B460 - National Anthems Bill
TSR's model parliament.
| Announcements | Posted on | |
|---|---|---|
| Please change your TSR password | 23-05-2013 | |
-
- Reputation:
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Posts: 1,819
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillSo, your going to change the national anthem from being monarchist to being imperialist? Fantastic. I will most likely abstain on the basis that the two are pretty much as bad as each other in my eyes, and also that I generally couldn't give a toss about what national anthem the British have (I consider myself Irish).
Last edited by CLS94; 11-06-2012 at 01:30. -
- Reputation:
- Respected Member
- Posts: 186
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillSince when did Parliament become the arbiter of musical taste?
There is nothing wrong with GSTQ as the British national anthem. Rule Britannia is nice, but the tune sounds almost comical and makes it look as if we're saying: 'hey world... look, look... we were a great imperial power. Don't worry about our present and future advancements - just look at the fact that we ruled loads of the world for a few hundred years!' -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Posts: 3,858
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillNd
Your unnecessary, popular culture-motivated feeling of obligatory national shame is immature, naive, counterproductive, and also very amusing.(Original post by CLS94)
So, your going to change the national anthem from being monarchist to being imperialist? Fantastic. I will most likely abstain on the basis that the two are pretty much as bad as each other in my eyes, and also that I generally couldn't give a toss about what national anthem the British have (I consider myself Irish). -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Hertfordshire
- Posts: 4,130
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillIt's not imperialist; it's patriotic. Britain needs to be more like the USA and Canada in celebrating our nation, being proud and patriotic without worrying about offending people. It's not racist to be proud of your country.(Original post by CLS94)
So, your going to change the national anthem from being monarchist to being imperialist? Fantastic. I will most likely abstain on the basis that the two are pretty much as bad as each other in my eyes, and also that I generally couldn't give a toss about what national anthem the British have (I consider myself Irish).
If you consider yourself Irish and are going to abstain because this is about Britain then why do you debate in the MHoC? Everything in the MHoC is concerning Britain; that doesn't make sense to me.
There is a lot wrong with GSTQ as the British National Anthem; for a start it doesn't mention the actual country once. It just goes on and on about the Queen who's not even fully British... It's pathetic and embarrassing as our National Anthem. It doesn't sound comical, it sounds up beat yes, but not comical as opposed to the deary crap from GSTQ.(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
Since when did Parliament become the arbiter of musical taste?
There is nothing wrong with GSTQ as the British national anthem. Rule Britannia is nice, but the tune sounds almost comical and makes it look as if we're saying: 'hey world... look, look... we were a great imperial power. Don't worry about our present and future advancements - just look at the fact that we ruled loads of the world for a few hundred years!' -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Posts: 3,858
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillI prefer I Vow To Thee My Country. Either way, though, GSTQ is awful. Not because of any anti-monarchic sentiment, but purely due to its awful melody and uninspiring words.
I expect there will be much opposition to 'Jerusalem' for England from the usual useful idiots - I wonder how many times the word 'secular' will come up in this thread. -
- Reputation:
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Posts: 1,819
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillI can debate Britain as the society in which I live, as the vast majority of decisions taken on here effect the lives of people resident in Britain. This however only really has an effect I feel on British people, rather than all those who live here, and therefore does not particularly concern me. Also, that is only the secondary reason for me abstaining, the imperialism is the main part. For me, it celebrates the Empire which has caused great damage to many nations around the world, and that most certainly makes it imperialist. If not for the fact that the current anthem is also ridiculously bad and celebratory of an equally destructive institution, I would be voting no.(Original post by xXedixXx)
It's not imperialist it's patriotic. Britain needs to be more like the USA and Canada in celebrating our nation, being proud and patriotic without worrying about offending people. It's not racist to be proud of your country.
If you consider yourself Irish and are going to abstain because this is about Britain then why do you debate in the MHoC? Everything in the MHoC is concerning Britain; that doesn't make sense to me. -
- Reputation:
- Respected Member
- Posts: 186
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillThat's the point - the song does not reference the bit of land that is the United Kingdom, but the person who is supposed to embody the nation. The Queen represents the state and the country as a whole.(Original post by xXedixXx)
There is a lot wrong with GSTQ as the British National Anthem; for a start it doesn't mention the actual country once. It just goes on and on about the Queen.
She's as British as you or I. Just because she has the odd European relative does not invalidate her status as British.who's not even fully British...
This is all just subjective waffle. Some people like the sound of GTSQ, others like the sound of RB - it's all relative, which is why Parliament should not be the arbiter of musical taste.It's pathetic and embarrassing as our National Anthem. It doesn't sound comical, it sounds up beat yes, but not comical as opposed to the deary crap from GSTQ. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Posts: 3,858
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillAnd isn't it about time you changed your signature? You lost...(Original post by CLS94)
So, your going to change the national anthem from being monarchist to being imperialist? Fantastic. I will most likely abstain on the basis that the two are pretty much as bad as each other in my eyes, and also that I generally couldn't give a toss about what national anthem the British have (I consider myself Irish). -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Hertfordshire
- Posts: 4,130
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillI myself am an atheist but I do acknowledge that Christianity is a big part of England, the song also talks about England as a country so I think it'a quite suitable.(Original post by tufc)
I prefer I Vow To Thee My Country. Either way, though, GSTQ is awful. Not because of any anti-monarchic sentiment, but purely due to its awful melody and uninspiring words.
I expect there will be much opposition to 'Jerusalem' for England from the usual useful idiots - I wonder how many times the word 'secular' will come up in this thread.
I think the main debate is found in changing the National Anthem of the UK as a whole. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Hertfordshire
- Posts: 4,130
Re: B460 - National Anthems Bill(Original post by CLS94)
I can debate Britain as the society in which I live, as the vast majority of decisions taken on here effect the lives of people resident in Britain. This however only really has an effect I feel on British people, rather than all those who live here, and therefore does not particularly concern me. Also, that is only the secondary reason for me abstaining, the imperialism is the main part. For me, it celebrates the Empire which has caused great damage to many nations around the world, and that most certainly makes it imperialist. If not for the fact that the current anthem is also ridiculously bad and celebratory of an equally destructive institution, I would be voting no.
You're trying to make us Britons feel guilty about being British. By saying that "we've caused great damage to many nations around the world"... Although the British Empire did some things wrong it also did a lot of good: built and helped to build infrastructure networks across many countries for a start, also you need to take into account that Britain wasn't the only empire building nation, eventually most of the countries that came under the British Empire would have come under one of the other big players anyway. I for one will not be deterred by your attempt to make me feel guilty. I'm proud to be British and always will be. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: Hertfordshire
- Posts: 4,130
Re: B460 - National Anthems Bill1) It should reference Britain. The song is the British National Anthem which should be about the land and the people not be reliant on the Monarch.(Original post by Lord-Voldemort)
That's the point - the song does not reference the bit of land that is the United Kingdom, but the person who is supposed to embody the nation. The Queen represents the state and the country as a whole.
She's as British as you or I. Just because she has the odd European relative does not invalidate her status as British.
This is all just subjective waffle. Some people like the sound of GTSQ, others like the sound of RB - it's all relative, which is why Parliament should not be the arbiter of musical taste.
2) She's not as British as me, I didn't say it "invalidates her status as British" I merely stated she's not fully British so I fail to see how she embodies the nation and I don't..
3) Exactly, some people like it; others don't that's why we're voting on it.. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Posts: 3,858
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillOMG PROUD TO BE BRITISH???!! UR A RAAAAYYYYCCIISSTT!!!!!!(Original post by xXedixXx)
You're trying to make us Britons feel guilty about being British. By saying that "we've caused great damage to many nations around the world"... Although the British Empire did some things wrong it also did a lot of good: built and helped to build infrastructure networks across many countries for a start, also you need to take into account that Britain wasn't the only empire building nation, eventually most of the countries that came under the British Empire would have come under one of the other big players anyway. I for one will not be deterred by your attempt to make me feel guilty. I'm proud to be Britisnh and always will be.
-
- Reputation:
- Peer Of The TSR Realm
- Posts: 1,819
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillWow, I've been quoted out of context before but I think this is the first time someone has actually changed the words within a quote to make it look like I've said something completely different(Original post by xXedixXx)
You're trying to make us Britons feel guilty about being British. By saying that "we've caused great damage to many nations around the world"... Although the British Empire did some things wrong it also did a lot of good: built and helped to build infrastructure networks across many countries for a start, also you need to take into account that Britain wasn't the only empire building nation, eventually most of the countries that came under the British Empire would have come under one of the other big players anyway. I for one will not be deterred by your attempt to make me feel guilty. I'm proud to be British and always will be.
I never used the word 'We've', I used 'Which' quite clearly in reference to the Empire rather than British people, assuming that's what you mean by 'We'. There was no intention to make you feel guilty, that's just the impression given by your made-up quote. Whether the Empire was good or bad is quite clearly subjective; whilst I can see your argument, I personally think the slavery and poor conditions it imposed do not justify the supposed benefits. I accept that many countries would have simply come under a different empire anyway, but fail to see why this means Britain should adopt an anthem celebrating empire - it is irrelevant to the argument at hand.
-
- Reputation:
- Respected Member
- Posts: 186
Re: B460 - National Anthems BillSimilar to how the US national anthem references a flag - it is a symbol and the embodiment of the nation. Thus, by referring to the Queen - GTSQ is about the land and the people.(Original post by xXedixXx)
1) It should reference Britain. The song is the British National Anthem which should be about the land and the people not be reliant on the Monarch.
She can trace her lineage back as far as Edward the Confessor - if we're going down the arbitrary ancestor route. The few ancestors of the Queen's (including her grandmother Mary of Teck), who technically originated from other European states, usually had a mother or father of British origin (Mary of Teck's mother was a British princess).2) She's not as British as me, I didn't say it "invalidates her status as British" I merely stated she's not fully British so I fail to see how she embodies the nation and I don't..
So every one of your ancestors was born in Britain, and they in turn have both a paternal and maternal lineage which has never left these shores? Do you honestly believe one's 'Britishness' is calculated in how few ancestors you have who were from other countries? If so, what is the cut off line?
And please do explain how the Queen isn't 'fully British', yet presumably - most other British citizens are.
I never used the word 'We've', I used 'Which' quite clearly in reference to the Empire rather than British people, assuming that's what you mean by 'We'. There was no intention to make you feel guilty, that's just the impression given by your made-up quote. Whether the Empire was good or bad is quite clearly subjective; whilst I can see your argument, I personally think the slavery and poor conditions it imposed do not justify the supposed benefits. I accept that many countries would have simply come under a different empire anyway, but fail to see why this means Britain should adopt an anthem celebrating empire - it is irrelevant to the argument at hand.
