Comments by "ʃuðɼinga ƿeoɼc" (@uingaeoc3905) on "David Starkey Talks" channel.

@danielkrcmar5395 It is not a question at all - it is drivel.
1
@danielkrcmar5395 Ill educate aren't you! Just because something is in the form of a question , ieg drivel, does not mean it is one. "How do you know this is a question?" - "I know it is a question as this is the answer!""
1
@danielkrcmar5395 I have explained everything with the proper use of the English language and clearly you are too ignorant to understand the explanation. there is NO question posed. You just display your historic idiocy. Now STOP POSTING here as you are out of your depth.
1
Devolution was an EU policy to destroy the nation state. Massive packing of Appointees to the Lords, to stop the elected Chamber doing anything . Making elected Local Mayors and Cabinets turned Councillors into just pressure groups against the Executive bureaucracy of the Council. Politicisation of the Judiciary with changes to the Lord Chancellor and Supreme Court - we saw this over the Brexit debates in the Commons. the LC could have become the Head of the SC. Finally, the love affair with supranational organisations which are an excuse to not allow accountability or responsibility at national level.
1
@docwhat8370 Nope - in fact less accurate! On the macro-economic point you are wrong because Slave Labour is the most inefficient system of production - as no less a person than Marx pointed out in detail - not a form of 'competition' with the North at all. The tension in and between the States over Slavery was the distinction between it and the 'Free Soilers'. The latter was the new population growth moving into the virgin lands of the mid-west to expand their independence and freedom (that is the actual background sense of 'the American dream'). The arguments were that the Territories and New States being formed if allowed to have Slavery would in fact enslave ALL labourers and their could be no freedom for anybody. It was not even racial in this sense. That is the moral opposition to Slavery of the Free Soilers - or as Donald Trump put it "It isn't me they are coming after, it is you!".
1
@docwhat8370 Nope - the row over the new Territories was over Free Soil and Slavery being the principal point. There would have been no 'South' developing anything, nothing could be so developed. This had nothing to do with 'competing economies' it was different social models which the South did not want to have any competition in. What tipped the South into Secession was the anti-Slave Free Soil Republicans nominating Abraham Lincoln as Presidential candidate whom was fully expected to win the Election. The war started when the Confederacy decided to attack federal properties. I suggest you look at the history of Sam Houston to understand the dynamics.
1
One Hundred and Eight Thousand Pounds of SILVER!"
1
@LexMewthor I see you have fallen for the White Boar propaganda.
1
@LexMewthor You are a f00£. great mediaeval prince's last more than 18 months in the job.
1
@Helena-ny1cm The point of your comment is what exactly?
1
@lastladylancastrian1380ommh Agreed on all points. Just what is her fixation with the shortest reign Monarch in English history - his own father in law, Stanley, deserted him.
1
There was no Dutch invasion - it was a glorious revolution because bloodless. You may as well say there was an invasion by the City of London and the House of Lords. They gave a formal invitation to William and Mary to reestablish constitutional norms and James ran away as nobody would fight for him.
1
@garymitchell5899 Approved by the Dutch presumably. People who make remarks like this are unaware of the family relationship between Charles I, James II and William and Mary.
1
@katakauchi Only a half wit can believe Woodville had any power to withhold anything from RII. I am not 'pro-Tudor so do not describe me as on of its 'bunch' which proves to me you are not a serious historian but an ignorant story spinner. You are also a total ignoramus to think that the retinue the Tower were in a position to do anything in regard to its inmates when they were also handpicked confederates of RIII. Do you think they had the same status as the current staff of Historic royal Palaces or that having a job which included free bed and board is not an inducement to do as told? It is dolts like you that turn so many people off historiography.
1
@katakauchi I always insult idiots who pretend they are historians.
1
@katakauchi You are a blithering idiot - I do not 'follow Starkey' in your asinine sense, nor is H8 his 'hero', you are incapable of understanding historical analysis.. As for the R3 'Mock Trial' you seem incapable of comprehending what 'playing Devil's Advocate is either -.
1
@nbenefiel I have read your posts. You write twaddle. Why would Henry VII know the identity of Warbeck as that of Edward but not inform his son? Essentially you fall into the ignoramus's trap of thinking there was strict primogeniture for succession when it was perfectly possible to skip claimants who were unfit. In fact apart from RIII so did HIV and even HVIII ignored his own illegitimate issue. All could have as easily 'legitimated' them is they wished. You are just a fourth rate fantasist with no real historical knowledge.
1
However, we surely do not want the vast majority of our American cousins to identify as 'Anglo-American'?
1
@jbloun911 Xenophobe.
1
@nicholasevangelos5443 By the fact that NOBODY else can say they exercise it.
1
@david6532 Who have a diseased mind you mean.
1
@elainebutterworth8051 really snide, because Dr Starkey does not 'identify' as Gay either.
1
@DS9TREK It only identifies what he does sexually. It does not define him as a person.
1
@davidpnewton Putin said the same thing. 'Ukraine was no separate status', in his speech a few days before the invasion.
1
@danielkrcmar5395 Drivel.
1
@paulgrieve7031 Utter incoherent nonsense you mean?
1
No. The Putney Debates did not result in any constitutional changes. All that was settled by the Civil War and Treaty of Breda was the limit of monarchical authority. Even then both Charles II and his brother James II tried to push back with a Bourbon model and James II was removed in the Glorious Revolution to reassert the Civil War settlement. However, Monarchical Executive power was ended by the American War when opposition in Parliament to it resulted in the end of 'supply' unless the king appointed a Minister who could carry the Commons for budgets. That Minister is the First Lord of the Treasury. Once that point was conceded we had Cabinet government of Parliament rather than Privy Council government of the Monarch. So the American Revolution caused one in Britain along the same lines. but it was based on Parliamentary representation, whereas France simply exploded.
1
There has been a merger of ideologies - Corporatist-State Globalism. There is no longer 'Right and Left' as the Globalists have adopted the Vocabulary of the Left . The Left think they have got Socialism granted by Mega Corporations. Working People who pay taxes and have the temerity to complain about low wages and high taxes through a distortion of the labour market caused by these policies are then attacked from the Left and Woke Right that we are racists.
1
Unlike all the other pompous bores who sound off in those interviews.
1