Elizabeth II / Charles III megathread

[Sordhau]

I want a Republic of England, Republic of Scotland, Republic of Wales, Republic of Cornwall, Republic of Mann, and United Ireland. But Cromwell messed that up.

While I'm sympathetic to a united Ireland, Ireland is divided from north and south because that is what the majority of people in the north wanted.

I don't see a reason to override the will of North Irelanders for the sake of a minority within their region, and nationalists in Ireland proper.

Which is why Northern Ireland should be decolonized.

SocDem moment.

Dividing the island of great Britain up to have actual borders will be a strain on a lot of people's lives.

No worries, m8. Just make a British Soviet Union and get rid of this icky monarcho-garbage.

[Salus Maior]

Which is why Northern Ireland should be decolonized.

In this context that means ethnically cleansed of non-Irish Catholics.

This is a Nationalist talking point.

[Fahran]

While I'm sympathetic to a united Ireland, Ireland is divided from north and south because that is what the majority of people in the north wanted.

I don't see a reason to override the will of North Irelanders for the sake of a minority within their region, and nationalists in Ireland proper.

Which is why Northern Ireland should be decolonized.

Dividing the island of great Britain up to have actual borders will be a strain on a lot of people's lives.

No worries, m8. Just make a British Soviet Union and get rid of this icky monarcho-garbage.

We must remove the Milesians from rightful Tuatha De clay.

[Celritannia]

No worries, m8. Just make a British Soviet Union and get rid of this icky monarcho-garbage.

The people have to support this principle first.
Now, it maybe possible for Great Britain to eventually become a republic, but I'm not sure about a soviet union.

[Sordhau]

Which is why Northern Ireland should be decolonized.

In this context that means ethnically cleansed of non-Irish Catholics.

Not necessarily. A region can be decolonized without removing the settler population by removing the settler culture and institutions.

This is a Nationalist talking point.

And? Left-wing nationalism is quite based.

[Fahran]

Which is why Northern Ireland should be decolonized.

In this context that means ethnically cleansed of non-Irish Catholics.

This is a Nationalist talking point.

It’s also fairly racist and impractical given “non-Irish” ethnic groups have been in Ireland for about a millennia at this point. And, no, forcible cultural assimilation isn’t anti-racist or practical either.

[Salus Maior]

In this context that means ethnically cleansed of non-Irish Catholics.

Not necessarily. A region can be decolonized without removing the settler population by removing the settler culture and institutions.

How do you propose removing "settler culture" without removing the people who hold that culture? What happens when they say no?

[Fahran]

Not necessarily. A region can be decolonized without removing the settler population by removing the settler culture and institutions.

How do you propose removing "settler culture" without removing the people who hold that culture? What happens when they say no?

They get to go to a special summer camp where former English speakers restrict food to them for each day they refuse to say tiocfaidh ár lá correctly.

[Suriyanakhon]

In this context that means ethnically cleansed of non-Irish Catholics.

Not necessarily. A region can be decolonized without removing the settler population by removing the settler culture and institutions.

That's absolutely ridiculous. Anglo-Irish culture has been a major part of Irish culture for centuries, how the fuck do you propose to destroy most of a country's modern history?

[Ethel mermania]

How do you propose removing "settler culture" without removing the people who hold that culture? What happens when they say no?

They get to go to a special summer camp where former English speakers restrict food to them for each day they refuse to say tiocfaidh ár lá correctly.

I am so screwed

[Sordhau]

No worries, m8. Just make a British Soviet Union and get rid of this icky monarcho-garbage.

The people have to support this principle first.
Now, it maybe possible for Great Britain to eventually become a republic, but I'm not sure about a soviet union.

A girl can dream...

It’s also fairly racist and impractical given “non-Irish” ethnic groups have been in Ireland for about a millennia at this point. And, no, forcible cultural assimilation isn’t anti-racist or practical either.

How do you propose removing "settler culture" without removing the people who hold that culture? What happens when they say no?

Not quite how it works. Decolonization requires campaigning - not the electoral or military kind, but the sociopolitical kind. It comes in three phases: the first phase is an identification, understanding, and acknowledgement of the harm and damage caused by the colonial status quo. Compare this to, say, critical race theory in the US which is somewhat anti-colonial in that it addresses the systematic racism in American institutions, said institutions originating from per-independence Colonial America. The second phase come afterwards when it is generally agreed upon by the majority that, yes, colonialism was bad and it's legacy is appalling. Another parallel in the US can be seen here with the removal of honors and monuments to defenders of the Confederacy, the slave trade, Amerindian persecutions, etc. The third phase is the most important one and represents the penultimate act of decolonization. It comes about as a fundamental rejection of society's colonial origins, uprooting the colonial legacy and creating a new society that acknowledges the colonial past as a horrible offense while moving away from it by prioritizing the creation of an environment that is inclusive and accepting; a culture and nation one can actually be proud of. This is a post-colonial society which, unlike it's predecessor, is not merely a 'toned down' version of the original colonial framework but is rather a genuinely revolutionary social, economic, and administrative restructuring of society by all constitute peoples for the benefit of all constitute peoples, and not just whatever the majority demographic is.

It is an artificial and syncretic fusion of two disparate societies to create a newer, better society through mutual consent by way of educating and organizing to bring attention to the issues of colonial legacies and their impact on each society and why these legacies are harmful and should be abandoned without need for ethnic cleansing of any kind; be it mass expulsion, mass assimilation, or mass extermination.

[Sordhau]

How do you propose removing "settler culture" without removing the people who hold that culture? What happens when they say no?

They get to go to a special summer camp where former English speakers restrict food to them for each day they refuse to say tiocfaidh ár lá correctly.

Based tbh

[Reverend Norv]

Not necessarily. A region can be decolonized without removing the settler population by removing the settler culture and institutions.

That's absolutely ridiculous. Anglo-Irish culture has been a major part of Irish culture for centuries, how the fuck do you propose to destroy most of a country's modern history?

I wish to close more seriously; this is a matter of very great seriousness. I think it is tragic that within three years of this country gaining its independence we should be discussing a measure which a minority of this nation considers to be grossly oppressive. I am proud to consider myself a typical man of that minority. We against whom you have done this thing, are no petty people. We are one of the great stocks of Europe. We are the people of Burke; we are the people of Grattan; we are the people of Swift, the people of Emmet, the people of Parnell. We have created the most of the modern literature of this country. We have created the best of its political intelligence. Yet I do not altogether regret what has happened. I shall be able to find out, if not I, my children will be able to find out whether we have lost our stamina or not. You have defined our position and have given us a popular following. If we have not lost our stamina then your victory will be brief, and your defeat final, and when it comes this nation may be transformed.

[Luminesa]

I mean this is completely valid, and he should do it. Might not be his first action, but yeah. It should be a priority.

Regardless of what we think about the desirability of this course of action, this is only something the King of Canada can do if his government in Ottawa advises him to do so.

The King of Canada is no more able to act independently of the advice of his Canadian government has he can act independently of the advice of the British government is in his capacity as King of the United Kingdom.

It wouldn't hurt for people to be able to separate out what they think might be a desirable course of action for the new monarch from what's a possible course of action for the new monarch.

Huh. I actually didn't think of that, I thought Canada took orders from the British Crown, at least in terms of historic treaties.

[Neanderthaland]

Which is why Northern Ireland should be decolonized.



No worries, m8. Just make a British Soviet Union and get rid of this icky monarcho-garbage.

We must remove the Milesians from rightful Tuatha De clay.

Unfortunately, after listening to Michael Sheen, I can only get behind Welsh nationalism.

[Suriyanakhon]

How do you propose removing "settler culture" without removing the people who hold that culture? What happens when they say no?

They get to go to a special summer camp where former English speakers restrict food to them for each day they refuse to say tiocfaidh ár lá correctly.

Y'all are going to make me start screaming God Save the King in Scots soon with this level of cringe.

[Salus Maior]

Not quite how it works. Decolonization requires campaigning - not the electoral or military kind, but the sociopolitical kind. It comes in three phases: the first phase is an identification, understanding, and acknowledgement of the harm and damage caused by the colonial status quo. Compare this to, say, critical race theory in the US which is somewhat anti-colonial in that it addresses the systematic racism in American institutions, said institutions originating from per-independence Colonial America. The second phase come afterwards when it is generally agreed upon by the majority that, yes, colonialism was bad and it's legacy is appalling. Another parallel in the US can be seen here with the removal of honors and monuments to defenders of the Confederacy, the slave trade, Amerindian persecutions, etc. The third phase is the most important one and represents the penultimate act of decolonization. It comes about as a fundamental rejection of society's colonial origins, uprooting the colonial legacy and creating a new society that acknowledges the colonial past as a horrible offense while moving away from it by prioritizing the creation of an environment that is inclusive and accepting; a culture and nation one can actually be proud of. This is a post-colonial society which, unlike it's predecessor, is not merely a 'toned down' version of the original colonial framework but is rather a genuinely revolutionary social, economic, and administrative restructuring of society by all constitute peoples for the benefit of all constitute peoples, and not just whatever the majority demographic is.

It is an artificial and syncretic fusion of two disparate societies to create a newer, better society through mutual consent by way of educating and organizing to bring attention to the issues of colonial legacies and their impact on each society and why these legacies are harmful and should be abandoned without need for ethnic cleansing of any kind; be it mass expulsion, mass assimilation, or mass extermination.

That doesn't really answer the question of what happens if this campaign is rejected?

CRT I don't think is going to have much if any success in the long run. Because, regardless of intention, it does necessitate the implementation of shame on one group to effect that change to make them cut ties with their ancestry. While I have no sympathy for the Confederacy, I understand pretty well why a lot of Southerners are really defensive over how their ancestors are remembered. It is unchangeable that a lot of Southerners had ancestors who fought in the war, and a lot of Southerners take meaning and purpose from that. For instance, a guy might work the shittiest sort of job and live a pretty meh life, but he can look to the records (which are very well kept in the Confederacy's case) and see that his ancestor was a badass who took up arms for hearth and home (in his perception ultimately, though I suppose it could be said that some Confederates thought that way). In the end, telling this guy to shove his ancestor is a personal attack on his own self-worth, which is why so many people do take up arms over the issue of Confederate statues and how history textbooks are written. As a disclaimer, I don't think this is an excuse for confederate sympathy, which is abhorrent in a lot of ways, but it's a big part of why it exists.

Northern Ireland is a lot like that. Granted I don't know very much about the details of N. Irish history but identity is a big part of the issue and telling one group to be ashamed of it and dump their history and identity is not going to bring any success.

[Salus Maior]

Based tbh

Fishhook theory.

[Fahran]

Based tbh

It's called cultural genocide. It's a human rights violation.

[Sordhau]

They get to go to a special summer camp where former English speakers restrict food to them for each day they refuse to say tiocfaidh ár lá correctly.

Y'all are going to make me start screaming God Save the King in Scots soon with this level of cringe.

There's no brakes on the cringe train.

That doesn't really answer the question of what happens if this campaign is rejected?

Bad things happen, to put it bluntly. The idea of the campaign exists out of necessity to avoid potential bloodshed. If it cannot achieve it's aims then bloodshed will come as a natural consequence. It simply isn't possible to maintain a balance between a society that celebrates a colonial legacy and a society that was victimized by colonialism. These are not things that can coexist as Ireland rather aptly demonstrates: a civil war and several decades of domestic terrorism. The Troubles may have ended but the dispute remains and it will continue to remain until it is resolved, and it cannot logically be resolved by people simply 'getting over it' because that isn't going to happen. The campaign is necessary to build bridges while also righting wrongs without the added baggage of humiliation. The alternative is violence, and that's not something anyone wants.

CRT I don't think is going to have much if any success in the long run. Because, regardless of intention, it does necessitate the implementation of shame on one group to effect that change to make them cut ties with their ancestry. While I have no sympathy for the Confederacy, I understand pretty well why a lot of Southerners are really defensive over how their ancestors are remembered. It is unchangeable that a lot of Southerners had ancestors who fought in the war, and a lot of Southerners take meaning and purpose from that. For instance, a guy might work the shittiest sort of job and live a pretty meh life, but he can look to the records (which are very well kept in the Confederacy's case) and see that his ancestor was a badass who took up arms for hearth and home (in his perception ultimately, though I suppose it could be said that some Confederates thought that way). In the end, telling this guy to shove his ancestor is a personal attack on his own self-worth, which is why so many people do take up arms over the issue of Confederate statues and how history textbooks are written. As a disclaimer, I don't think this is an excuse for confederate sympathy, which is abhorrent in a lot of ways, but it's a big part of why it exists.

Northern Ireland is a lot like that. Granted I don't know very much about the details of N. Irish history but identity is a big part of the issue and telling one group to be ashamed of it and dump their history and identity is not going to bring any success.

The goal isn't to make the settler population ashamed of their ancestors or themselves, but rather to acknowledge that their ancestors did wrong and that amends must be made. It's not about shame but justice and restitution; to be better than our ancestors and to do better where they failed to.

[Sordhau]

Based tbh

Fishhook theory.

Based tbh

It's called cultural genocide. It's a human rights violation.

(it's called shitposting, relax)

[Fahran]

Y'all are going to make me start screaming God Save the King in Scots soon with this level of cringe.

We twa hae run about the braes
And pu'd the gowans fine
But we've wander'd mony a weary fit
Sin days of auld lang syne
And we twa hae paidl'd I' the burn
Frae morning sun 'til dine
But seas between us braid hae roar'd
Sin days of auld lang syne
For auld lang syne, my dear
For auld lang syne
We'll tak a cup o' kindness yet
For days of auld lang syne

[Adamede]

While I'm sympathetic to a united Ireland, Ireland is divided from north and south because that is what the majority of people in the north wanted.

I don't see a reason to override the will of North Irelanders for the sake of a minority within their region, and nationalists in Ireland proper.

Which is why Northern Ireland should be decolonized.

Dividing the island of great Britain up to have actual borders will be a strain on a lot of people's lives.

No worries, m8. Just make a British Soviet Union and get rid of this icky monarcho-garbage.

And what does “decolonization” entail exactly?

[Adamede]

In this context that means ethnically cleansed of non-Irish Catholics.

Not necessarily. A region can be decolonized without removing the settler population by removing the settler culture and institutions.

This is a Nationalist talking point.

And? Left-wing nationalism is quite based.

So forceful conversion to Catholicism?

[Fahran]

(it's called shitposting, relax)

You just posted an elaborate argument comparing the proposed policy of decolonization, which allegedly requires the destruction of two cultures and the creation of a "synthetic" culture, to CRT. Like if this is all an elaborate shitpost... consider me thoroughly bamboozled, but I did not have "The GOP is right about CRT. And that's a good thing actually." on my bingo card of NSG hot takes.

Tfw the monarchy is all that stands between the Brits and pure cringe.