Our chance to forswear allegiance
- This topic has 79 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
The first Charles wouldn’t play ball. That’s why they chopped his head off. At least he wouldn’t be a prop for the bourgeoisie.
What !!! Next you’ll be telling us that James II was a good bloke too. I think you are forgetting, comrade, that at the time the bourgeois revolution was historically progressive.
Odd for a socialist to criticise the bourgeoisie for being too revolutionary.
Even Winstanley and the Diggers supported the overthrow of the king and the defeat of the royalists. They knew that this was a precondition for making the Earth a common treasury for all.
I popped along to the Republic protest, which amounted to 6 men and a dog (some girls in plastic Union Flag bowler hats were quite shocked when they heard the booing of ‘god save the King’. Apparently a extra contingent was being prevented from joining up, as it was the location for the demo was under a watch tower with police cameras on it. While I was there I saw the police confiscating a bag, which I heard contained loud hailers.
The arrest of the Republic organisers, who had *co-operated* with the police over organising their event could turn a mild mannered protest group into something else entirely. It also suggests that maybe co-operating with the police over protests is worthless.
I left before the king turned up, after a while in the rain, I just couldn’t be arsed.
” Next you’ll be telling us that James II was a good bloke too.”
———
Next you’ll be saying Matthew Hopkins was a good bloke. Only the retreat of Roundhead forces put an end to his crimes.
TM – It’s usual to purge the radical elements within the ranks supporting the bourgeoisie in their struggle once the revolution is secured – happened in the French and Russian revolutions as well.
I’m not going to support the execution of Charles I, nor am I going to support the hanging of the Levellers.
I shall oppose the death penalty under all circumstances and shall remain consistent in that, just like the man I admire most in history, the Marquis de Sade – observing the follies of men but remaining guiltless of any participation in their crimes.That would have saved you from being hanged, drawn and quartered when Charles II came to power.
My opposition to executions is not dependent on culpability or innocence, nor does it denote support for the executed.
Three Charlies: what a comedy show!
Charlie III gave an oath to be a ‘serving king’- self service anyone!
I stopped watching the coronation at that oath… muttering to myself like an irate and bewildered muppet… my partner thought it was a good idea to leave the room as I was ruining the muppet show, I was clearly the heckler in the gallery box.Being Irish, I responded to the ‘what say you’ oath with “no thanks”. I got a giggle from mi partner as I left the TV room to a hum of the muppet theme tune!
That wasn’t your original position, TS. You commended Charles I for not being a “prop of the bourgeoisie”. Which of course is what Charles III is, though “puppet” might be a better term.
I do like the first for certain things. He was a thorn in the side of the bourgeoisie. He stopped enclosures. He stopped witch-hunts.
I never read of the parliamentary side stopping witch-hunters. In fact Hopkins flourished with roundhead protection, and had to flee when the King’s forces gained ground.
I do commend Cromwell for outlawing bear and bull-baiting, but I suspect it was more on religious grounds than anything else.
Rather than the forerunners of socialism using the revolution, wasn’t it more the revolution using them? And then packing them off to kill Irish people?
I like to think I would have kept my head down, and therefore on, whereas you would have either been hanged by Cromwellians, or hanged, drawn and quartered by Charles II for signing the death warrant.
Coppe kept his head down, and on.
I like him too.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.