a room somewhere laughing their asses off!!! You might as well put a group committed to pornography and child marriage in charge of women's rights!!! The original League of Nations (started by US President Woodrow Wilson) and its' successor, the United Nations, are two of the most useless human constructs in the history of man!!! The US should be allied with, and in the same organization with, countries like Great Britain, Canada, Australia, etc. Any organization that has on its' "Security Council" the US, Russia, AND China - is a timebomb waiting to go off...when it's not a useless waste of time, that is!
@swamidude I can't disagree with you there, Swami....but a lot of that is up to the Russians. I think it's a great thing that we cooperate in space (I think ALL nations should cooperate in space), but with the present state of the Russian economy and their worsening demographics (they have more deaths than births; their population is aging rapidly, and they're having fewer babies as a result - which means Russia is literally shrinking in population and economic output), I wonder about their ability to continue to work with us. It takes BILLIONS to operate in space; and that's money the Russians are finding it harder and harder to come up with! And, now that Boeing and SpaceX are giving the US the ability to send our own astronauts into space, without having to rely on (or pay for) the Russians' Soyuz rockets - they're about to lose hundreds of millions in THAT deal as well! Their economy is lopsidedly built on oil and gas exports; with world oil and gas prices dropping (mostly because of the shale revolution in the US, which has now made US the world's leading exporter of oil and gas - yes, even larger than Saudi Arabia!), their economy is suffering. Frankly, I can see a time coming when they will have to choose between maintaining their military, OR going into space - because they may not be able to do both! Commercial spaceflight in the US is a potential GAME-CHANGER; especially if we can figure out how to economically mine asteroids! Those are things no one else can match us in; even in potential capability; least of all Russia - unless they suddenly turn into a free, capitalist society and turn their demographic problems around!
@@SeatBill your lies are obvious. Iran is not head of human rights. Saudia Arabia is with US support. You know ... he journalist killers and their defenders...who broke the Iran deal.
What prophetic? Like they said in the clip, it was true for the last 500 years, if not more. England has always needed a disunited Europe simply because if its geography. "Divide and conquer" and "balance of power" are key phrases in British history. The brilliant thing about Yes Minister is that they didn't predict anything. They just described how people, democracy and England are, have been and will be.
Astoundingly accurate, calling diplomacy cynical. In a better world diplomacy wouldn't be a word because being able to talk problems out like adults without violence would be normal, even expected. Instead, we have to set up these political mobius double reach-arounds to prevent war breaking out by means of preventing ANYTHING from happening.
This almost dates from before I was born ("Almost...." I was born in July 1978) The shocking thing is how relevant it still is today after we've supposedly left The EU.
I guess geopolitics is based on geography, and geography changes very slowly (tectonic plates don't move all that fast). That's why it's still relevant.
YM and YPM were such masterpieces of writing that the producers must have had a tough time trying not to introduce canned laughter after every sentence.
Gentleman von Tweed such a ridiculous statement and attitude is unworthy of the an educated man. Civilisation will thrive once your primitive generation die out.
@@gentlemanvontweed7147 your reaction makes no sence. The EU is not a nation nor has it a national identity. Next time just write: "i have a fear of islam" instead of trying to be clever.
@@gentlemanvontweed7147 Muslims make up 2.8% of the British population, meaning they're outnumbered by the atheists ten to one. Christians are over 70% and so long as the British love beer and bacon; that's not going to change.
This comedy series are probably the best political satire ever made. The worrying part is how incredibly less of a satire it becomes as time goes by towards being profetic.
There's a thin line between comedy and reality, and sometimes, there isn't any line between them at all. You just have to laugh at the joke, because your brain cannot fully accept the insanity behind real world. And now I feel all wise and full of shit....nevermind.
Johannes Liechtenauer well, they haven't. TV is currently in a golden age. I mean back then there was only 3 channels, so people would watch whatever shite was shown. Now with so much competition, there are hundreds of channels and networks, putting out top quality content. You probably don't remember the vast swathes of crap that was on TV thirty years ago because, well, it was crap.
When I started watching this clip, I was confused, but intrigued, just as a passing fancy. By the end, I had to know where this was from. Brilliant. Far better than it looks at first glance.
@Donald Mackay 100 internation companies already left the UK 350 are considering... and no its your turn to leave now but it seems your parliament doesnt want to leave and even passed a law to forbids you to leave without a deal. european commission is making things hard? it sounds like somebody doesnt want to leave at all...
@@jebise1126 Wage growth is at an 11 year high and employment is the highest since comparative records began. Source - BBC www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49328855
@@grancito2 on the contrary. when others will see how will UK be fucked when they will leave it nobody else will think about it. did you notice how did people that wanted to leave EU become very silent in france and some other countries? leaving EU is very unpopular right now. we only need to finally kick UK out of it and we will have peace for next 50 years.
Great series. I believe it works so well today, in part, because it wasn't an attack on a particular party. We never actually know who Jim Hacker represents politically, even when he gains the champion's chair of Prime Minister. Instead, it's a witty attack on both the civil service and the egos and self-serving bias of politicans. Perhaps I'm biased myself, but I much prefer the original series than the more recent attempt to resurrect it for television.
It's probably generally aimed towards what happens in the Conservative Party, but not as a a direct attack at the party. Not naming a party is pretty important, as you can apply Yes Minister to New Labour as well nowadays, and possibly other future parties.
@White wolf Yes Minister came out in the 1980s - Labour only really started becoming neoliberal urbanoids in the late 1990s, with it coming into full effect around 2010. Yes Minister entirely predates modern Labour.
It's obviously implied to be a Conservative government, but I agree, it's never explicit and never that overt - and in the end, which political party is not really important for the plots and the comedy.
@White wolf Labour were not 'liberal' or 'elite', or even that metropolitan and London focussed in 1980. If you want to make that kind of charge against them, you'd do better do focus on the New Labour period onwards. How old are you? Serious question. You give the impression that you didn't watch Yes Minister at the time, and were perhaps not even born at that point. You seem to be projecting your current opinions and views back onto a very different time.
This show was made in 80 and politics is still the same now. This show is a timeless showcase how politics is corrupt and a far cry from what it should be.
The funny thing is that this does give the real reason why the UK in the 1980s pushed to let all the smaller countries join the EU. We didn't like being told what to do by France and Germany, and we thought that if there were many more member states the EU would have less central control and would do less because there would be less agreement between the member states. This was the policy of the Conservative government at the time: we pushed for enlargement in order to make the EU a looser federation of nations. It didn't work, because the EU introduced a system of qualifed majority voting so that France and Germany could ignore countries like Poland and Greece and still get their way.
What's France got to do with it? Harold Macmillan, then Prime Minister, explained his about face that allowed Ted Heath to pursue entry to the EEC: "We have to stop the French from sleepwalking into giving Germany hegemony in Europe, something we've just fought two world wars to avoid." The UK failed in that endeavour, so there was no point in staying.
@@danielh234 I’m American, not British. But history has proven the best way for Europe to be safe is for none of the European countries to become too powerful.
Marcos Lopez Lema because politicians won't do what the people have mandated them to do. It's the EUs game, tie it all up in courts and in negotiations etc.
@@robertmoulton2656 Hard to gauge what the 'Will of the people' is when the people pushing for Brexit willfully misled 'the people' as to what their 'Will' should be.
It's noticeable even from this how much the actor playing Frank Wiesel sticks out. There's a gulf of class between him and the other three. They took absolutely the right decision, rationalising it down to Hacker, Humphrey and Bernard.
avonacolyte it's a sad fact that the actor was involved in a serious car accident resulting in some brain damage resulting in him not being able to remember lines..it finished his acting career.
I used to positively HATE this programme as a youngster! As it was about Politics. Now as a Man, I realise how spot on accurate it really is! HILARIOUS
2019. I am over 45 I remember times before the EU. This Is One Of Britain's Great Shows , Brilliant Writer's. I remember when it was on the ABC- Australia. Cheers thanks
misterfunnybones it felt incredibly satisfying to see what for so long has been a strongly felt opinion of mine (UK's active meddling to keep europe disunited) aknowledged in possibly the most british show ever made with the most british of cinical manners.
Jonathan Lynn and Antony Jay had more influence on shaping public opinion than they gave themselves credit for. Antony Jay was, of course, a speech writer for Margaret Thatcher and episodes of Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister largely reflected her views
Yes Minister (and Yes Prime Minister) is the BEST SERIES EVER CREATED: it is as truthful, timely and delightful as it was when it was first aired. (I recommend Mind Your Language to my intermediate English language students and this my advanced ones: both are also good for getting into the way we think and our humour.)
@@pyeltd.5457 You have right to your opinion, though it would help if you would express which series you are talking about... Your comment as it is strongly hints of trolling or low education, in which case complex expressions and clever twists of words is wasted on such a person.
To quote: O Lord our God arise, Scatter her enemies And make them fall. Confound their politics, Frustrate their knavish tricks; On Thee our hopes we fix: God save us all. Yes, indeed. This verse may be out of favour, but it is totally appropriate when Juncker and Co. are behaving in such an unfriendly manner. Why should we *not* pray, in a hymn of all things, for deliverance from the enemies of our land, and for the frustration of their plans against us ? Such a verse is also clearly appropriate because of the assault upon this country by Islam.
I'm not even British but I approve of their national anthem. However when we start sending people to live on Mars and the Moon, let's hope only whites are allowed. It's not racism, it's just that I can't trust them colored people to not screw things up, damn lazy people. Send only Germans, and Swedes and Polish and Brits up there. The rest are too prone to failure. And whatever they do, don't send up Americans.
The Major If such a stupid idea ever takes shape, it would be a good idea to get rid of all undesirables first, and you should be among them. Well someone has to keep things in order :))
as many have pointed out the yes minister series, and to a lesser extent yes prime minister, were so well written that elements of it come up regularly. watch the whole thing and then tick off the policies, arguments and so on that you have seen in the news over the last few months and ignore brexit for now as no-one saw that becoming a reality! This series wass ridiculously accurate. Why do you think they don’t allow it to be shown much on tv any more and why they haven’t remade it like every other popular show from the past
This is not a comedy, like all good satire, it's a documentary. It's frightening that over 40 years later the same problems are still relevant and making news headlines.
“You might get away with calling it EuroClub Express” got a big laugh out of me. People generally hate mandatory licenses, but we LOVE belonging to exclusive clubs.
The Brexiteers are still trying to break the EU from outside, the only difference is that the Europeans are much smarter now. Probably the Europeans have learnt the ‘Divide and rule’ policy and they are preparing to give Brits a taste of their own medicine.
Paul Eddington and Nigel Hawthorne were great, but Derek Fowlds had some of the best lines.
Which would work just long enough for some anti-government conspiracy theorist to try to resist joining. The government would insist on full cooperation, the number of resisters would grow, and there's no way that ends well.
@@zork999 Indeed
If that line were re-written for today, it would might be "EuroClub Plus" 😝
"They're playing Pass-the-Parcel"
"Can't really blame them when it's ticking."
Yes, that's what's happening right now.
Well said ! :-)
I would not want to hold it either with how much it smells of Curry and Sharia law
This show was great in part for for lines like those delivered like that.
"Unity and harmony" as long as you submit and become Muslim maybe.
I remember when “Yes, Minister” was aired in the United States. I was a teenager, and assumed I would NEVER understand the show. It only took me thirty years of life experience to understand and appreciate the show.
You guys get that in the US?? I'm texan but I've lived here all my life so I didn't really expect the folks back in the homeland to get British programmes
@@ProbablyNotLegit - I haven’t had a TV in twenty years, but PBS used to broadcast a bunch of British shows: Blackadder, Jeeves & Wooster, Monty Python, etc.
I had the same experience in 1995, when I was 10 years old and watched a Sylvester Mccoy episode of dr who. The difference being, of course, that while I have had 30 years to grow appreciate the show, I certainly don't actually understand any of it.
It is a show that is appreciated only with life experience. makes little sense when you are 18 and an idealist ( most 18 year old are idealists as they should be)
@@jbosco3970 "most 18 year old are idealists as they should be"
If you don't vote Labour when you're 20, you have no heart;
If you don't vote Tory when you're 30, you have no head;
If you don't vote LibDem when you're 40, you have no hope.
00:27 - 00:41
"The Foreign Office is quite ready to go along with it as a quid pro quo for a deal over the Butter Mountain, The Wine Lake, and Milk Ocean ... the Lamb War and the Cod Stick."
The *Butter Mountain* and *Milk Ocean* are based on the dairy industry surpluses that were happening in Common Market countries during the 1970s and 1980s.
The *Wine Lake* refers to the glut of wine production in the EU, especially in France.
The *Lamb War* refers to the different definitions of lamb versus sheep (the age periods of the animal) and lamb vs mutton (lamb meat is different than mutton; lamb meat is usually from young male sheep and mutton is from either older female or gelded male sheep) used by the EU, UK and US. Britain is also a big producer of lamb and mutton and has to compete with European and American production.
The *Cod Stick* refers to UK vs EU fishing quotas and the definitions of what is or is not codfish (there are different species that could be classed as cod and the US/Canada, UK and EU had different classifications).
Thanks. I think you'll find most people on this thread have Search Engines of their own...
@@tedthesailor172 Now now, it’s actually really useful to have this explanation on hand. I actually thought Humphrey was being sarcastic when he said that line, but having it be explained that these were actually real issues that the UK had back then makes the line make more sense!
@@tedthesailor172 I wouldn't be able to remember all of this to google it and my will to do so would flee as soon as I left the video. This gave welcome context and is much appreciated.
@@tedthesailor172 Why is it that when i press Thumbs Down on your comment, the number of Thumbs Ups do not get reduced by one as a result?
Thank you very much.
I just love how "Yes, Minister" was a Brexit meme 40 years ahead of time.
Omg that’s hilarious!
Just goes to show that anti EU sentiment has been strong in the UK for decades, not something created by Twitter bots in the last few years. That's why John Major signed up to the Maastricht Treaty without giving the public a referendum. He knew the people would vote against it. The Irish got a referendum, and did vote no. So their government and the EU made them vote again the next year, to get the "right" decision.
@@karlbassett8485 Nonsense. The EU has no power to make any member have a referendum. And it's had plenty of referenda change its course.
This here is comedy because the UK was self-confident and committed to Europe. It wouldn't be funny if the UK had been as scared, uncertain of itself and disappointed in itself as it is now.
@@lacdirk Firstly, Ireland had a referendum because their constitution legally required one for any decision that affected their sovereignty, such decisions are too important to be left to politicians or parliament, the people must decide, so having voted against the treaty the EU put enormous pressure on the Irish government to have another referendum because otherwise the whole thing would have had to be abandoned. Secondly, I'm a brexit supporting leave voter and I'm not scared or uncertain at all. Who thinks we are? It is the Remainers who are predicting doom and gloom and disaster. We're happy. These anti-EU jokes were in Yes Minister because they resonated with the public, which is something all comedy has to do. Dara O'Brian talks about this when he explains why he doesn't make jokes about Muslims. The majority of Brits wouldn't find it funny because they wouldn't get the references. Yes Minister joking about the EU is funny because the public recognised the anti EU sentiment.
@@karlbassett8485 I think most brexitters are very uncertain about their place in the world, and scared because of it. That's why they hang on to concepts that are wildly out of date, like the idea that sovereignty means domestic law trumps everything, or pure myths, like the idea that the UK was ever a trading nation.
Prediction is the essential part of planning. Some brexitters are happy because they don't have much of a connection to the real world anymore, and think that they can simply think their way to a better tomorrow. Optimism doesn't change the world, good planning does.
The UK was very pro-EU at the time of Yes Minister. That was the late eighties, under Thatcher, who had campaigned heavily to join the customs union and who was pushing exceedingly hard to get the single market off the ground, which would literally create the EU out of the EC.
What was funny is the idea that there was a civil service underneath, working cynically against official government policy, training ministers in the process. It was funny because no one believed it.
So what'll it be, UK?
"Well yes, but actually no."
The people are anti-Europe because it is really pro-Europe.
Out! Out! WE NEED TO GET THE FUCK *OUT!!!*
It’s still NO but the corrupt government are doing their best to overturn it
@@jack36afc18 You realize that is a UK problem and not an EU problem?
Maybe UK should restart at 0 and draw up a constitution etc. When it finally arrives in the 21th century like the rest of the EU they could rejoin (assuming is does not crumble on the way).
Benjamin Meusburger find me when I said it was an Eu problem? We need to leave with no deal. EU is falling, their economy is slowing, and they also helped sabotage the deal because they HAD to. If the overpaid unelected old bureaucrats in Brussels who are trying to destroy European culture, nation states and national identity gave Britain a good deal, every other country would follow. Keep your European army and United States of Europe and shove it up your arse 🖕🏻
Back when my wife worked in the private sector, she merely thought it was funny. It was only when she joined the civil service, where I already worked, that she realised it was a documentary! 😊
Even if it was true, they fucked up and are outside now...
@hafor2846 Whats better: an ever growing strong union, or a disfunctionate union which strongest member left?
@@user-wq9mw2xz3j
UK. Strongest member.
Dude, are you on crack?
@@user-wq9mw2xz3j a perfectly functional union. And the UK was not the strongest member, Germany, France or even Belgium might contend that title, but the UK wasn’t committed to the union enough to be a strong member
@@hafor2846yeah, and not before time. 😂
When Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser was in hospital in 1982 he was visited by some of his Cabinet colleagues to discuss the plans for an early election. The discussions were halted until that evening's episode of Yes Minister had finished. Messrs Jay and Lynn held the fate of our country in their hands!
Yes Minister is a documentary
Lord Birdwood Sadly, it's been a documentary for 500 years - and will be as current in the foreseeable future.
at least 500 years.
Lord Birdwood Didn't Tony Blair say that?
And a masterpiece. This is 40 years old.
Yes Minister is definitely more realistic than BBC news.
“Well you might get away with it by calling it Euro Club Express.”
😂😂😂
That's pretty much what they do now. It's all slick advertising slogans like "Build Back Better."
🤔Call it a vaccine passport.... 🧐😳🥺
Get out
It's usually the other way around.
@@rfichokeofdestiny generally speaking, I think politics nowadays is all 'slogans first' and ideology later. And then seeing what it does to the polls.
"Ancient history, surely!"
"Yes, and current policy!"
Nigel Hawthorne was pure class. This is the comedy we were once famous for, I listened to a few episodes on a plane that was audio only. It still worked beautifully
Nigel Hawthorne was an absolute demigod of an actor. You can't think back to shows like this then look at Love Island today and not despair. Really how low can the bar go?
"They'll think im introducing a police state, again".
Comedy gold.
But a bit antiquated giving that the UK has the highest number of surveillance cameras in Europe. The UK has managed to become a surveillance state without help from the EU. In fact the EU's privacy laws are probably preventing some of it from becoming even worse.
@@frankbauerful The UK even policies porn. For instance depictions of face sitting, fisting and the female orgasm are illegal in UK Policy.
@@suly4346 Excuse me what the fuck? Literally where did I mention pedophiles? The UK porn ban bans depicted of the female orgasm you moron.
john arryn I still don’t understand why female orgasms are illegal.
MLGFearlessGamer can you not fucking read a simple comment
1980: Telly comedy
2012: RUclips clip
2019: REALITY
ScreamingScallop it was reality back then too
Have you lost your memory? Brits rejected totally the idea of a national ID card. Introduced in 2006 and scrapped in 2010, by the lib dem tory coalition government
@Yeshua is Lord. In fact the ID card would essentialy be a requirement of Britain rejoining because its obligation of Schengen space, - its unlikely that Britain could rejoin with opt-out on it.
thus well...
@@voice.of.reason It's now redundant as everyone has a handheld thingy that can be tagged and geo-located in real time.
So, the best way to achieve the objectives of remaining is to vote leave...
I return to this series every few years and it never disappoints. If anything it seems to improve with age. The best written and acted sitcom there's ever been.
You should watch Frasier
You should watch frasier
Fraiser was utter crap. You need to watch Fawlty Towers.
“Surely we’re all committed to the European ideal?”
“Really, Minister…” (condescending chuckle) 😜
Shows just how brilliantly written, acted, and researched this show was. Without doubt the best sitcom this country ever produced.
One could make the case that it is the best sitcom ANY country has ever produced!
Sean, you let yourself down.
Sean you really should stop talking about yourself.On youtube clips.
windowlicking ?
only fools & horses would say something like that.
‘The Foreign Office is terribly pleased, it’s just like old times!’
@Alexander_the_Great.&.
@Max_Anderson =
This sketch is absolutely brilliant and there is definitely a whiff of reality in it.
The wonderful paradox is that the “divide & impera” policy has effectively been an almost official policy for England, not only towards European nations but also towards its Empire.
But this policy has started to have undesirable side effects post-1918: the propping up of Germany to counterbalance France has resulted in an unrestrainable Germany careening enthusiastically towards war under Hitler !
Post-WW II, it is true that the UK has stayed aloof of the EEC/EU for a decade and - seeing that it was ‘missing the boat’ - has spent about ten years of efforts to join. And it is also true that - after having joined - the UK has exerted a considerable influence on the EEC/EU, notably for pushing towards enlargement and for hampering (or opting out of) ‘federalist’ initiatives and initiatives off the ‘liberal mantra’.
But this was not necessarily an effort to “dynamite” the EU from within: my belief is that, while UK diplomats and UK Brussels functionaries have often been a ‘pain in the neck’ for other Europeans and have restrained many EU initiatives, they have also had a contributive role in steering the EU policies by argumentation and compromises (“quid pro quos”). In effect, the UK representatives had blended into the Brussels woodwork, and the “divide & impera“ policy had become “ducere per compromissis”.
This wonderful situation, which for Whitehall may have seemed “just like old times”, has been totally upended by Brexit. Now Britain has a choice of following EU decisions (without having much say) to achieve favorable compromises with the EU or of diverging substantially - which in effect will make the UK an opponent of EU policies, i.e. an objective economic adversary of the EU.
Thus, divergence would make the UK a kind of sparring-partner against which the Europeans would progress into unity and perfect their practice of power politics!
Definitely the opposite result of « divide et impera »…
__ .
@@christianfournier6862 Its wishful thinking on a grand scale, to believe that Europeans are going to unite against a Britain pushing against divergence with the EU, or unite over anything much. The early vaccination debacle is proof of the opposite, which was just infighting. 'When push comes to shove', every country looks out for itself, whatever the Maastricht treaty might indulgently idealise. Ask the Poles and Hungarians.......
Why does this program never get old and is always on the nail?
Because people on a power grab never change. What makes anyone think we are any different from the warring barons of medieval times.
Now It applies to the private sector too
@@hlwhhlwh2351 Exactly. We're not
“I was redrafting the redraft of the draft.”
Pure poetry.
As Sir Humphrey said on another occasion “after all, it is necessary to get behind somebody in order to stab them in the back.”
Writing a 10,000 word dissertation on Brexit atm. I might quote this as an academic source because it makes more sense than actual Brexit negotiations at the moment.
You are insane but good luck!
Hopefully not from a middle class liberal elite perspective....with a dash of patronising those that voted out?
Well despite my personal distaste for the outcome and being a person from the Republic of Ireland, not to mention a lover of the Union, I believe that Brexit has to go ahead because I value democratic principle over personal gain. Otherwise we'll end up overturning every referendum or vote that recieves a sizeable protest and backlash.
Chris' #1 Fan 10,000 words should be a breeze with all of the available material. Keep going though and you could end up with next series of ‘Yes Minister’
@@leelicayan2180 It sounds like although you're pro EU you haven't lost your common sense. I'm guessing you will eventually come to see it for what it is.
This is one of the best TV dialogues ever written ... ! We will miss you GB 🇬🇧!
Hawthorne and Eddington. Fantastic comic actors working with a weapons grade script.
"Surely the Foreign office is pro-Europe isn't it?"
"Well yes but no."
pirates meme sauce was yes minister who knew?
Yes & no**
Well yes, but actually no
What is your favorite color?
Yeah, but, no, but, yeah, but... Vicky Pollard vibes
this video is more relevant now.
i think that's why its now getting recommended again to everyone
Halfway through I wanted to dismiss this a typical British delusion about scary EU while they have voluntarily became the biggest surveillance state in Europe... and then I had to eat my own unwritten words
Absolutely. Mandatory id cards are an increasing feature of European societies.
@Kenny H In my country, you are to have an ID card on you at all times
An "increasing feature"? They have been around for a long time. And they are very practical.
I'm gonna edit this with a KYIKES! head on the obvious UDEN! and a Wojak face on the other guy
This show is a classic. As someone who has worked in government, I can tell you what happens on this show isn't far from the truth.
"Now that we're inside, we can make a complete pig's breakfast of the whole thing !"
I swear this scene makes me ROFLMAO completely. Nigel Hawthorne's comedic acting is masterclass
That's probably what Boris said to his team once they got elected
Sir Humphrey is such a well written and brilliantly acted part. The sort of conniving shit you can imagine Whitehall being full of.
The reason why De Gaulle vetoed against the UK entering the EU for many years.
Why exactly? What is "the reason" you are referring to? I am a little confused
@@georgplaz Basically, it was his opinion that the UK was not committed to the European idea and only saw it from a purely economic angle. That it would cherry pick which rules it wanted to follow and which it wouldn't. And that they weren't really interested in making it work, just concerned about opening up new markets.
Sadly enough, De Gaulle's predictions were mostly vindicated.
@@sebprice He 'caused' nothing in Vietnam, he stayed in power less than a year after WW2, and the Indochine war started ten months after that (and had been over for a long time when he came back). And while he expressed the possible need to divide Germany during the war (which, frankly, is an opinion most Frenchmen would have given they had been invaded thrice by it in 70 years), he had already changed his opinion about before the war even ended. (not sure what you're talking about with 'western Italy'. There's actually no such thing.)
And no, it's certainly not simplistic to say he feared the Uk would ruin the EEC. While he had his own reservations toward the European construction, he nonetheless believed in its potential, and expressed quite clearly the feeling that the UK would not mesh well into that project.
@@sebprice Frankly, it's your rebuttal that seems overly simplistic to me. First, you seem to take the fact that "De Gaulle wanted to keep French possessions after the war" as proof for... what, exactly? Yes, he had France's interests at heart, and little time to think on whether or not trying to keep colonies through force was the way to go - and as your own source notes, he changed opinion on that by 1953, so hardly a hardcore imperialist at that - just ask any Pied Noir.
As for Aoste (seriously THAT's what you call 'western Italy'?), yeah, he thought about it, and then didn't push for that option. You could argue why, I suppose, but I fail to see how that is supposed to demonstrate anything.
And finally, sure, you can claim "he didn't mean what he said" about the UK, but frankly, in that case you're the one who must prove that claim. And since his stated fears pretty much came true, it lends his words at least some credence.
@@sebprice It is absolutely the last time there was even the beginning of a territorial difference with Italy, and even calling it that is stretching, as there wasn't even an official attempt at claiming Val d'Aoste, just musings.
As for the Indochine, now you're conflating attempts at exerting economic influence and straight out colonialism. You can argue that one isn't much better than the other but that's still completely different things, and economic jockeying is something every country engages on, to some degree. So yes, he definitely changed his opinion in 1953 - and again, I'm using your own sources for that claim...
... the same way that I will use the link you provided, who ALSO support my claim. While De Gaulle hesitated in his answers toward Algery, he still made the call to leave it against the opinion of the local generals. So thanks for your attempts at "informing myself", but you actually didn't teach me anything new.
As for the poll you're quoting, that's once again shifting the goalposts. Yes, Euroscepticism is on the rise. But only one country decided to politicize the belonging to the EU in order to shut the right wing of his own party.
My advice though would be to stop looking at the world in such black and white tones. You keep using the word "imperialism!!!" as a hammer (and forgetting it has NOTHING to do with the starting discussion), as if it should be the end to all debate and critical thinking. Reality, as always, is a lot more nuanced than that. Did De Gaulle try to defend France's interests, or at least what he believed them to be? Obviously, that's kind of what was expected of him. That doesn't actually contradict the fact that he believed UK's presence to be in France and Europe's best interests.
Well he was being totally honest about historic British foreign policy, it was always to prevent any one power from dominating Europe.
@igeto12 Not really, Britain never wanted to rule Europe they just wanted to not have the power or the will to attack Britain. That's why Austria wasn't allowed to join with Germany after WW1, so long as they don't have the power to interfere with the Empire then they won't...
@James Chris And now, once they've left the EU, they will be a tiny island nation with few resources. No longer commanding an empire or being apart of the world's largest economic bloc. Bullied by the rest of the world. Desperately cosying up to former colonial holdings who've far surpassed them in economic, military and political might and influence.
Hats off, sir. :D
Zotan Inoron 5th Largest Economy, One of the only permanent security council members which holds a UN Veto and the closest ally to the largest superpower in the world. I highly doubt we are irrelevant
@@dancal4387 About to be over taken by India.
And you'll no longer operate as the English language port to the EU. A quite lucrative position to be sure.
Planning to leverage that UN veto for trade considerations are you? :)
I'm not sure how far that will get you when your economic health depends on two other permanent members of the security council, the U.S. and China.
And what happens when Scotland follows your lead and you lose those wonderful North Sea fossil resources?
Brad Smith nobody is saying that is a bad thing, thats how they did back then, but thats what it is its the past and it should stat that way
"Yes Minister" and "Yes Prime Minister" weren't just TV comedies - they were factual, accurate, depictions of how this world is actually run by our "statesmen" (and "women" too!!).
Thanks for the superb humour you two gave us - RIP Sir Nigel Hawthorne CBE and Paul Eddington CBE. 👍
.. and Derek Fowlds - his one-liners were superbly timed aces 🙂
"Euroclub express". Bernard really is the hero of every scene he's in
Indeed:"shall we call it Eurocardexpress, Minister"?
It's the whole discription of English diplomacy for more than 500 years.
Its sad to see that the British think it didn't work. What if Europe had been united in 1930? That would have been worse than WW2. At least the allies won. What kind of nation would Europe be with the 1930's Austrians and Germans and Italians making up a huge portion of it? Spain wasn't much better.
Can you be more specific?
@@Arigator2 i dont understand the question. Are you trying to say that if the EU had existed in 1930 ww2 wouldnt have happened or that if the EU had existed, ww2 would have been much worse?
@@jmurphy2169 - I am saying there are worse things than WW2. At least it ended. Tyrants never tire of tyranny.
@@Arigator2 "What if Europe had been united in 1930? That would have been worse than WW2."
Sure, much worse than 70 million deaths (the most conservative estimates), destruction, fear and six years of war economy.
Why isn't there stuff like this on TV now? - instead we got love island and other useless junk.
Because they don't want people to know what actually really going on
because you stopped watching the BBC.
@@nat9380 it's a good thing I dont have normal tv in my house netflix
The thick of it and veep are sorta spiritual successors to it.
KingsWorld2015 you know why.
Sir Humphrey is still 100% right, even in 2023.
This was one of the very best scenes from the Yes PM series. The cynical and almost flippant commentary regarding a funny kind of "fifth columnist" civil service quietly opposing any structured European alliance. Absolutely brilliant!
It would actually be funny if it was not true … from an EU citizen perspective…
@@khamjaninja. Well the EU didn't do what they wanted so what's the point of sticking around? That membership came with major costs
@@EresirThe1st It is argued that leaving it came with an even bigger cost
"What appalling cynicism"
"Yes we call it diplomacy minister"
😂😂
best
I read this comment right the moment he said it in the video
This series really never gets old. Really a timeless classic.
Because politics never change 😂
@@samclarke3573 Politics never changes because people never change.
the only TV series which stays in my hard drive all the time. most of others are just watched and deleted
Which show is this, may I know
@@honeybadger3439 yes minister, it's in the description
We have a similar issue in the US: Part of the paranoia of a preventing a police state means sacrificing government efficiency, even if it ends up being the case that no identity card would be a detriment to the very people who did not want it. If tomorrow, a legislator proposed an identity card for all US citizens, there would be national outcry.
Yet, all US citizens, with only a tiny amount of exceptions, Carry a social security card. The Social Security Administration required that everyone can everyone so that they could associate people a Social Security number so as to administer their benefits upon retirement. This was all well and good, until the Internal Revenue Service which handled taxes had a need for their own identity card. Unable to create one or use a national identity card, they began using Social Security Cards. The problem is that social security cards do not have an attached photo, and the numbers are not random. the Social Security Administration has said even on the card that it should not be used as a form of ID. But the IRS and even other government organizations continue to use it as such because they need some form of identification for people.
In short because Americans did not want a national ID card, they got a national ID card in all but name, only less secure and dumber.
For anyone needed a photo-id, they can use a car liscense which removed the part of population that never has nor can afford a car, driving lessons or ever need to. Which is how voter-id, another commonsense measure, became another tool of voter-suppression and political shit-throwing.
but you don't have to have it with you all the time
@@yourmum69_420 The Social Security Card is paper thin, that you know it is going to be torn apart if you carry it with you all the time.
@@Account.for.Comment right, so it's nothing like the proposal in the video
@@yourmum69_420 Of course, it is much dumber and far less secure. Any citizen that can carry a passport to a foreign country, a Driving License or a wallet with them, can carry an extra card. A social security card is not safe to carry in your pocket, wallet and it contained access to your retirement savings, bank accounts, and classified info.
Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn's writing was extraordinary, the acting superb, even despite the real relevance and accuracy of the script only becoming apparent years later.
This programme is a relevant now as it was back in the 80s.
You might get away with calling it EuroClub Express! Ah I love Bernard.
He has a most appalling and yet ingenious manner of breaking the conversation down to its essentials. The brilliance of a typical megalomaniacal civil servant such as Sir Humphrey, and yet a keen eye for the common perspective.
I say appalling, with special reference to his method for the characterisation of the typical Sun reader later in Yes, Prime Minister.
that was hilarious
I remember his remark about how you can't multiply divisions because then you end up where you started 🤣 it's like this guy has Aspeger's, and as an aspi I mean it as a compliment.
How about “red tape hold the nation together”?
Bernard!
This is when intelligent shows were still allowed on TV. Before the 'dumb people down' policy came into full effect.
More like before we had 400 channels to fill with any old shit IMO.
there are still incredibly good shows and documentaries, but you have to find them first.
Thanks to the advance in the internet you don't even need to relay on a couple of studios anymore.
Sure shows like Yes Minister are far and few between, but only a complete fool would still actively choose to watch broadcast television... and only a moron would complain about it.
The "dumb people down" policy is not a thing, it's simply a matter of cheap tv production and pumping out as much content as possible to fill in the air time. there's plenty of fools and morons, so they keep making a shit load of money off that.
But still if you bother to look around you'd see that there's hundred of not thousands of really good shows and talented actors/writers/producers out there.
What you are doing now is like bitching about RUclips has a "dumb people down" policy after watching what is on the front page.
quality over quantity
Yeah music's not crap either you just have to go on a treasure hunt for that too. You're the problem 😕
@@mooseyman74 yep, it's all our fault. no, you're the problem! you're the reason the for all this crap music! you're the reason the last season of GoT was trash! you're the reason for all the woke movies! you're the reason they're brianwashing the kids! you're the 13th reason why someone's gonna off themselves! you're the reason china's gonna nuke your town first! how dare you acknowledge all the shit in the world! you're the problem! lol
In the 60s De Gaulle sunk two attempts by the UK to get into the EEC (EU). He said Britain was incompatible with Europe and had a deep-seated hostility to Europe. If it wasn't so f-ing depressing it would be funny.
He was right after all!
De gaulle never got over having to live here in the war, at britains charity
Never got over Dunkirk being a success,
Eisenhower hated him,
Churchill, God knows why, supported him,
The real reason behind rebuffing our admission was because he needed the CAP in place before we joined. If we joined before it was set then we could negotiate and water it down. France needed us to accept it in its entirety because we not only be contributing to it directly, but we'd also be locked into the Common Market and be forced to pay the higher prices the French could charge (as we'd lose direct access to Commonwealth goods).
We've been hideously out-manoeuvred and lied to repeatedly, and then also done over by our own civil service & MPs who gold-plated EU directives and waved them through HoP with almost no debate or scrutiny (because we didn't realise / acknowledge that the EU is an emergent superstate). We also seemed to enforce those directives with a zeal that is not generally mirrored elsewhere: us during the foot & mouth outbreak; France blocking our exports; France & Germany with repeated budget violations, etc.
@@caractacusbrittania7442 Only at the start!
@@caractacusbrittania7442 The man had an army of 300k by 1944 that was willing to fight, that would be reason enough for Britain to deal with a difficult personality
soon it will be 2018 and we still don't get the euroclub express card
You didnt. We did: www.dfa.ie/passportcard/
Its political suicide....
connla I want this card it's cute
connla What is the point in that? So it's a passport for travelling through Europe, but you can't use it outside of Europe? Why not just use your actual passport?
It failed because there was no "cash-back" component.
Comedy, documentary and prophecy in one...
Never seen such an accurate depiction of politics in any other show or document as good as this.
'We had to break the whole thing up so we had to get inside. We tried to break it up from the outside but that wouldn't work. Now that we're inside, we can make a complete pigs breakfast of the whole thing'. Notice how jolly he looks when he says those words. Best comedy ever.
'To create a disunited Europe' - brilliant
Can never get tired of watching this show.. Both Yes Minister and Yes PM were well researched and beautifully presented.
The writers wrote speaches for thatcher. So were in those circles.
Absolutely brilliant in every way!! I'd forgotten how good these series were.
One program which aged beautifully. I have watched and listened to Yes Minister (and Yes Prime Minister) multiple times. From the days when writing was intelligent and acting was perfect. A program based on dialogue, with sublime comedic timing. There are many more scenes like this, that suit the modern situation perfectly. Shame the actor who played Hacker didn't live longer.
This is... scary in how accurate it is.
Isn't it, though?!? And, you can give the same reasons why the Russians and the Communist Chinese joined the United Nations, too - they'd rather be INSIDE, keeping it impotent that way....than dealing with it from the OUTSIDE. Sure, you might call this outlook cynicism, but I think there's a much better word for it:
REALPOLITIK!
And, it's the reason the United Nations was doomed as soon as the ink dried on the founding document! The US should NEVER have joined, or supported this idea! What SHOULD have happened is, we should have formed an organization of countries with similar values and cultures to ours. When you have Iran, of all countries, heading up the UN Human Rights Commission - then someone's sitting in a room somewhere laughing their asses off!!! You might as well put a group committed to pornography and child marriage in charge of women's rights!!!
The original League of Nations (started by US President Woodrow Wilson) and its' successor, the United Nations, are two of the most useless human constructs in the history of man!!! The US should be allied with, and in the same organization with, countries like Great Britain, Canada, Australia, etc. Any organization that has on its' "Security Council" the US, Russia, AND China - is a timebomb waiting to go off...when it's not a useless waste of time, that is!
@swamidude I can't disagree with you there, Swami....but a lot of that is up to the Russians. I think it's a great thing that we cooperate in space (I think ALL nations should cooperate in space), but with the present state of the Russian economy and their worsening demographics (they have more deaths than births; their population is aging rapidly, and they're having fewer babies as a result - which means Russia is literally shrinking in population and economic output), I wonder about their ability to continue to work with us. It takes BILLIONS to operate in space; and that's money the Russians are finding it harder and harder to come up with! And, now that Boeing and SpaceX are giving the US the ability to send our own astronauts into space, without having to rely on (or pay for) the Russians' Soyuz rockets - they're about to lose hundreds of millions in THAT deal as well! Their economy is lopsidedly built on oil and gas exports; with world oil and gas prices dropping (mostly because of the shale revolution in the US, which has now made US the world's leading exporter of oil and gas - yes, even larger than Saudi Arabia!), their economy is suffering. Frankly, I can see a time coming when they will have to choose between maintaining their military, OR going into space - because they may not be able to do both! Commercial spaceflight in the US is a potential GAME-CHANGER; especially if we can figure out how to economically mine asteroids! Those are things no one else can match us in; even in potential capability; least of all Russia - unless they suddenly turn into a free, capitalist society and turn their demographic problems around!
you mean the english diplomacy in the last 500 years?
Wouldn't get away with a comedy like this today.....
@@SeatBill your lies are obvious. Iran is not head of human rights. Saudia Arabia is with US support. You know ... he journalist killers and their defenders...who broke the Iran deal.
They don't make them like that any more pure genius.
Westendstores Discount 'they'?
Check out Death of Stalin (Netflix)
Magnificent , British comedy ever, full of laughter and Wit, absolutely outstanding .
This show is both funny and depressing,great writing well acted and still relevant in 2021.
Watching this in December 2019 ... it’s insanely prophetic 😂
Absolutely :-)
Rexy The Hound insanely pornographic? well... I enjoy politics... but its not that exiting.
🤣😂 Brilliant
Funny? yes
Prophetic? no. If it were true Britain would have made sure it was part of the EU from the beginning
What prophetic? Like they said in the clip, it was true for the last 500 years, if not more.
England has always needed a disunited Europe simply because if its geography. "Divide and conquer" and "balance of power" are key phrases in British history.
The brilliant thing about Yes Minister is that they didn't predict anything. They just described how people, democracy and England are, have been and will be.
_apalling cynicism...yes we call it diplomacy, minister_ xD lol
Yup, all of politics is realizing almost nothing, even good things, are done for good reasons in politics
yegfreethinker That one got me too :D
Astoundingly accurate, calling diplomacy cynical. In a better world diplomacy wouldn't be a word because being able to talk problems out like adults without violence would be normal, even expected. Instead, we have to set up these political mobius double reach-arounds to prevent war breaking out by means of preventing ANYTHING from happening.
Surely the foreign minister is pro-Europe?
Well, yes and no, forgive the expression. The foreign minister is anti-Europe, that's why we are in it.
@@pizzafacesuperleipoman8634 Foreign Office. That includes the Civil Service and the Minister, oh and the sub ministers.
This almost dates from before I was born ("Almost...." I was born in July 1978) The shocking thing is how relevant it still is today after we've supposedly left The EU.
I guess geopolitics is based on geography, and geography changes very slowly (tectonic plates don't move all that fast). That's why it's still relevant.
@@stuartgolodetz3352and the tectonic plates at parliament very rarely change.
YM and YPM were such masterpieces of writing that the producers must have had a tough time trying not to introduce canned laughter after every sentence.
They didn’t need to. It was videotaped in front of studio audiences, who provided the most natural of laugh tracks.
EU "Do you want to stay or leave?"
Britain - "yes"
Great Britain: Do you want to maintain your national identity or convert to Islam?
EU: Convert to Islam.
Gentleman von Tweed such a ridiculous statement and attitude is unworthy of the an educated man. Civilisation will thrive once your primitive generation die out.
@@gentlemanvontweed7147 your reaction makes no sence. The EU is not a nation nor has it a national identity. Next time just write: "i have a fear of islam" instead of trying to be clever.
@@gentlemanvontweed7147
Muslims make up 2.8% of the British population, meaning they're outnumbered by the atheists ten to one. Christians are over 70% and so long as the British love beer and bacon; that's not going to change.
That would leave only 0.02% others? That's ridiculous with the number of Indians we have.
This comedy series are probably the best political satire ever made.
The worrying part is how incredibly less of a satire it becomes as time goes by towards being profetic.
My boy, It been like this since Rome
i come back to this clip periodically.
it never disappoints.
There's a thin line between comedy and reality, and sometimes, there isn't any line between them at all.
You just have to laugh at the joke, because your brain cannot fully accept the insanity behind real world. And now I feel all wise and full of shit....nevermind.
Now I can apreciate this sitcom. When it was on I was too young and ignorant.
Same
Now compare this with “love island” and “I’m a celebrity get me out of here” and you realise how dumbed down television has become.
ekorusoy because there's no political dramas on TV today? And there was no trash TV back in the 80s?
Exactly Keir. Everyone compares the best things from the past with the worst of today.
Johannes Liechtenauer well, they haven't. TV is currently in a golden age. I mean back then there was only 3 channels, so people would watch whatever shite was shown. Now with so much competition, there are hundreds of channels and networks, putting out top quality content.
You probably don't remember the vast swathes of crap that was on TV thirty years ago because, well, it was crap.
You have to admit there are some complete idiots. I honestly don't know how some TV shows survive. It's just depressing.
To be fair, much of TV has made room to replace what used to be clever comedy filmed in a handful of rooms with high-budget crime drama.
This show was ahead of its time
*Read title:* This aged poorly.
*Watch video:* This aged _gloriously._
Comedy? Or a frighteningly accurate foreshadowing?
Both, I´m afraid. Then as well as now.
Antoni Gates
Foreshadowing? I think you’re a tad late to the party. This has been the foreign policy for over 500 years.
It's like the Simpsons
That was nearly 40 years ago. It all makes sense now😂
As a polish watching this, it's interesting because I always wondered why Brits never had national identity cards.
we associate them with Nazi Germany
Wait do all other Europeans have them??
When I started watching this clip, I was confused, but intrigued, just as a passing fancy.
By the end, I had to know where this was from. Brilliant. Far better than it looks at first glance.
This is very clever writing especially when you compare it to writing on today's shows.
the most horrifying thing about this video is how much sense it makes when you think about the state of the EU and Brexit right now.
yes but they are leaving it before they were able to break it...
@Donald Mackay 100 internation companies already left the UK 350 are considering... and no its your turn to leave now but it seems your parliament doesnt want to leave and even passed a law to forbids you to leave without a deal. european commission is making things hard? it sounds like somebody doesnt want to leave at all...
@@jebise1126 Wage growth is at an 11 year high and employment is the highest since comparative records began. Source - BBC www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49328855
@@jebise1126 Leaving it will break it, the Irish will be screwed and may leave, there are a number of European countries talking about leaving.
@@grancito2 on the contrary. when others will see how will UK be fucked when they will leave it nobody else will think about it. did you notice how did people that wanted to leave EU become very silent in france and some other countries? leaving EU is very unpopular right now. we only need to finally kick UK out of it and we will have peace for next 50 years.
Only thing we ended up making a pig's breakfast of is the UK when we exited the EU lmao
This is my favorite TV show of all time, along with it's follow-up, and I'm grateful to its writers.
Great series. I believe it works so well today, in part, because it wasn't an attack on a particular party. We never actually know who Jim Hacker represents politically, even when he gains the champion's chair of Prime Minister. Instead, it's a witty attack on both the civil service and the egos and self-serving bias of politicans. Perhaps I'm biased myself, but I much prefer the original series than the more recent attempt to resurrect it for television.
Conservative party surely ???
It's probably generally aimed towards what happens in the Conservative Party, but not as a a direct attack at the party. Not naming a party is pretty important, as you can apply Yes Minister to New Labour as well nowadays, and possibly other future parties.
@White wolf Yes Minister came out in the 1980s - Labour only really started becoming neoliberal urbanoids in the late 1990s, with it coming into full effect around 2010. Yes Minister entirely predates modern Labour.
It's obviously implied to be a Conservative government, but I agree, it's never explicit and never that overt - and in the end, which political party is not really important for the plots and the comedy.
@White wolf Labour were not 'liberal' or 'elite', or even that metropolitan and London focussed in 1980. If you want to make that kind of charge against them, you'd do better do focus on the New Labour period onwards.
How old are you? Serious question. You give the impression that you didn't watch Yes Minister at the time, and were perhaps not even born at that point. You seem to be projecting your current opinions and views back onto a very different time.
This show was made in 80 and politics is still the same now.
This show is a timeless showcase how politics is corrupt and a far cry from what it should be.
Only politicians are worse :D
@@PP266 ... barely speak english, not mentioning latin :D
Calm down Aristotle
Lmfao...it was nothing more than 1 of the many comedy series on our TV at that time lol.
You mugs still can't see humour fir what it is can you lol.
The funny thing is that this does give the real reason why the UK in the 1980s pushed to let all the smaller countries join the EU. We didn't like being told what to do by France and Germany, and we thought that if there were many more member states the EU would have less central control and would do less because there would be less agreement between the member states. This was the policy of the Conservative government at the time: we pushed for enlargement in order to make the EU a looser federation of nations. It didn't work, because the EU introduced a system of qualifed majority voting so that France and Germany could ignore countries like Poland and Greece and still get their way.
Now you are out, enjoy 😁
What's France got to do with it? Harold Macmillan, then Prime Minister, explained his about face that allowed Ted Heath to pursue entry to the EEC: "We have to stop the French from sleepwalking into giving Germany hegemony in Europe, something we've just fought two world wars to avoid." The UK failed in that endeavour, so there was no point in staying.
In 2020 it finally makes sense .
@@danielh234
UK vetoes are no longer needed because the UK’s job is finished. The EU is collapsing in on itself and will not exist much longer.
@@danielh234
I’m American, not British. But history has proven the best way for Europe to be safe is for none of the European countries to become too powerful.
@@danielh234
Could you locate each of the 50 states on a map?
@@danielh234
You really need to try and join the real world.
Now they need to make the "why the UK is still in the EU 700 years after brexit"
Marcos Lopez Lema because politicians won't do what the people have mandated them to do.
It's the EUs game, tie it all up in courts and in negotiations etc.
@@robertmoulton2656 last time i checked the referendum was not legally binding for anyone
Lukas Luk it's not much of a democracy when elected officials don't do the will of the peolpe
After the EU ceased to exist.
@@robertmoulton2656 Hard to gauge what the 'Will of the people' is when the people pushing for Brexit willfully misled 'the people' as to what their 'Will' should be.
It's noticeable even from this how much the actor playing Frank Wiesel sticks out. There's a gulf of class between him and the other three. They took absolutely the right decision, rationalising it down to Hacker, Humphrey and Bernard.
avonacolyte it's a sad fact that the actor was involved in a serious car accident resulting in some brain damage resulting in him not being able to remember lines..it finished his acting career.
This wasn't why he was dropped from Yes Minister. The car accident was several years later.
He is supposed to be acting like that.
Sir humphrey . possibly the finest believable character to grace our screens.
I used to positively HATE this programme as a youngster!
As it was about Politics.
Now as a Man, I realise how spot on accurate it really is!
HILARIOUS
You are still a boy
@@delinquente1444 Gee, thanks!
2019. I am over 45 I remember times before the EU. This Is One Of Britain's Great Shows , Brilliant Writer's. I remember when it was on the ABC- Australia. Cheers thanks
2:15 Jonathan Lynn and Antony Jay demonstrated incredible insight with this policy analysis.
misterfunnybones it felt incredibly satisfying to see what for so long has been a strongly felt opinion of mine (UK's active meddling to keep europe disunited) aknowledged in possibly the most british show ever made with the most british of cinical manners.
Jonathan Lynn and Antony Jay had more influence on shaping public opinion than they gave themselves credit for. Antony Jay was, of course, a speech writer for Margaret Thatcher and episodes of Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister largely reflected her views
Absolutely brilliant. Timeless
There was a lot of truth and predictive programming in Yes Minister. I think the writers and producers knew something we the general public didn't.
They did.They knew how things worked, and used that knowledge to produce a comedy classic.
Lol, yeah..it's called comedy.
Yes Minister (and Yes Prime Minister) is the BEST SERIES EVER CREATED: it is as truthful, timely and delightful as it was when it was first aired. (I recommend Mind Your Language to my intermediate English language students and this my advanced ones: both are also good for getting into the way we think and our humour.)
Claptrap Claptrap it's shit
@@pyeltd.5457 You have right to your opinion, though it would help if you would express which series you are talking about... Your comment as it is strongly hints of trolling or low education, in which case complex expressions and clever twists of words is wasted on such a person.
Just about spot on in every detail.
Het is wel waarheid wat Humprey zegt 😂
British humor at its best: brilliant writing, acting and visionary really.
Wow!!!! This makes so much sense in August 2019
Yeah it's even in their national anthem, Confound their politics indeed.
such a great anthem
To quote:
O Lord our God arise,
Scatter her enemies
And make them fall.
Confound their politics,
Frustrate their knavish tricks;
On Thee our hopes we fix:
God save us all.
Yes, indeed. This verse may be out of favour, but it is totally appropriate when Juncker and Co. are behaving in such an unfriendly manner. Why should we *not* pray, in a hymn of all things, for deliverance from the enemies of our land, and for the frustration of their plans against us ? Such a verse is also clearly appropriate because of the assault upon this country by Islam.
I'm not even British but I approve of their national anthem.
However when we start sending people to live on Mars and the Moon, let's hope only whites are allowed.
It's not racism, it's just that I can't trust them colored people to not screw things up, damn lazy people. Send only Germans, and Swedes and Polish and Brits up there. The rest are too prone to failure. And whatever they do, don't send up Americans.
The Major
If such a stupid idea ever takes shape, it would be a good idea to get rid of all undesirables first, and you should be among them. Well someone has to keep things in order :))
@@livedandletdie the dispossessed are usually the first to colonize new frontiers
This programme is incredibly well acted and well written. I was a young un when it came out and just did not get it or want too.
Great clip, except for the trifling fact that the EU wasn't created until 1993. You're referring to the EEC.
This clip will have many views in June 2016
And so it was!
And right it is.
Its June 2017... Its still current... Lol
its been current for five hundred years dont you know.
July 2018 ... Ditto!
as many have pointed out the yes minister series, and to a lesser extent yes prime minister, were so well written that elements of it come up regularly. watch the whole thing and then tick off the policies, arguments and so on that you have seen in the news over the last few months and ignore brexit for now as no-one saw that becoming a reality! This series wass ridiculously accurate. Why do you think they don’t allow it to be shown much on tv any more and why they haven’t remade it like every other popular show from the past
They did try but it was not well received. I
The original was a beautiful chemistry where the whole became greater than the sum of the parts. You can't just remake it; just enjoy what it was.
It never gets old is an understatement. It's more relevant now then ever before!
This is not a comedy, like all good satire, it's a documentary. It's frightening that over 40 years later the same problems are still relevant and making news headlines.