Britain’s black queen: Will Meghan Markle really be the first mixed-race royal?

[enhanced_deficit]

Would elections of America's first Black President, UK's first Islamic Mayor and now induction to royal family of UK's first potential future Black Queen have been possible without Iraqi Freedom War?










Britain’s black queen: Will Meghan Markle really be the first mixed-race royal?


When Britain’s Prince Harry and American actress Meghan Markle announced their engagement Monday, Twitter erupted with the news that the newest princess in the royal family would be biracial.

“We got us a Black princess ya’ll,” GirlTyler exulted. “Shout out to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Their wedding will be my Super Bowl.”

We got us a Black princess ya'll. You really can't tell me a damn thing for the rest of the day because it won't matter. Shout out to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. Their wedding will be my Super Bowl. pic.twitter.com/WmBnGm5AuZ

— GirlTyler (@sheistyler)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ed-race-royal/




Related

UKIP suspends leader's lover for 'racist' Meghan Markle texts
Jo Marney reportedly said that Prince Harry's fiancee will "taint" the Royals with "her seed" and pave the way for a "black king".
https://news.sky.com/story/ukip-susp...texts-11207371



London voters elect first Muslim mayor of major Western capital
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...a2a_story.html


UK's 'biggest peace rally'
Sat 15 Feb 2003
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/....politicalnews

Barack Obama to be America's first black president
George Bush and John McCain praise Democratic winner as record numbers turn out to vote in historic election
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...elections20084

[Swordsmyth]

Who cares?

[enhanced_deficit]

Who cares?

Is that a serious question?

Besides the historians looking at massive political/cultural/economic changes to US/UK as a result of Iraqi Freedom war, probably everyone of these folks cares to some extent about developments cited in above post.
Caution: Language in these tweets/vids may be offensive for many


Seventy-Two Percent of Americans Support War Against Iraq
news.gallup.com/poll/8038/seventytwo-percent-americans-support-war-against-iraq.aspx
The level of support for the war against Iraq is slightly more muted than was the case just after the ... George W. Bush's Job Approval Rating: 2003 ... The weekend poll shows that 28% say the war will be over in less than a month







https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AolV-_dQH30



Donald Trump Destroys Relationship With UK by Retweeting Britain First
observer.com/.../donald-trump-destroys-relationship-with-uk-by-retweeting-britain-fir...
Dec 1, 2017 - Donald's Trump State Visit to the U.K. is all but off since he ... hooligan elements of the EDL.

[Swordsmyth]

Is that a serious question?

Besides the historians looking at massive political/cultural/economic changes to US/UK as a result of Iraqi Freedom war, probably everyone of these folks cares to some extent about developments cited in above post.
Caution: Language in these tweets/vids may be offensive for many


Seventy-Two Percent of Americans Support War Against Iraq
news.gallup.com/poll/8038/seventytwo-percent-americans-support-war-against-iraq.aspx
The level of support for the war against Iraq is slightly more muted than was the case just after the ... George W. Bush's Job Approval Rating: 2003 ... The weekend poll shows that 28% say the war will be over in less than a month







https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AolV-_dQH30



Donald Trump Destroys Relationship With UK by Retweeting Britain First
observer.com/.../donald-trump-destroys-relationship-with-uk-by-retweeting-britain-fir...
Dec 1, 2017 - Donald's Trump State Visit to the U.K. is all but off since he ... hooligan elements of the EDL.

Iraq has nothing to do with who the royals marry, and as an American I am supremely disinterested in the royals.

My only interest is to finish the revolution and get our country out from under their influence.

[donnay]

Meghan will never be a princess, so she will never be the queen.

Harry is 6th in line for the throne and unless some freak accident happens, he has a nephew and niece and nephew who are much younger than him ahead of him.

[H_H]

My only interest is to finish the revolution and get our country out from under their influence.

Revolution is an inherently leftist project, Swordsmyth. Actually, scratch "an": THE.

Just food for thought.

[H_H]

Meghan will never be a princess, so she will never be the queen.

Harry is 6th in line for the throne and unless some freak accident happens, he has a nephew and niece and nephew who are much younger than him ahead of him.

Also, more importantly:

Nestled safely in the Alps, biding his time, is the True Heir. And he's coming for you usurping, cumberworld Windsors. You're crusty plague sores. Your days are numbered.

[Danke]

]Attachment 6000

[dean.engelhardt]

England’s first Black Queen, Sophie Charlotte born

*Princess Sophie Charlotte was born on this date in 1744. She was the first Black Queen of England.

Link

[Swordsmyth]

Revolution is an inherently leftist project, Swordsmyth. Actually, scratch "an": THE.

Just food for thought.

If the government is bad and can't be changed a revolution is required, revolution is like a gun, it isn't good or bad, it all depends on who uses it and for what.

[Zippyjuan]

Line of Succession:

1) Prince Charles
2) Prince William
3) Prince George (William's oldest son)
4) Princess Charlotte (William's daughter)
5) Prince Louis Arthur Charles (William's youngest son)
6) Prince Harry
7) Prince Andrew

Then Andrew's children

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment...sh-throne.html

[H_H]

If the government is bad and can't be changed a revolution is required, revolution is like a gun, it isn't good or bad, it all depends on who uses it and for what.

Revolution is the defining characteristic of leftism. All other features are incidental, unimportant, or side effects to being revolutionary. Even egalitarianism itself is just a ploy to get the maximum number of rubes onboard for your revolution.

Revolution is about what?

Tearing down existing social order.

That is leftism.

Nutshell style.

Bare essence.

So to speak.

Now, you say sometimes the existing social order may be in some way... what was that splendidly simple word you used? Ah yes: "bad."
Making tearing it down good.

By implication.

Sounds like endorsement.

If I ever heard one.

True enough.

Make horseshoes not hand-grenades.

Unless called for.

By "bad."

Who woke up this morning thinking you'd hear?

"Swordsmyth endorses leftism!"

Only under certain conditions.

Pretty common ones, though.

You have just Experienced Things.

[H_H]

Line of Succession:

Wrong, you Worthless Windsor Lackey! Your sad, pathetic anti-Jacobite rear-guard action shall fail. Britain crumbles from within under the putrescent fopdoodles for whom you quisling. Its people are hungry, desperate for a champion.

That champion has been bred. In the third millennium he shall cleanse and restore Albion. The Glorious Return is coming.

[Swordsmyth]

Revolution is the defining characteristic of leftism. All other features are incidental, unimportant, or side effects to being revolutionary. Even egalitarianism itself is just a ploy to get the maximum number of rubes onboard for your revolution.

Revolution is about what?

Tearing down existing social order.

That is leftism.

Nutshell style.

Bare essence.

So to speak.

Now, you say sometimes the existing social order may be in some way... what was that splendidly simple word you used? Ah yes: "bad."
Making tearing it down good.

By implication.

Sounds like endorsement.

If I ever heard one.

True enough.

Make horseshoes not hand-grenades.

Unless called for.

By "bad."

Who woke up this morning thinking you'd hear?

Swordsmyth endorses leftism.

Only under certain conditions.

Pretty common ones, though.

You have just Experienced Things.

Alright "bad enough", does that suit you better?
Leftism is the exaltation of revolution for the sake of it, that would be like endorsing shooting people just for the sake of it, on the other hand some people need to be shot and some revolutions need to happen.

[H_H]

Alright "bad enough", does that suit you better?
Leftism is the exaltation of revolution for the sake of it, that would be like endorsing shooting people just for the sake of it, on the other hand some people need to be shot and some revolutions need to happen.

It's a stretch.

He's stretching.

Also, something about hairs.

Yes, too many split ends already in this fallen world of ours.

Would it be too hard to say that maybe leftism isn't always 100% evil?

Actually. Too painful.

Ahh, well. Identity trumps reason.

Vote for Yin!

[H_H]

Right = Order, Stability, Tradition.

Left = Novelty, Innovation, Dissatisfaction.

[dannno]

Fuuuuuuuuuck "Royalty".

Don't care.

[Swordsmyth]

It's a stretch.

He's stretching.

Also, something about hairs.

Yes, too many split ends already in this fallen world of ours.

Would it be too hard to say that maybe leftism isn't always 100% evil?

Actually. Too painful.

Ahh, well. Identity trumps reason.

Vote for Yin!

Lefthand tools are different than the current version of Leftism, Rightism if it devoted itself to stopping all change would be bad as well, even the old version of leftism was less wise in that it is better to be cautious about change because whatever replaces the old might be worse if you aren't careful and the old left was always too eager to change things without being certain that it would be a change for the better.

[Swordsmyth]

Right = Order, Stability, Tradition.

Left = Novelty, Innovation, Dissatisfaction.

And when dealing with government both can be required but it is wiser to lean to the Right.

[Swordsmyth]

@H_H
Revolution is like fire, a dangerous servant and a fearful master, one of the greatest drawbacks of monarchy is that there are no milder options to effect necessary change.

[dannno]

Revolution is an inherently leftist project, Swordsmyth. Actually, scratch "an": THE.

Just food for thought.

These are the people who banned the media from reporting on Tommy Robinson's trial, a guy who was simply reporting on the trial of immigrants who were accused of running sex rings with minor girls.

[H_H]

These are the people who banned the media from reporting on Tommy Robinson's trial, a guy who was simply reporting on the trial of immigrants who were accused of running sex rings with minor girls.

Everything's a complete mess right now. Utter disgusting clownworld disaster.

Nothing revolution wouldn't make worse, though.

Revolution is not the answer.

In my opinion.

[H_H]

@H_H
Revolution is like fire, a dangerous servant and a fearful master, one of the greatest drawbacks of monarchy is that there are no milder options to effect necessary change.

Nay, there be an unlimited panoply of options! Hundreds of which are tested, effective, and Mother Approved!

Poison! Intrigue! Subtlety! Pressured Resignation!

Unless you define absolutely any and all change as revolution.

Which you could do.

But then your criticism applies to every system.

Making it incoherent.

[Swordsmyth]

Nay, there be an unlimited panoply of options! Hundreds of which are tested, effective, and Mother Approved!

Poison!

Hardly reliable and if you are caught it can lead directly to revolution.

Intrigue!

If you mean assassination then this is basically the same as poison.

Subtlety!

Subtly do what?

Pressured Resignation!

Through the threat of revolution? What else would succeed?

Another point is that the options you mention don't necessarily give you control of who will replace the old king.

Unless you define absolutely any and all change as revolution.

Which you could do.

But then your criticism applies to every system.

Making it incoherent.

I absolutely don't define it that way, the important value of an electoral system to choose your executive is that it creates the presumption that he can be replaced and must give way to his successor, it is much harder for him to convince the police and/or the army to support an attempt to retain power against the will of the people.

[H_H]

Sword, Sword, Sword. I take it you have not read Dune. Or any number of fantasy books which doubtless portray kings and royal courts and whatnot, due to thinking them to be pointless time-sucks for wusses. Which, of course, they are. I have not read them. The fantasy books, I mean. Dune, obviously I have. Also you could get the picture just reading standard old-enough history.

Kings have been put out of power all the time, constantly, throughout the history of the human species. We have it logged and recorded and, as of late, dated. You can check the logs. Only very recently have we had this innovation that we labeled "revolution". It's an actual specific thing with a specific definition.

Taking out one king to replace him with another king does not fall under this definition. Believe me.

[Swordsmyth]

Sword, Sword, Sword. I take it you have not read Dune. Or any number of fantasy books which doubtless portray kings and royal courts and whatnot, due to thinking them to be pointless time-sucks for wusses. Which, of course, they are. I have not read them. The fantasy books, I mean. Dune, obviously I have. Also you could get the picture just reading standard old-enough history.

Kings have been put out of power all the time, constantly, throughout the history of the human species. We have it logged and recorded and, as of late, dated. You can check the logs. Only very recently have we had this innovation that we labeled "revolution". It's an actual specific thing with a specific definition.

Taking out one king to replace him with another king does not fall under this definition. Believe me.

I understand, I also understand that attempts to replace a king fail as often as they succeed and that successfully replacing a king doesn't necessarily let you choose his replacement, but very often just as much blood is spilled in the attempt or the aftermath as a success where the new king was better than the old.

Revolt or intrigue are both clumsy and dangerous weapons to use as your standard methods of dealing with bad government.

[H_H]

I understand, I also understand that attempts to replace a king fail as often as they succeed and that successfully replacing a king doesn't necessarily let you choose his replacement, but very often just as much blood is spilled in the attempt or the aftermath as a success where the new king was better than the old.

Revolt or intrigue are both clumsy and dangerous weapons to use as your standard methods of dealing with bad government.

Well, I guess all weapons are dangerous. Kind of what makes them weapons. Eh?

But this "revolution" thing is a disaster. Name one instance where it made things better. One.

You'll think of one. Exactly one. But then, I think, you'll think better of it and realize, "Actually, OK, fine, it's true: things were better and freer pre- than post-. Even for that special One." And you'll be right.

To shamelessly plagiarize an analogy, revolution is like Chinese Chestnut Blight. It's less destructive in China than elsewhere. Elsewhere it wreaks total havok when it hits. But it's no great shakes in China, either. It's a destructive disease in both birthplace and foreign lands.

The Anglos invented revolution. It has been less destructive for us. The Anglosphere is uniquely resilient and resistant to revolution's ill effects. It's still bad, not not nearly as malignant as for the other peoples on whom it metastasizes. But it has not been Glorious anywhere. It has been a disaster.

Tried. Failed. Experiment done. Results replicated exhaustively. Time to toss out Rosemary's Baby.

Revolution Doesn't Work

[H_H]

successfully replacing a king doesn't necessarily let you choose his replacement

Who is "you" in this hypothetical?

[H_H]

I understand, I also understand

Thanks for playing along, BTW, Swordsmyth. Very good discussion.

In the interest of you, and others, actually maybe coming to more deeply understand the rather odd, far-off-the-beaten-track points I'm making here, you might check these out:

A short comment: https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?...omment-1732229

A long article: http://unqualified-reservations.blog...bertarian.html

A medium article: https://blog.jim.com/culture/history...singularities/

The essence of leftism is the revolutionary. Lots of things you can point out about leftism are epiphenomena springing off from this main thrust.

The pathology of leftism is the chopping away of the branch on which one sits, eating away at foundations that are genuinely crucial. The pathology of rightism is in building structures on structures on structures, becoming ever more hidebound and fearful of movement and change, strangling the new to let the old string out its fading glory. Both run rampant in our society. Virtue springs from necessity, and necessity has been absent for too long. Pathological behavior of all kinds flourishes because it is not punished. A return to sanity is needed, but will not be forthcoming. Exit is the only option – to the real world, to circumstances where virtue is rewarded and pathology eradicated. Escape Universe 25.

[Swordsmyth]

Well, I guess all weapons are dangerous. Kind of what makes them weapons. Eh?

But this "revolution" thing is a disaster. Name one instance where it made things better. One.

You'll think of one. Exactly one. But then, I think, you'll think better of it and realize, "Actually, OK, fine, it's true: things were better and freer pre- than post-. Even for that special One." And you'll be right.

To shamelessly plagiarize an analogy, revolution is like Chinese Chestnut Blight. It's less destructive in China than elsewhere. Elsewhere it wreaks total havok when it hits. But it's no great shakes in China, either. It's a destructive disease in both birthplace and foreign lands.

The Anglos invented revolution. It has been less destructive for us. The Anglosphere is uniquely resilient and resistant to revolution's ill effects. It's still bad, not not nearly as malignant as for the other peoples on whom it metastasizes. But it has not been Glorious anywhere. It has been a disaster.

Tried. Failed. Experiment done. Results replicated exhaustively. Time to toss out Rosemary's Baby.

Revolution Doesn't Work

It worked well for the Maccabees.

I also insist that America is better off because of the revolution than anywhere else in the British empire, imperfect as the Constitution is it has protected our rights better than anywhere else in the world.