Sometimes, I’m surprised by how thoroughly the Windsors have managed to whitewash their own family history. Even in the direct line of monarchs from George V to Edward VIII to George VI to Elizabeth II, there’s a crazy amount of scandal. King Edward VIII – also known as the Duke of Windsor after his abdication – was a well-known Nazi sympathizer who even met directly with Adolf Hitler. It was Hitler’s plan to re-install Edward VIII on the throne if and when Germany successfully invaded and conquered Britain. Prince Philip, while technically a Greek prince, grew up in a mostly German family and at least two of his four sisters ended up married to Nazis. The Windsors themselves are almost entirely German, having changed the name of their royal house from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Up until Edward VIII, it was widely believed that the royal family of England spoke mostly German amongst themselves.
So, is it really that surprising that Queen Elizabeth was taught the Nazi “Heil Hitler” salute when she was just a girl? Not really. But before this weekend, we didn’t have any proof. The Sun UK got their hands on some archival Windsor family video which shows then-Princess Elizabeth of York (because her father was at that time the Duke of York) doing the Nazi salute with her mother, uncle and Princess Margaret. The video was taken in 1933, when Elizabeth was only 7 years old. Her father, King George VI, would ascend to the throne following Edward VIII’s 1936 abdication three years later. Sidenote: it’s believed that George VI (then the Duke of York) was the one behind the camera, filming this video. Here’s the video:
My take? Eh. It’s more disturbing to see the then- Duchess of York doing the salute, especially considering she was an adult. It’s also disturbing to think that she was doing that in 1933 and then just a few years later, when she was Queen Consort, she was considered to be a proud symbol of resistance to the Nazis. For the current Queen Elizabeth II… she was just a kid and she really didn’t know what she was doing.
As you can imagine, Buckingham Palace released a statement about the video: “It is disappointing that film, shot eight decades ago and apparently from Her Majesty’s personal family archive, has been obtained and exploited in this manner.” The Sun says they obtained the video legally, although I can’t imagine how? This is pretty obviously a private family video, and it was even filmed at Balmoral, the Queen’s private Scottish estate. Oh, and a royal source dished to People: “Most people will see these pictures in their proper context and time. This is a family playing and momentarily referencing a gesture many would have seen from contemporary news reels. No one at that time had any sense how it would evolve. To imply anything else is misleading and dishonest.” Sure.
I’m almost surprised that Buckingham Palace even said anything formally. The Queen has done an excellent job – for the most part – of burying her family’s connections to Nazi Germany. One must not speak of that time, even if one’s sisters-in-law were married to Nazis and one’s uncle was a Nazi propaganda tool.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Surprised the family didn’t destroy the tape. Maybe someone knowledgeable on royal history can explain why the tape was or had to be preserved.
That is what I don’t understand. Why would they keep it and risk it being uncovered? Two adults appear in the video, plus someone else (possibly QE’s father) filmed it. It’s not as if children got hold of a video camera and took footage that no one was aware of.
Like most families there is probably lots of film that has been forgotten about until it turns up to embarrass. And yes, it would be destroying a part of history and history is to be studied and remembered so that we aren’t doomed to repeat it. This film was taken at least 5 years before England declared war on Germany and it is doubtful that the queen consort and her daughters knew anything about the horrors that Hitler had planned. Churchill may have been one of the few people with the foresight to understand the evil that was Hitler and Nazism. Edward was a weak-willed and self-indulgent Peter Pan who needed a tyrant of his own, and her name was Wallis, to focus on anything. He didn’t want to make decisions, he wanted to be told what to do. Also, Edward was an idiot who was drawn to fascism/Nazism for most of his life. He was moved to the Bahamas and installed as Governor to get him out of the way and to keep him from embarrassing the royal family with his Nazi leanings. Yet he and Wallis still courted fascists. Hindsight being 20/20, if Edward hadn’t abdicated the English monarchy would have been destroyed and the British Empire would look much different. And not in a good way.
Well, it is a part of the history. Maybe it wasn’t meant to be seen during HM’s lifetime. Still, destroying it would be unfair. Also, I think it is unfair to judge them from our point of view – they had no way of knowing in 1933 what would happen and all the atrocities of WWII.
I suppose I’m wondering why it was even filmed (since the royal family is about public image), although at that time perhaps people didn’t know what that salute would come to symbolize.
I totallty agree with Splinter. This has been put out there for the shock factor. Many families had connections with Germans and Nazi’s. Germany remains full of Germans. They couldn’t see the future and we have learnt from the past. It’s rather silly to judge that video by todays standards or to think that destroying it would help anything.
I think as a German you could foresee that they were up to no good, but they lived in another country and they probably had no clue in 1933 that there would be a genocide (hey Jesse Eisenberg!). They distanced themselves from the Nazis and I think that’s totally fine then.
Destroying it would have been like the Tudor blackwashing of the Plantagenets. It might not be pleasant, but it’s an important record and resource for future historians. One imagines that they intended it to remain cloistered for enough generations for it to be of interest only for study.
Sixes, I agree. It is still historic record and in fact supports the good side of his abdication, so to speak. Ie, lucky that a foolish sympathizer was not left in office.
The “why now” portion of the release of the images is obviously what interests me. By who, why. The Guardian had an interesting piece on it online today, saying the royals are urged to spill more now. But again, why now? An example of the stupidity some had about dangerous rising regimes?
Liberty – it may be a conspiracy theory too far, but yesterday Lord Mountbatten was finally openly named by a whistleblower/victim in the Establishment paedophile scandal (and a documentary was aired in Australia). Distraction?
I wonder why it wasn’t destroyed too. I’ve read a few biographies about this family and this is my guess.
The Queen Mother came to despise/loathe Edward for abdicating. She blamed him for ruining her husband’s health, and his early death at age 56. She didn’t seem to blame his heavy smoking somehow.
Prior to Edward abdicating, he used to spend a lot of time with the Queen Mother, Bertie, young Elizabeth and Margaret, they were close. Then when he abdicated, he was not allowed to be in England, at family events etc. I read the Queen Mother was the driving force behind the shunning long after Bertie died etc. She hated Wallis. (Sidenote, Wallis called her “Cookie” because rumor was the Queen Mother was the child of the family cook and her father.)
I can’t help but wonder if the Queen kept the footage to remember the happier times between them, no matter what the footage showed.
There are a lot of people who think that Elizabeth wanted to marry Edward and only chose Bertie when Edward rejected that.
bluhare, I’ve read that multiple places as well.
Wow, I did not know that about the Queen Mum wanting to marry Edward. That’s good gossip!
The only person who didn’t romanticize the Queen Mum was Madonna’s terrible W.E. She’s like the villain of the piece.
Oh yes. And that she was a manipulative bitch who was behind Margaret not being able to marry Peter Townsend. And she didn’t like sex so George Vi had mistresses. And she started drinking at 10:00 am. And wanted Edward but settled for George. And loved the abdication because she got (a) her wish of being queen,and (b) an eff you to Edward.
No clue whether it’s all factual.
OMG, this is awesome gossip!
Yes, agree with you guys, I have heard many times that she had a major crush on Edward too. Supposedly Elizabeth turned down Bertie’s proposal 2-3X, she had ‘whooping cough’ on their honeymoon and maybe used a turkey baster? to help get pregnant. Not sure how passionate their marriage was.
Bluhare, I wonder about the Margaret story. Recently it was told that Margaret could have married Townsend but she would have had to give up her title and money and couldn’t do it:
“But the Cabinet decided that if the Princess insisted on marrying Townsend, then a Bill of Renunciation would be placed before Parliament, stripping Margaret of all her rights, privileges and income…Townsend felt he could not expect the Princess to make the necessary sacrifices and when they met he realised she had come to the same conclusion.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-99426/Princess-Margaret-love-affair-denied.html
Sharon Lea, I can’t remember the details but she was agitating behind Margaret’s back, while being nice to her front, about it. From what I understood their relationship was never the same afterward as Margaret either found out or knew what her mother did.
And I read the same that Elizabeth and Margaret were not conceived naturally. Because of said distaste of sex. Although I didn’t read turkey baster. She went to an ob/gyn.
Fabulous gossip, yes! Now the Palace is all-aflutter in its quest to find the dastardly “traitor” who passed this film to The Sun.
I did find this article in the DM, I don’t know if any of you have read it. Supposedly a skilled lip-reader analysed the footage and came up with the explanation that they were actually all just “waving” at some lady passer-by that they all recognised. Desperate damage control much? Seems like furious back-pedalling to me. Hmmmm.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3166822/Was-Queen-just-WAVING-Lip-reading-expert-claims-Edward-VIII-encouraging-princess-gesture-shot-WASN-T-teaching-Nazi-salute.html
Also Channel 4 in the UK is just about to release a documentary opening the whole can of worms on Prince Philip, when he attended a relative’s funeral in Germany where he mingled with senior ranking Nazis, all madly Sieg-Heiling away. Yikes.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3167558/Now-Royals-face-TV-Nazi-exposure-Palace-considers-legal-action-Hitler-salute-photos-new-blow.html
Shock Horror. It’s going to be a Tempus Horribilis all around for the Saxe Coburg Gothas and Battenberg descendants!
She was six. Only 6, so..yeah. And I agree with the disturbing part.
Also disturbing, have you seen that the NYT has released the FULL 1000 page depo of Bill Cosby?? Oh boy. He’s truly, truly DONE…and sicker than we thought, which didn’t seem possible.
I was hoping this would get covered today, but I’m now fully anticipating the outrage and endless number of comments tomorrow to be epic.
Oh man l have to go look! I’m glad he’s finally being exposed.
I read half of the Times’ Cosby article and had to stop. I felt like I needed a shower! So gross. And I agree, a 6yo doesn’t know what she’s doing but her mom … that gets more of a yikes.
Yeah, a six year old does not understand the full concept. No way, no how.
ETA, on Cosby: Perfect example of a sociopathic predator in a ‘how-to’ on grooming for trust, and then knocking everyone out.
That is what I thought when I read the Cosby piece Kiddo, it’s truly disturbing..
From what I’ve read, he still doesn’t admit wrongdoing, says everything was consensual, there was sexual touching but not intercourse, and if there was more it was “sexual intercourse”. He’s not admitting he drugged and raped anyone.
There will continue to be Cosby apologists who insist these women were sluts who wanted his fame, willingly took drugs from him, and wanted him. LipstickAlley has a few staunch Cosby defenders whose posts are horrifying to read, though most of the posters I’ve seen there aren’t that way.
SO many insights into this monster though. He claims he’s an “expert” at reading non-verbal cues that a woman wants sex? W.T.F?!!.. And the there’s this disgusting gem taken from TMZ: “when asked about one woman and whether she was capable of consenting to sex while under the influence, he said, “I don’t know.” Cosby was so matter-of-fact and even flippant during the depo, Constand’s lawyer said, “I think you’re making light of a very serious situation.” Cosby responded “That may very well be.” “–
and that’s just a sample of his sick justifications, lies, manipulations, and covert acts to keep his evil hidden . He’s a MONSTER.
He admits to conning them, gaining trust through fraud, pretending to be a mentor or someone who cared about their life ills, like cancer. He admits fraudulently obtaining prescription drugs, lying about pain from a back injury, so that he could ply these pursuits, with them. These woman didn’t seek out Cosby, throw themselves at him, he groomed and calculated how he could gain their trust. He basically admits to pretending to care in order to fulfill his goal. It was an abuse of power, at the least. Since he finds it funny, it’s clear he is devoid of empathy. He also conned his wife into believing that he was this generous man only giving women money to pay for school. THIS explains Camille COMPLETELY. He lied and gaslighted her if she had suspicions.
Last week the big news story was Camille C allegedly admitting to friends that she thinks he’s a philanderer not a rapist and all the women consented. She knew it wasn’t just giving money to pay for school. CB had at least one article about this last week.
notasugarhere, NOW. Who knows how long she was aware or had that mindset? Not saying she didn’t know for a long time, but it’s clear Cosby was blowing smoke up her ass, at least at some point. And a control freak is hardly ever only a control freak in only one element of their lives. Cosby was not beyond humiliating his own family, including his kids.
I found the depo on scribd and downloaded it onto my computer. I’m going through it now with my blog…and yea….it’s GROSS. His lawyer is disgusting.
Wait, you started a blog? I missed that. Hope it is going well and getting you loads more writing experience.
Click on her name, nas.
Looks good, virgilia! I just bookmarked it.
@Virgilia-EXCELLENT blog post! I wanted to reply, but alas..my Dino phone (Nokia E-5) won’t let me. Tried mobile and web version. It says “click to reply” but it’s not a clickable link on my phone. Just know I bookmarked you and am really looking forward to the other installments. Bless you for highlighting all the WTF factors, sliminess and badass Trioani!!!
Thanks everyone! And God…I went to bed on that shit. It was sooo disgusting. The worst part is Cosby acting like he’s got Alzheimer’s or is a doddering old fool.
bluhare I had no idea that that’s what that meant. I thought names in blue were people who were actively logged into the site and commenting at that point. Well, I’ve learned my new thing for today!
I had no idea why my name was in blue and I still don’t as I don’t have a blog – deeply confused (as per usual)…
I’m deeply confused now too frisbeejada. You have an unresolved name. Has that been causing you any issues? 😉
Frisbeejada’s name just has “celebitchy/” in the website box….she might’ve put it there on accident.
Bluhare – I’ve always had issues, I’m amazed you can’t tell given your usual level of perspicacity, still never mind blue is my favourite colour (well no it’s not really…)
How awesome would it be if they took this as an opportunity to talk about coming from the wrong side of history to the right one? They could draw attention to how easily people can be manipulated, or how caught up in our own time we can be. And how to move forward from that and evolve as humans who care about other humans. It’d never happen, but it’d be awesome.
That’s an interesting point.
That would require leadership and oddly enough leadership isn’t really their thing.
That would be awesome. Especially with all the changes we’re seeing as a group of humans today, and with the way some people are responding to those changes. ITA that it would have been great to see this used as an opportunity to illustrate just how scarily manipulative the Nazi party was, how easy it can be to get swept up in something sinister without knowing it at the time, and how we are all capable of growth regardless of what we get caught up in at the moment.
The power of the Nazi propaganda machine was incredible. When I was getting my degree in communication theory in the 80’s I had a course that studied just has the fascist movement was conceived, launched and sold to the people of the 30’s leading up to and during the war.
Disturbing now, as we know the eventual outcome, but in 1933 Hitler and the Nazi party were seen as figures of fun to many people. Without context it is hard to be sure what was actually happening in that clip and the only participant still living was less than 7 when it was filmed. Given the other playful actions it is possible (if not probable) that the then Duchess of York and Prince of Wales were poking fun of the silly salute that was sweeping Germany at the time while entertaining the two young princesses.
What actually is disturbing to me is the actions of The Sun that obtaining the images and published them. They claim they were legally obtained but The Sun has a really poor track record in that regard. The Queen is 89 years old and regardless of what you think of Royalty has devoted her entire life to the serve of first the Empire and then later the Commonwealth. The news media creating artificial controversy to sell papers and generate clicks for ad revenue is poor reward for her tireless efforts.
Julaine – I took a similar class in college and I get what you’re saying, but even without knowledge of the unimaginable attrocities to come, isn’t this basically treason?
Julaine, +1. Your theory, however, makes the campaign of Donald Trump more disturbing than entertaining within that framework.
Yeah, I am not amused by the buffoonery of Mr. Trump. I am equally not amused by the fact that the Republican Party and the American people are allowing this depressing spectacle to continue. My faint hope is that we are being treated to a large scale piece of performance art and that in the coming days Mr. Trump launches into a full scale attack of the people who support his ridiculously bigoted ideology. Not going to happen but it is truly depressing that this man has a national platform to spew that garbage. What it says about how much farther we have to evolve that he is not polling in the negative numbers is even more disturbing.
Politics are really not my thing, but then I don’t really believe what The Donald is doing is actually politics. I sincerely hope that the horrifying thought that his bigotry and ignorance will not parallel in any way the rise of Fascism.
Julaine, there are parallels. Blaming certain ethnic groups for all problems in this country and a lot of the population getting on board with that scares me. Plus his mannerisms, as I’ve mentioned before, are unhinged and so off the rails, that he reminds me of the ‘crazy’ visual of Hitler.
To quote an excellent philosopher: “What would be even nicer is that we could look at the things we are doing today in terms of how we may look to those who come after us. Let’s not make THIS present an equally shameful past to the generations of the future as the one we’re talking about here.”______Sixer
Juliane, Kiddo- I honestly shivered as I read your Trump discussion. The parallels are striking and scary when you look at it from the perspective you two are taking. Your exchange was very thought provoking, so I thank you, but I also want my mommy. *shivers again*
Hold on, there is no parallel between Hitler and Trump. The only real similarity is if you replace “Jews” with “Illegal Hispanics” and that is about it. Very few people at the top of the Republican party is taking Trump seriously. He will not make it the convention.
M.A.F. I hope you are right. He seems to be striking a cord with a subset of the populace, I wasn’t really considering the party.
I sincerely hope that Donald Trump will not be the next Republican nominee for US President. However, at the present time, albeit more than a year before the election he is the current front runner in a crowded Republican pool. Therefore, I have to take it seriously that he is striking a chord with a segment of the population. I want two intelligent candidates capable of leading this country and representing the U.S. In the international forum. That is NOT how I would describe Donald Trump.
What would be even nicer is that we could look at the things we are doing today in terms of how we may look to those who come after us. Let’s not make THIS present an equally shameful past to the generations of the future as the one we’re talking about here. You know?
That’s something I could get behind. And not just because Kiddo called you a great philosopher either.
If you weren’t a staunch Republican for very good reasons, I’d say, “Sixer for Queen!” You’d be the one voice of reason in/above UK politics.
Precisely, Sixer. I think that’s exactly what Savu was getting at with “the wrong side of history.” I look back at black and white photos of pro-segregation rallies, of people holding signs that say “stop the race mixing,” and they make me cringe. I feel ashamed on behalf of those who participated. And so I wonder, will these Facebook posters who so proudly proclaim, “I will never call Bruce Jenner ‘she,'” along with far more disgusting sentiments that I would feel too dirty to type… Will they be the ones who make the next generation cringe with shame when they look back? Do they realize that’s the path they’re going down? Is that really the side of history they want to be on? Or are they just too swept up in their own ignorance to think about it?
Aww, thanks guys. Specially Kiddo.
I think if our immediate response is not “EWWW they did that, where’s my pitchfork?” (much as that is tempting) but more “Erk. WHY did they do that?” – then we would be much more aware of what we’re doing ourselves today. Good way to avoid all the pitfalls.
There are no doubt more skeletons and residual sentiments in their closets that people would go digging for if they issued any sort of condemnation of the material. Just because people turned against Hitler does not mean they necessarily disagreed with his views. His “real” crime was in getting too big for his jodhpurs. Not pointing fingers, but definitely wagging one or two….
I’m shaking my butt. Non sequitur.
It’s ridiculous do judge her so harshly now.
According to my history geek brother Hitler was already well known in London during this period of time due to the success of he and his team with the economic actions they were working on in Germany. Hitler before becoming the legendary monster he did loads of good over there.
His anti Jewish campaign was in full swing, even then. But. What sixer says below. Lots of aristocratic were supportive of nazism because it was anti communist.
THIS. People like to pretend that no one saw Hitler’s evil coming, but anti-Jewish laws were passed as soon as he came to power. A sort of casual anti-Semitism was rampant among the British upper classes and many of them privately believed that the economic and social attacks on German Jews were acceptable. Maybe no one could have foreseen Auschwitz (although Europe’s millennia-long history of Pogroms makes that a dicey claim) but to say that no one realized Hitler’s anti-Jewish agenda in 1933 would be laughable if it weren’t so offensive.
And there was plenty of anti semitism in europe to go around back then. It was common, socially acceptable, and nobody cared. Maybe they did not know what was coming, but they knew jews were not welcome in Germany. They just didn’t give a damn.
And a significant factor contributing to that anti-Semitism was the same fear of Bolshevism that I mention below. The involvement of the Jewish Bund within the Russian Revolution and its contribution to the leadership of the Bolsheviks, really stoked the rise of 30s anti-Semitism outside Germany, in the US, in Britain, and across the other European powers. All the establishment and all the owners of capital were terrified of Bolshevism.
As Miss J says, many aristocrats in Europe were fascinated and attracted to the Nazis. Some of it was probably ideological but I think that some of it was also the aesthetic “glamour” of how the Nazis staged the look of their regime. The fascist aesthetics of the Nazis shouldn’t be underestimated – think of the privileged roles that the architect Albert Speer and the filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl had in that regime. One should never underestimated the role played by art and the staging of politics. The Nazis understood that, so did Elizabeth I and Lous XIV – and this entanglement of official art and politics is still practiced intensely in North Korea.
Speer was much more involved with the politics than Riefenstahl. However, I have never been able to wrap my head around by the fact that she was appeared to be able to completely dissociate her artistic work for the Nazi regime with the politics it represented and carried out. Until her death, she held on the the belief that the art she made for them had no bearing on their politics.
Except Hitler himself declared his program to be a socialist one. And true socialism = communism = fascism.
Communism = fascism? Really? One is an economic model, another – a form of government, I’m not at all sure how you can equate the two. It’s like saying that capitalism = democracy. Yet, that would imply that, say, the UK is not a capitalist country.
Granted, “communist” countries did a load of fascist stuff, but then again, so did many capitalist countries as well. I think that neither communism nor capitalism is inherently fascist, but both can turn to it, given the “right” circumstances.
Nonononono. Communism and fascism both lend themselves to authoritarian and totalitarian governments but are completely different. Communism is a system in which all citizens share equally in the products of state/industry; there is only one party to govern because all interests are thought to be common (so one party represents everyone, not multiple parties for multiple factions). Fascism is an anti-Marxist, anti-democratic, racist ideology that believes that not only are people not equal, but those that are better should rule and make decisions for the whole — hence, there is usually an imperialist endeavor to fascism. In fascist economies, governments dictate the terms of production through their mass consumption of goods, not by any actual ownership of the means of production.
Yes, Nazism is technically “national socialism,” but to think that it is socialism (particularly in the Marxist sense of government ownership of the means of production) is to ignore the complexities of the political parties in 1920s/1930s Germany. It’s like saying North Korea is a democracy because it’s named the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
This is a misunderstanding. The only economic success he got was probably because of the war industry. The economics were about to get better when his party came into power. Hitler didn’t even invented the Autobahn, that was done before his time. He just happened to get elected when it was build.
The above thread is the reason I love Celebitchy! No matter the story subject there is always so many great insightful comments that I learn so much reading posts. Thanks to all for sharing your insight and giving so much info to dissect and think about. Ladies of CB rock!
I remember Harry dressing as a Nazi not that long ago, yes it was Halloween, but Harry should have known better, if he cared. Those old views probably aren’t that far in the past as some would want to believe.
Exactly. Harry needs to learn from his family’s mistake. As for the queen- it’s no big deal that she did this but it does support what I’ve heard before about the queen mum being a nazi sympathizer.
The Queen Mum was never a Nazi sympathiser. Edward VIII and Wallis, sure. But Elizabeth and George were always anti-Nazi. Elizabeth nursed soldiers in WWI in Scotland, one of her brothers was captured by the Germans and another killed.
And George V, the King at the time, knew which of his sons could be trusted. In 1935, two months before he died, he wrote, ‘I pray to God that my eldest son [Edward VIII] will never marry and that nothing will come between Bertie [George VI] and Lilibet [QEII] and the throne.’
Is it possible that the official reason for Edward VIII’s abdication isn’t the real reason why it happened? Saying one abdicated because of true love is a lot easier for the British people to swallow as opposed to because he was a Nazi sympathizer. By 1936, the general public would have started to see that Hitler was trouble and itching to start a war, and the Windsor family already had too many German connections that they had to sever from WWI that this ensured the British public wouldn’t want to get rid of their still more German than British monarchy.
Harry dressed in the German African corps uniform which is different from the classic Nazi storm troopers uniform many people are more familiar with.
Not many people (the west) know or care what the Germans did in Africa, much less know their uniform.
Pardon my ignorance I guess I was distracted by the swastika on his sleeve. Did the German African corps do good anywhere that I am not aware of.
Definitely. I hate how people don’t pay attention to it.
Lily: the point being that people wear the German African corps uniform thinking it’s not the same as the official black one. Even with the swastika. People are that ignorant.
The British monarchy has had a history of anti-Semitism for centuries. So, this behavior, while shocking to many, was not to me. I will never get the fascination the Windsors. Diana, yes, the Windsors, no.
I honestly only see kids playing and nothing more… Why is that sign related to Nazism? People see evil everywhere because there’s evil in their own minds and hearts.
Out of curiosity, Portuguese military, when they swear allegiance to the Portuguese country and flag, do the same sign, guess that makes us all Nazis??
My God, really, Mankind makes me feel sad so often.. There’s no more innocence, no more faith, no more joy, no more HUMANITY…
That particular salute is Roman isn’t it? Just like the eagle the Nazis used. They appropriated a lot.
Yes, it a Roman salute going back to the Roman Empire. Mussolini’s Fascist state was to bring back the Glory Days of the Empire. Hitler’s Nazi Germany was modeled after Mussolini.
Are you effing g kidding me? Edward viii was an enthusiastic nazi sympathizer. To the end.
Aw shucks they were just waving their right arms around… it only looks likes the Nazi salute…. It is a nazi salute. I understand the desire to stick your head in the sand, but that is what this is.
EII was only six and I don’t hold her accountanle, but her parents knew perfectly well what this was.
You are correct that Edward was a staunch Nazi supporter – thou not sure he was after the war but TQs parents were very much anti Nazi from the beginning.
As this was a private family moment – i would suggest that they were ‘taking the piss’ out of the gesture as from what my grandparents told me everyone did at the time (this was before war broke out). The context is is that when the video was shot no one would have known what that gesture would have gone on to symbolise. It didn’t have the same meaning then as it does now – that is the context here.
Look, I get what you’re trying to do. Be above it all; maybe show off some archaic knowledge about the history of the Nazi salute (which, FYI, most people do know — just as we know that the Nazi’s appropriated a Hindu symbol). But, trying to pretend like they weren’t doing the Nazi salute in this video is, well, disingenuous — at best. Ignoring racism, antisemitism, homophobia (etc….), it’s the same as condoning it. Pretending that these people are just playing in the backyard, no biggie, is immature and dangerous. I mean, what? If the KKK rolled up to your house, you’d just think: “Oh my! Why did a bunch of people, dressed in their “semana santa” cloaks, from Europe, come visit me? And is that burning cross a token of their affection?” I mean, come on….really.
Your final paragraph is an over dramatic joke.
I suppose since it’s not your family being mudered it’s fun to hypothesize and pretend to be totally clueless about history. If that’s the joy you want then you and the Nazis and all the other violent hate groups can swim in it together.
So, humanity makes you so sad because of THIS? Because some tabloid dug up a footage of the Queen doing a Nazi salute, and some people are upset?
You either upset easily or don’t read the news much. If you want to be sad for humanity, I promise you, there is a lot more stuff that is deserving of your sadness than some people wagging their finger at the Queen.
Because we’re judging people for not knowing what the future would bring.. It was 1933… not 2015… If nowadays someone did this with a Nazi meaning, I would condemn the person, be against them, but I can’t be against someone for doing something (at the age of 6 or 7) 6 years before one of the worst events of world history…
And it is your right, etc.
I’m just not sure it warrants your last paragraph, with “the world is getting so terrible” attitude. Seems like a bit of an over-reaction to me.
P.S. I wonder if this resonates more with those of us who are American because of the ongoing Confederate flag issue. We see lots of people who are fully aware of what that flag came to represent, of its history, and who’re still trying to defend the flag because “it wasn’t created as a slave owner flag”, “it was appropriated”, “it is misunderstood”, “the flag didn’t kill people”, etc.
I’m kind of shocked that no one in the press seems to be getting upset that the Queen Mum is doing the nazi salute. While Queen Elizabeth and Princess Margaret were children, the Queen Mum knew what was going on. I’ve seen a lot of “they were kids who didn’t know what was going on” and “we all knew Edward VII was nazi sympathizer”…..(both true) ….but a complete whitewashing of the fact that the Queen Mum is doing it too. Yes, you have to view it context with the time but it’s still shocking and disturbing to see her do it.
I find it UNBIELIVABLE that people are still trying to defend them when it’s well-known that they have ties with the Nazis. It apparently still runs in the family( see prince Harry) and I also know that historians have a lot more dirt but don’t want to broadcast it. There’s gotta be even more damaging archives.
Absolutely. The fact that Harry did not realize how offensive the Nazi costume is, was telling. He was never told, and the horrors were never revealed. It shows how ignorant and uneducated the royal family is. It boggles the mind that such a horribly anti-intellectual bunch is showered with all this priviledge and respect.
And what context are we talking about ? By 1933 their sympathies were well-known. The Queen Mum was a bigot to the end, Phillip still is, Harry probably does not even understand the difference between humor and racism and the rest are probably cleverer about hiding their true feelings.
Charles was said to be furious at both William and Harry. Only Harry was held accountable and apologized. Golden Boy’s part in the costume selection and his African Native costume were swept under the rug by the press.
Firstly, even aren’t upset by the QM making that salute because it was 1933. It wasn’t the information age. Entire establishment, if not the population, didn’t have a problem with Hitler. That is very uncomfortable for us to comprehend, especially because we know the scale of the problem. They did not.
Right upto the moment war was declared in 1939, that belief held up. No one knew what was happening with the jews as far as killing them on an industrial scale.
There was a very effective propaganda machine in place that kept the population ignorant and unquestioning and or able to reason away anything they heard being done to the jews.
You can’t judge something from 1933 using our modern thinking. You also have to take into consideration that news didn’t travel as fast as it does these days.
Finally, Hitler became afraid of the QM’s ability to rally the British and is quoted calling her the most dangerous woman in Europe for it.
That tells us, if nothing else, that she was opposed to him in the end, if not before.
Finally, people who say anti-jewish laws should have awoken the population to what was happening to the jews clearly don’t know Jewish history in Europe.
Jews have been feared and persecuted for centuries. Putting up new laws whilst putting up anti-jewish propaganda wasn’t going to change society’s views overnight.
LAK, I thought of this too, from naive child, to this: “Hitler became afraid of the QM’s ability to rally the British and is quoted calling her the most dangerous woman in Europe for it.”
I read Ivanhoe last year and had a really difficult time getting through the comments about Rebecca.
I dont want to defend Prince Harry but I highly doubt he is a Nazi sympathiser when he did I am willing to bet he knew what he was doing he knew what the nazi’s did, he would of been taught what happened at school especially a private school. He will have done it because its contraversial, in the same vain as doing black face its what some idiots think of as “banter” its usually just stupid and racist. Also they did have Nazi ties they were also fans of the black shirts a strain of facisim that was around in 1930s England. Although they weren’t to know the extent of what was to happen regarding the Nazi’s, lets be honest the royals were never ones for equality what little they knew I doubt they very much cared for the plite of the Jews.
Hitler was considered a buffoon and a figure of fun in the 1930s, it’s not at all surprising that the Queen Mother was making fun of him. Charlie Chaplin did it in The Great Dictator, which didn’t come out until 1940.
It’s not any different to any of the many pop culture references to the leaders of North Korea (Team America: World Police, The Interview, Kim Jong IL/Un Looking at Things, etc). The North Korean regime is utterly appalling, but that doesn’t stop us from making fun of its leader.
This x 1000.And in addition, even at times when we know what we know, irony, laughter and caricature conrinue to be considered amongst the strongest weapons wepossess. Let’s not forget Je Suis Charlie. Many people today use imitation, laughter, and caricature to mock at political systems they detest. The example with North Korea is excellent as the level of suppression and cruelty there is significant but concealed. Same with China. I haven’t seen even one person mocking at those systems called a sympathizer or believer in them. And btw, when I was at school,we watched the Great Dictator and for weeks we laughed at and imitated the pompous greeting, the voice, etc. We weren’t sympathizing Hitler!
I don’t think she was saluting him in anticipation of the Holocaust.
A few comments – so many excellent points in the discussions above:
I found it strange that This year was the first time the queen Had visited a concentration / death camp. I would have expected her to do so on One of her much earlier trips to Germany.
Antisemitism was rife in pre war Europe- I would be surprised if the royals were immune to it.
True socialism is not the same as fascism.
While it may seem trivial, I find it a bit offensive that it seems perfectly acceptable To make jokes about Adrien Brody’s nose, when it would be considered racist to make Jokes about JZ’s lips.
I haven’t seen any comments on Brody’s nose. Is there something wrong with his nose and JZ’s lips? Regular CB Royals readers usually don’t let negative comments on someone’s physical features go unchallenged. But, wiglets, wedges and short skirts are always open for discussion.
Are you kidding? There was nothing particularly disturbing about the Nazi salute in 1933 and, as the Duke and Duchess of York, they would not necessarily have been any more well informed than the average Times reader. As the BBC said on the news this morning, it was about this date that the British soldiers guarding the funeral procession of the German Ambassador in London gave the Nazi salute. Many people admired how Hitler brought Germany out of recession, it was how they reacted once more details started to emerge that really matters.
As for hiding their Nazi past. it is well known that Edward VIII was a Nazi sympathizer and it is generally regarded here that we are very lucky he abdicated. As far as I am aware Edward’s support continued throughout the war and I am not sure if he ever condemned Hitler’s treatment of the Jews.
All of this.
And, we owe Wallis Simpson a huge debt for getting Edward VIII off the throne. What a disaster it would have been had he stayed.
A lot more information about the Duke of Windsor’s Nazi sympathies has come to light recently, especially a lot from the FBI archives. They kept close tabs on him during the time he was Governor of Bermuda.
He even did an interview, which was heavily redacted because he was was quite defeatist and said that Hitler was a great man whose defeat was a loss to Europe.
He was also incredibly racist, referring to Australian aborigials as apes.
In a documentary, one man, who knew them both – and detested her, actually said that Wallis Simpson saved the British monarchy – because she was the reason he abdicated.
I agree. Hitler was Time’s Man of the Year in 1938. Edward was an idiot! Supposedly, elements of Parliament were thrilled to get rid of him and the Nazi sympathy was just one reason as it showed his reasoning skills, judgement and morals as BANKRUPT.
My father is 95 years old, and guess what? He has a couple of swastikas in an early 30s schoolbook. My father fought in WWII, and hated/hates the idea of the Holocaust. Media decimation then is not as it is today by a long shot.
I know you weren’t saying it, but just to make that clear: Hitler wasn’t responsible for Germany leaving recession behind.
Reminds me of Harry and his swastika…..Makes me wonder what these people get up to in secret. The Palace’s response is also so unnecessary. They sound guilty of something else that is not yet out but related to the video. *conspiracy face*
William picked out the colonial costume and goaded Harry into wearing it. Shopkeeper on record saying so. If you’re going to bash Harry for it, you have to bash William for it too.
That’s the same party William went to wearing black tights, draped in animals furs, and calling himself an African Native. We know this because the shopkeeper also said that William was disappointed the shop was all out of native costumes. I guess he made his own from supplies he found around the palace.
Did William also goad Harry into calling his Pakistani colleagues Pakis?
Did you miss the part where the guy said that was his nickname and everyone called him that?
And how easily you ignore William’s offensive activities.
@Maia, agree. Harry is responsible for his own actions. I’m no Harry fan, however, I do think he’s matured since that time and learned that no matter what kind of racist, bigoted garbage he heard in the company of family elitists like Prince Philip or his aristo friends (who probably are just as bad as the duke), he has enough sense to know now that that type of mindset is damaging to others, his charities and the image of the BRF.
Yes I guess William put a gun to Harry head and mead him do it right? Then again no one can say anything bad about Harry with out people say well William did this he’s the bad one, Harry just a victim.
@Maia
And when Harry assured his pals that his then Zimbabwean girlfriend, Chelsy Davy, was “not a black or anything”.
@Neah23
Pretty Much
Harry will turn 60 and still pull crap, but it must ALWAYS be Big Willy’s fault.
“Harry is a victim of his brother” is one of the narrative for the ages.
I’m not saying Harry isn’t responsible for his own actions. I continue to be amazed at the people who think William has NO responsibility at all in the situation, having picked out the costume, and who don’t seem fazed by William’s racist costume at the same party.
If you’re going to be outraged by Harry, why aren’t you equally outraged by William? William as Diana’s golden child is definitely a narrative for the ages.
I agree that Harry has to stand on his own and take responsibility for what he’s done. So does William. So do we all.
Showing what someone else did doesn’t make the other thing better. However, I do think that the PR machine goes into effect much more for William, being a future king. Harry, less so. And Harry’s still managed to accomplish quite a bit in his endeavors.
However, things done out of ignorance are a lot different than things done out of intent. And I choose to hope that Harry’s mistakes were out of ignorance and I hope I’m right.
Ok, I’ll happily blame William for it too. Given their family history of having extraordinarily uncomfortable Nazi connections, Harry in a Nazi uniform (however he got there) was beyond in poor taste. I give nobody the benefit of the doubt on this one. Sure, the Queen might have been young and that gesture wouldn’t have been nearly as charged as it became, but Harry and William didn’t grow up in a vacuum. Wouldn’t surprise me in the least if this little video wasn’t the only instance of pro-Nazi behavior in this family.
My grandma broke, mentally, when she found out that the Nazis had captured and killed all of her five brothers and sisters and their children. She was never really okay again. The Nazis were horrible and the BRF have a troubling track record when it comes to them. So I have absolutely no patience for any of the BRF nonsense trying to hide their family history. I can’t even properly express how angry it makes me.
@notasugarhere
Once again it’s all Williams fault. 😋 No one is saying William is innocent but you and others keep placing the blame on William. When in fact Harry is a grown ass man and choose to wear that costume because he wanted to. Just because someone dared point out something Harry did doesn’t mean you have to point the finger at William.
@bluhare
So Harry did it out of ignorance? Harry is who old ? You can’t tell me he doesn’t know better.
Neah, you aren’t saying William is innocent, but you certainly aren’t holding him accountable for his part in the selection of either Harry’s costume or of his own racist getup at the same event.
Let’s try a different version of the narrative. Let’s pretend Harry was never at the party. Here’s the narrative that would have been used for the last 15 years:
Prince William attends Colonials & Natives Party dressed as an African Native. Shopkeeper admits that William was disappointed that all of the African Native costumes were already rented out for the weekend. Photos reveal that Prince William made an African Native costume of his own, complete with furs, black tights, and the lion slippers that come standard with the African Native costume from the shop.
How would everyone calling Harry to account (but ignoring William’s actions) react to that narrative? Those who disagree so vehemently with Harry’s actions — do you defend William’s choice of costume? Or are you going to keep ignoring it?
@Neah 23 –
Exactly. But I wont bother.
Harry wore the outfit.
Creating knots to absolve him and blame his brother is just the usual.
And the costume issue is pertinent, as this topic is in the question of Nazism and the Windsor’s history.
Their tenuous relations to their German heritage, and newspapers’ agenda/accountability.
And I doubt the original poster aimed to start a good brother vs. evil brother debate.
But as you, I and others have seen, whether Harry wears outfits, or makes racially insensitive comments, be it to comrades or to black UK comics, its never his fault.
Someone else is to be accountable. Preferably William.
@notasugarhere
Of course I’m not holding him accountable for Harry costume. Lol Why would I Harry is a grown A$$ man and if he didn’t want to wear it he wouldn’t have to. Once again you keep putting it back on William and are not holding Harry accountable for his choice.
William was an a$$ for his own offensive costume, there are you happy now I said something bad about William which is what you wanted. 😱😂
@ Jegede
Agreed it always Williams fault or it gets over looked because he the favorite.
Did you miss the bit in this thread where I typed “I’m not saying Harry isn’t responsible for his own actions.” I bring up William’s costume choice in this thread because I think it is relevant AND I think more people need to stop pretending it didn’t happen. If you’re going to subscribe racist intent to Harry’s costume, then a discussion of William’s racist costume belongs in that discussion too.
You don’t find it at all questionable that Harry was held accountable and apologized, but nothing happened to William regarding his own costume? I see that as a clear example of how things about William are covered up, and I cannot imagine I’m alone in that.
Lol what are you talking about? Are you new to this site? I hate to tell you this, but no one is pretending what William did, didn’t happen and In fact the majority of the people on this site don’t like William so they are the first one to point fingers at him.
( I bring up William’s costume choice in this thread because I think it is relevant AND I think more people need to stop pretending it didn’t happen. )
See I don’t believe that because instead of saying Harry was an a$$ and so is William for what he did. You go and say “William picked out the colonial costume and goaded Harry into wearing it.” When you go and make statements like William goaded Harry into wearing the costume you take away all responsibility From Harry.
Lets not talk about how thing get covered up for Harry as well or how people excuse Harry bad behavior because they think he’s good looking/ the favorite. They are royals so yes thing like this get covered up unfortunately.
Yes, notasugar – I must have missed that part of the video where the person says that everyone calls him a ‘paki’ and he is okay with that. Please post the transcript of where he says that – I could not find it.
That is tantamount to a black person saying that he is okay with others of a different race calling him the n-word because that is what they call him. There are historical connotations to these words that are probably best not ignored. I would really like to read what this person said.
The Queen was just a child along with her sister princess Margaret. They were just children. It their asshole of an Uncle Edward VIII that perturbed this evil in the royal family. Thank God he abdicated his position.
Seriously. England is very lucky he followed the brain in his pants and not the one in his skull!
The government was very lucky they were able to use Wallis as an excuse. They wanted the feckless, dangerous king out and they were able to use her (or the idea of a twice-divorced American being Queen) to get him out.
He was forced to abdicate and i think the real reason was his obsession with Hitler and the Nazis. The gov was worried that he would have handed the British Empire to Hitler on a gold plate – Edward wanted an alliance with them, to rule Europe alongside him (or in reality – ruled by Hitler). He was to Hitlers brand of Facism as Tom Cruise is to Scientology – a true believer.
Wallis was used as the get out clause for all involved and saved face for him, the gov and the BRF. If u were Prime Minister what would you want for the public reason for the abdication:
1) The King that would have rolled over, handing his people and Empire over to a bunch of genocidial maniacs
2) The King who gave up his throne for true love
Take your pick.
Churchill was heavily criticized for holding fast against Hitler and taking the country to war. Many held the (mistaken) belief that Hitler meant it when he said he’d stop at X number of countries. The people of the UK wanted peace, not war, and didn’t understand the massive evil Hitler represented.
Churchill was one of the few people who could see what was coming and he knew war was the only way to stop it. If he hadn’t have held fast and prepared the country it would have been too late as Hitler was obsessed with occupying the UK – and getting his hands on the Empire’s resources.
To follow up on what I said about Wallis – history has painted a very harsh picture of her, too harsh in my opinion as she took the brunt of the fallout over Edwards decisions and political inclinations. She’s a modern day Waity – a crass social climber who ruthlessly pursued a Prince. The differences being Wallis was smarter than Kate and didn’t let her Prince treat her like dirt – Wallis was the one in charge who called the shots. I can’t imagine Wallis sneaking around with an overnight shag bag – she was practically living with Edward.
And as for the ‘alleged’ affair with Von Ribbentrop – there is no evidence to prove this, its all rumour. Both the UK and US intelligence services looked for it and found nothing. The gov spun that tale to divert attention away from Edward who am sure would have spied for them, hence why he was desperate to have a public profile supporting his brother (the new King) – there is a very good reason he and Wallis were shoved off to the Bahamas. The man was a dangerous liability.
Betti – I think you are 100% correct. The public would be rioting over a King who wanted to be pals with Hitler, since the British Royal Family is still very much German in ancestry, especially at that time, and WWI was still fresh in their collective minds, as tons of young British men, mostly from lower and middle classes, were killed because of this fight between ruling cousins. Having a British King now want to work with Hitler, who was not even a relative, would have created mass chaos.
I think there are government papers that we have yet to see because the Queen is still alive, but I would not be surprised if the real reason for abdication was the nazi sympathizing and not Wallis Simpson.
It’s nonsense that this is somehow surprising, you know? Not that I think ER’s sodding privacy has been invaded or that publication is in any way a bad thing (although one would prefer sensible discussion rather than tabloid scandal rubbish from the Sun).
Philip even gave a very candid interview about it Royals and the Reich, by Jonathan Petropoulos. Quotes are up somewhere online – hang on, I’ll google…
“There was a great improvement in things like trains running on time and building. There was a sense of hope after the depressing chaos of the Weimar Republic. I can understand people latching on to something or somebody who appeared to be appealing to their patriotism and trying to get things going. You can understand how attractive it was. There was a lot of enthusiasm for the Nazis at the time, the economy was good, we were anti-Communist and who knew what was going to happen to the regime?”
And that’s where you have it – “we were anti-Communist”. Don’t forget, it was a scant fifteen years since a royal family had actually been lined up against a wall and shot in the Russian Revolution.
Vast swathes of the establishment were all for fascism then because of the Bolshevik threat – politicians, industrialists, financiers, aristos. And, I might add, on both sides of the Pond. It was that American banker Prescott Bush that basically bankrolled the German Nazis into power and the Kennedys weren’t exactly inimical either. And Churchill may well have been a racist, imperialist old git – but he was a very lonely voice in identifying the actual threat before any of the elites on either side of the Pond.
This film was at the height of all that, in 1933. By the time the dimwits that led us had realised it was actually the Nazis who were the immediate threat, it was all too late and war was upon us. At least then they all did a good job of fighting fascism, including Philip in the navy. David (and Wallis) were pretty much the only ongoing believers after that – which is why they were shipped off to the Bahamas.
Blimey. I sound as though I’m sticking up for the BRF. I’m not. I’m just saying that it’s not a surprise they were happy about National Socialism. And that they were far from the only ones.
Ridiculously long comment. Sorry!
But all ridiculously good information. I don’t think anyone was totally innocent during that time. Information on wasnt as easy to get at the time, and propoganda works. The Kennedy family has whitewashed their history similarly. It’s not about defending, it’s about understanding history.
The Bush family has whitewashed theirs a good deal more successfully.
@lilacflowers – yes, they certainly have.
@Lilacflowers – Very much so.
Not saying they didn’t just left them out of that sentence.
Don’t be sorry! All the information and your commentary on it is much appreciated. I don’t think you sound like you’re sticking up for the BRF– just explaining why this doesn’t come as a shock.
Completely agree Shambles. I appreciate your comment Sixer, I don’t think you were defending, just giving it a bit of context.
I think this is what I’m trying to suggest: yes, let’s condemn the BRF for some frankly revolting attitudes and deeds vis a vis fascism. They bloody well deserve it. But let’s not allow that to blind us to the fact that they weren’t the only ones. The views were widespread among political and industrial leaders throughout the European and American world. And our leaders only stopped supporting fascism when fascism attacked them. Until then, they were ALL fine with it. And more to the point, with one or two honourable exceptions, they were all too bloody stupid to even SEE that fascism was going to attack them.
It’s also crucial to remember the casual anti-Semitism of the British Upper Classes at that time. Hitler got the trains running on time, and if he confiscated Jewish property and imposed a whole host of social restrictions on them, well, after all, they were the money lending Other. The U.S. State Department was filled with people who believed allowing Jewish refugees to flood the country would damage the nation, so anti-Semitism was hardly limited to one place or class.
The point is, the then-Yorks would absolutely have known Hitler’s general beliefs and just because they couldn’t have predicted genocide doesn’t mean they get a free pass on their social world’s casual indifference as Hitler stripped an entire group of German citizens of their rights and freedom.
Absolutely to all that. Support for fascism was rampant on both sides of the Atlantic – FROM THE ELITES, who were running in fear for their fortunes at the thought of the Bolsheviks. Like I said above, this exacerbated the already existing anti-Semitism. Far from the fascist imaginings, there’s a reason Jewish-run banks like Goldman and Lehman were set up – the existing WASP banks generally refused to do business with Jews, like the charming chaps they were.
It was obviously not part of their beliefs. Hitler ended up calling Queen (Consort) Elizabeth the most dangerous woman in Europe.
Yes, Julian Fellowes also talked about it a lot on the Gosford Park DVD. He slipped it in with a Jewish character. He noted that many of his own relatives didn’t care and then were in for a shock when the war ended and the full scope of Nazism was revealed.
notasugarhere, British opposition to Hitler during WWII was of course essential, and the Queen Mother’s refusal to leave London did have enormous symbolic importance. They changed their minds about Hitler’s regime, and that’s a good thing. But it doesn’t erase the need to look at how elite indifference to Jewish rights combined with their fear about Bolshevism and thus enabled political leaders across Europe and the Americas to look the other way as the vice tightened.
Are you saying the royals are solely responsible for all of high society’s attitudes at the time? That seems to be the direction you’re headed.
Where did I say that?! I’m saying they shared values with a social set and political world! The very opposite of making the royal family responsible!
What I am pointing out is that theirs was a world where Hitler could be admired, or mocked. But few and far between were the brave individuals who saw his evil for what it really was.
Many atrocities have been supported for decades, some much more recently than World War II, in support of what was anti-communist.
Exactly. McCarthyism springs to mind, as an exercise in non-violent anti-Communist hysteria.
Yep. American foreign policy was directed by that very thing for decades. And it went so well, right?
McCarthyism, the support of the Contras in Nicaragua, Reagan’s backing of Pol Pot in UN votes, Pinochet in Cuba, the Duvaliers in Haiti and on and on and on. All a maniac had to do was claim to be anti-communist and the US would throw dollars and give support in the UN.
You left out Franco in Spain and Trujillo in the Dominican Republic. (Actually Pinochet was Chilean, not Cuban. I think you meant Fulgencio Batista.)
Why was everyone so afraid of communism in the 30s? Nefore it became totalitarism, it was the best regime available.
Franca – the people that were running the show were afraid of communism. And for very good reason: if there had been a Bolshevik uprising in any of those countries, they wouldn’t have been running the show any more! And the people running the show not only made the laws and conducted the diplomacy, they also owned all the businesses and ran all the newspapers. Look at some Daily Mail content from the 1930s to see the pro-fascist propaganda the general population were bombarded with!
Thanks, Carmen, Pinochet in Chile and Batista in Cuba. My fingers were typing fast and merged them. Far too many to cover all of them.
Don’t forget Vietnam.
Don’t forget the CIA-promoted tragedy in Guatemala in 1954, installing a ruthless military dictatorship, all because sensible land reform by the elected government just had to be “communist”. Follow the money in all these cases to see who benefitted.
Well said Sixer, who needs Google when we’ve got you! (so proud – sigh). What I’m finding really interesting about this is where they got the story from and the timing of it. Is this the first time in years the Brit ‘press’ (I had to say that advisedly since it’s the Sun, the Murdoch owning, bo**ocks spewing rag from the deepest depths of Hades) has had a dig at the actual Queen? I know we’ve had the Andrew ‘scandal’ recently and the ongoing delicious debacle that is W&K(these people are so embarrassing!) but this feels different, this is aimed at her directly. Ok they’ve dragged up something from decades ago that can be explained in context (as you did so brilliantly above if I may say so) but it’s still a swipe. Is the press starting to turn I ask myself.
Well, when he was Australian (!) ol’ Rupe was anti-monarchist, wasn’t he? But y’know, I doubt it’s that. He just wants to create outrage. In that sense, I find publication of this video quite obnoxious. I also think it’s quite misleading to make it into a pro-/anti- monarchy thing.
What it is, is an important example of how support for fascism was worryingly prevalent among all the powers-that-be during the early 1930s. It’s something we shouldn’t forget about when we’re judging who it is that our leaders are supporting and opposing today. And if that makes ER feel uncomfortable, tough cookies. You know?
If it was designed to create outrage it’s backfired with quite a lot of people taking the p*ss out of it (they’ve even got Sooty on Twitter doing a ‘salute’). But if we do get some more spiteful little stories like this then we’ll know that there is an agenda won’t we? Time will tell on this one, it’ll be interesting to watch what happens next.
Yes!
I always thought Sooty was a bit shady. 🙂
@ bluhare – Nah it’s that Sweep wot’s a Fifth Columnist if ever I saw one….
Are you sure it was Philip being interviewed? And not Philipp, Prince of Hessen?
Never mind, found the article 🙂
VERY good comment, explains it all well.
This entire thread is interesting. Thank you. That is all.
I can’t get upset with two very young children mimicking their parent(s), and how do we know the adults weren’t trying to be sarcastically mocking the salute? – or maybe they weren’t, but it’s not obvious so I can’t judge. In any case, Hitler didn’t even come to power until 1933 so I don’t have any trouble believing that most people would be ignorant of his true intentions and the depth of his depravity at that point.
I don’t blame her as she was a child and it’s possible that they were parodying Hitler. At that time, he still wasn’t taken too seriously outside of Germany. It is fascinating though. And yes, Philip has some major Nazi drama in his fam.
In 1933, the symbol did not have the same meaning it does now. I don’t believe that fully happened until 1937 and she’s 6/7. She doesn’t understand what she is doing.
Also, I just did the nazi salute last night while picking a bathroom at the movie theatre without a lock. Gotta hold that door!!
Yes it did. Hitler’s intention was published in the mid 1920s via Mein Kampf, so Hitler’s intentions were always apparent. To say they weren’t is incorrect and verging on political correctness. The symbol had the same meaning back then as it did during WWII and now. The Queen mother should have known better.
But did the actual salute originate in the book? No, the salute itself predates Hitler by a thousand years as its attributed to the ancient Romans.
The following painting shows the salute being performed by Roman soldiers. Its a painting called ‘Oath of the Horatii’ by Jacques-Louis David and was painted in 1784.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_the_Horatii#/media/File:Jacques-Louis_David,_Le_Serment_des_Horaces.jpg
He appropriated it and other symbols when he got into power and because of this people have forgotten where it came from. Hitler did not invent it. It was in fact adopted by the Italian Fascist party first before the Germans a few years later.
edit: what Jen2 said below, I seem to remember the swastika was originally a Buddhist symbol of Peace – that’s what you call misappropriation!
What Betti said.
Let’s also not forget that the swastika originates in India/china (Hinduism/Buddhism) and other cultures and was a symbol of luck – good luck. Don’t be shocked if you find shrines and temples on the continent with it.
Until the Nazis appropriated it in 1919, retained it’s original meaning, even in Europe where you see it roman, Viking, celtic antiquities in museums. It was used as the flag of the airforce in Finland.
It was considered such a good luck symbol, a popular, widespread one, that even a regiment of the American army wore it incorporated into uniform having taken it from various Native American tribes.
Edit: it was the 45th Infantry Division of the American Army.
The Nazis adopted it because it was such a popular and widespread symbol. Aa case of piggy backing onto something already popular and interpreted as good by the general population.
Only after Nazism revealed itself has the symbol been demonised. To extent that it is associated ONLY with Nazism.
BTW, Mein Kampf (sp) appropriates most of it’s philosophy from the popular German philosopher/poet Frederick Nietzche(sp).
Given Jewish history of persecution in Europe and seemingly complacent acquiesce of their population in all strata of society, it’s not hard to see why Hitler’s jewish policies and laws didn’t alarm anyone.
Shakespeare wrote a very unflattering portrayal of a jewish character, shylock, in his play ‘The Merchant of Venice’ which shows you the prevailing societal view of Jews 400yrs ago, nevermind 100yrs ago.
Whatever Hitler wrote about the jews, didn’t come from a vacuum, and it fell on centuries of ripe ground.
http://www.openculture.com/2014/08/george-orwell-reviews-mein-kampf-1940.html
LAK – that’s George Orwell’s review of Mein Kampf, written in 1940 and going into some detail about symbol appropriation and careful propaganda appeals to emotionalism. He was bang on!
What an excellent article, Sixer: George Orwell, one of our greatest thinkers, making concentrated commentary – thank you for the link, which is important to understand.
Wolfie – what’s really interesting to me about it in the context of this discussion is the way the early part goes into how he’s reviewing a hastily reissued edition (in 1940, after war had broken out) that had to backtrack on all the complimentary stuff that was in the blurb and the introduction to the earlier edition. Shows just how widespread and taken for granted support for fascism had been.
Sixer: an excellent read. 🙂
It never fails to amuse me when I read the revisionist articles, books etc AFTER the truth becomes apparent.
It’s a continued source of frustration to me when people can’t put the history in it’s proper context.
Putting it in it’s proper context doesn’t mean one agrees with it.
It’s completely revisionist to say that because Mein Kempf was written in 1925, Hitler’s final solution for the Jews was a known certainty.
And as your excellent article and comments point out, there was a lot of back tracking AFTER Nazism was known towards the end of the war.
Human history is ugly which some fail to appreciate and would rather revise it all armed with modern tools of information and thinking.
What seems obvious to us, isn’t obvious then.
It’s like those IS people. Not long ago, Cameron wanted to arm them against the Syrian regime. Thank goodness the MPs stood up to him on the grounds that we didn’t know who we were arming (and a side order of we can’t afford it) – really enjoying the Cameron backtrack.
LAK – exactly! There’s recently been released a Pentagon document from a few years back that says “the West and the Gulf States” would “support the establishment of a principality” (ie caliphate) by “militias opposed to the Syrian regime”.
Yes, guys, great idea. Now such a principality is here, you’re telling us that it’s coming to get us all and we’ll have to spend all our money bombing it out of existence.
It’s a direct parallel, isn’t it? And what I’ve been saying all through this thread: be careful about criticising the past while turning a blind eye to the present. Our leaders are as idiotic now as they were then. They never see the right enemy until it’s too late.
Queen Elizabeth II is the remaining living person in this video not to mention she’s still a reigning monarch so that is why she is the one getting the heat for this. I agree that she and Princess Margaret were just little children being egged on by the adults in the family. I can’t fault her majesty or her baby sister. I blame the adults. I feel bad for HM because she’s served her country with great dignity for almost 60 years. It’s saddening to me that this is being dredged up. But unfortunately that is part of her history. It is not to say this is who Queen Elizabeth is. She’s not her parents or her uncle.
“the Nazi “Heil Hitler”
It should be noted that from 1892 to 1942 in the United States, this gesture was known as the “Bellamy Salute” and the gesture children made while reciting the Pledge of Allegiance. Congress amended the Flag Code to change it to the hand over the heart as a result of the Nazis and Italian fascists co-opting the salute.
The Nazis destroyed and/or sullied quite a few things. The Swastika is an ancient religious symbol used for more than 3000 years. At the church I attended, which was built in the 20s, it is depicted in a tile on the floor with other religious symbols. I was shocked when I first saw it, but looked up the history and saw its true meaning–sun, power etc. It is a shame that the true meaning has been lost forever.
Yeah, it’s weird. It’s not uncommon to see it all over in India and in Japan in some places, but, obviously, with the original meaning, not the Nazi-appropriated one. It’s quite commonly used in architectural designs, like you said.
That’s fair enough but there can be no question of what it meant in this context. People in Europe giving that salute in 1933 would have been evoking, and known they were evoking, Hitler and his victories in Germany.
Edward VIII, because he was so unrepentant a supporter of Nazism, has taken the fall and been portrayed as the man who could have led the country to ruin. Contrasting his views with his brother’s was useful palace propaganda. This snippet of film should probably be an invitation to reconsider the question of how the entire Royal Family saw the Nazis up through the late 1930s. As the DoE was quoted saying, they were not the stalwart opponents of Nazism that they later became.
And because anti-Jewish laws were at the heart of Hitler’s National Socialism, they need not to be given a free pass. A great many people looked the other way as Hitler stripped people of their rights and freedoms, because “after all, it is only the Jews.”
This is perfect !!!!!!
A six year old would not have known.
I haven’t seen anyone blame the Queen and her sister for this. It is valuable to consider what the adult Yorks believed about Hitler. They were later fierce opponents — it’s reasonable to suppose that they were not so opposed in 1933 (few in their social and political circles were opposed at that time) and it’s a white-washing of history to assume that anti-Nazism was always the accepted response.
Edward VIII was a genuinely slimy and stupid person, but he served a perfect foil to his brother and heir. It doesn’t erase George VI’s wartime leadership to point out that his opinions might have been different at an earlier time.
(I think it’s useful for all of us to remember that what’s now considered a heinous set of symbols didn’t immediately arouse that revulsion. People everywhere were quite willing to see what Hitler could to to rebuild Germany, and if he was pursuing nasty policies towards the Jews, well, maybe that’s just how it should be, A LOT of people thought.)
Ellen, I absolutely agree. But I would also warn against scapegoating only the BRF when support for fascism was so very widespread across all the upper echelons of society in Britain, the United States and other European powers. The elites in all those countries were primarily concerned with guarding their own wealth and influence against the Bolshevik/communist movement. Yes, there was a lot of anti-Semitism and the fate of the Jews was a matter of indifference to these people, but their support for fascism wasn’t borne of a hatred of Jews; it was an existential fear of communism and the loss of their own status and power.
And the BRF had some very real fears about Bolshevism, since an entire royal family had been wiped out by it only a few years before. (Not that this excuses them; but it does explain them and that we are shocked by it now just exposes our own very filtered understanding of recent history).
I’ve been saying that the Royal Family were part of a social world that didn’t feel alarm about Hitler and, as LAK has pointed out, was steeped in centuries of anti-Semitism. My intention wasn’t to scapegoat the royals — bluntly, I don’t think they had much cultural importance after WWI, they were followers not leaders of elite ideas by then — but to say,
(1) no, there’s nothing especially shocking about this, because lots of people did it
And
(2) people who accepted Hitler shouldn’t be let off the hook on the grounds that they didn’t know what he intended, because he started systematically to strip people of their rights as soon as he took office in 1933.
I worry that we all assume evil is easily identified, and that Hitler was just good at keeping secrets. Hitler got away with what he did because lots of people at every level of society said, “oh, well, that’s not so bad.”
The Royal Family really had nothing to do with the creation of that attitude. At all. It’s just that, until the war broke out, they weren’t brave crusaders against it, either. Almost no one was.
In which case, Ellen, I think we are in accord! (Your second comment here wasn’t visible when I posted.)
If you will forgive the (ab)use of the phrase during what has been a difficult news week, for their sanity and clarity, I declare Sixer and Ellen2 co-winners of the internet.
Her mother should have known better. Apparently not. I guess it answers the mysterious question as to why no royal residences were bombed during the London Blitz.
Between 1925 [when Mein Kampf was published] and 1933, there was ample time for the royal family, i.e. the adults ,to know what Hitler stood for.
Even if they did not fully realize it at the time, why would the mother not remember this little film and at least hide it from ever being discovered?
And in case there is an argument that says the film just went into the archives and out of their hands, then I would ask if they have to hire people to use common sense on their behalf.
… Actually not true. Buckingham Palace was bombed during the war, and suffered substantial damage on at least one occasion, when the Queen’s Mother said of the incident ‘at least we can now look the east end in the face.’
In fact Buckingham Palace was hit seven times during the Blitz, despite like St Paul’s being one of the London buildings that the government wanted to protect from bombing because of the perceived loss of national morale if a major building were destroyed.
It’s all too easy with the benefit of hindsight to think motivations were different at that time. I’m fairly sure any number of families with young kids made jokes of nazi salutes in private. I’m fairly sure that I played second world war for example with my brother and friends when I was growning up in the 70’s. Doesn’t mean I’m anti semitic, just that I was a clueless kid.
No royal residences were bombed? Is Buckingham Palace not a royal residence? What about Clarence House? St James’s Palace also got damaged in the Blitz.
You are speaking with a very narrow view not to mention hindsight to re-write history.
If only History was this simple.
BTW, BP, SJP and CH were hit during the war.
Westminster Abbey was damaged as well. The stained glass windows in the Pict(??? can’t remember the name; it’s behind the abbey by the cloisters) were blown out in WWII and they’ve been replaced. Some of the panes have scenes from WWII in them, including bombers, a soldier and the queen mother. We were there on a day the abbey was closed and went back there. The guides were bored out of their minds because everyone thought the whole place was closed and we got a fabulous tour. With a bunch of stuff they usually don’t tell people!
It should be noted that the Queen’s sister, Margaret, was a well known racist. I wonder where she got it from? I also wonder where Harry was taught that it was ok to make racist comments and wear a Nazi uniform?
Exactly. These were not isolated incidents, but symptomatic of their upbringing.
Betcha Kate and/or her mother leaked it. Days after HM called her duchess dolittle. We will know soon enough if it was a Middleton leak if they are not in the royal box in Wimbledon next year.
LOL – but no, even they don’t have the balls to turn on TQ. It was obvs an inside job – The Sun admitted that there were several copies of the clip made and they had one and that the copies were made several years ago. So it’s someone who had access to the Royal Archives – either a former employee or a family member themselves. I’m not sure I’m buying the ‘inadvertently given to film makers’ as they would be tied to super tight confidentiality agreements.
On another note if they did obtain it illegally (and lets face it – its the Sun so chances are they did) I hope that Murdoch rag goes the same way the News of the World did. It’s worse than the Daily Mail.
Sounds like they have a leaky ship right now. Insiders leaking bits here and there.
That would be good gossip, but do you think she would have access? I assume things like this are in some sort of archive guarded by historians.
The Sun printed some stories of “Nazi-Edward” lately. Maybe someone watched old copies for good clips and found this. I wouldn´t be surprised if some unaware Palace-archive member gave these videos out years ago not noticing this little clip… We´re talking about just a few seconds. Maybe the “royal inspector” was old and bored or distracted from all the boring rich family stuff or he was pissed that The Queen pays so little 😉 It´s possible.
Never ever would all british papers show the video/pictures if this stuff was really stolen. They blurred Harry and Kate´s “nude covers”. They didn´t show the pictures like they did now. So there has to be some proof that this video wasn´t stolen.
I do feel a bit of a conspiracy theorist about it all. In the same week, Harry’s work in Africa is attacked, Philip is called out, footage of Elizabeth and the Queen Mum nazi saluting is released (William leaked it!), while William gets a pr bump. Not really though, but it can be fun to speculate.
The Middletons do not have that kind of juice to get at the Royal Archives, let alone pay off someone to get the films. BUT….if there is an off-chance a Middleton played a part in The Sun’s hit piece, that family is done. The Queen and Charles would shut down Carole, Pippa, & James; Kate falls in line or risk losing George and Charlotte, and William would not be able to do anything about it.
There is more to this – that sort of access to personal archives is not granted easily and without legal protection for all. This has to have come from either within the Household or the family – a disgruntled employee or disaffected family member. Only The Sun knows and for the moment that are not saying anything. The Household will find out who sold it on – the question is will we, especially if a family member is behind it.
Nothing much to add except…blue carnation LOVE!!!
See the pink and purple garment, peeking out between the blue carnation folds on the last photo (?).
actually it was in papers and news this morning in the uk that they were waving. a few “professional” lip readers watched it and confirmed that she was told to wave and they did.
I mean I wouldn’t be surprised, and would probably expect they had some connections to the nazis during the war but they’re not and probably never were stupid enough to film stuff like that. with the amount of things theyre believed to have covered up and keep secret, I highly doubt they’d slip up on something like this.
Aah, that’s interesting. When I watched the video, it looked to me like they could be doing a “royal wave” (those waves where they don’t really move their wrists). I thought I was the only one who thought about that because this Hitler salute angle has been determined as the only angle.
I have particular interest in the English Royal Family but most royals families were (are?) closed to fascism like the spanish and dutch one.
After reading some of the comments i feel i have to say that am sure that many of you have now elderly family members who probably made this gesture around the time the video was shot – does this make them Nazi sympathisers who should be vilified? Or just people poking fun at others?
As others up thread have said – the salute didn’t have the same meaning as it does now. Now it’s associated with genocide and hate – then it was seen as the Germans ‘borrowing’ from Roman military history (much in the way Napoleon did). Are you going to accuse the ancient Romans of being Nazis as well?
At that time the Nazi’s were seen as the party of the people – they promoted the working man, family life, communities, national interests, something that given the political climate of the time was an enticing alternative to the Bolsheviks and Communists. We are seeing this happening today with people flocking to the ISIS brand of Islam- its an ‘ideal’ that is sold to them as an alternative to the chaos that’s gripped the world today.
Am sure I will get flamed for what i wrote above but i do think there is a need to step back and look at the historical context of the time, something that those who have not studied history may not be aware of.
I’d like to offer you a match and give you the option of self-immolation.
Excellent points.
You are exactly,correct. They were pompous and laughed at.
This is long, but I’m a history buff and wanted to share….
Background:
-Queen Elizabeth’s father was George the sixth.
-Her grandfather was George the fifth.
-Her great grandmother was the Danish Princess Alexandra, who married the English air to the throne (Edward 7).
1.). Alexandra was born in a part of Denmark on the German border, that actually annexed part of itself into Germany and many spoke German…part of why she was picked to marry the future king of England, they both had German culture and language.
2.) Alexandra’s mother-in-law was Queen Victoria. One of Victoria’s daughters wed the Emperor of Germany. Alexandra was good friends with her sister-in-law. Alexandra’s kids (queen Elizabeth’s grandpa) spent summers with their German cousins every year and were close friends. The German cousin in line for the throne loved Queen Victoria, his grandma.
3.) Then things changed. Alexandra’s nephew became emperor of Germany and interested in war. Alexandra’s sister in law wrote her for help. The German emperor nephew was again invited to England, where he acted strangely. Alexandra grew to distrust and dislike her nephew, even though he was the son of her close British sister in law. She was a strong detractor of Germany as soon as WWI began, pushing the British Royal family and king to take a firm stand against their own nephew!
4.) once Grandma Queen Victoria died, the German Emperor had no reason to side with England and war soon followed.
5.) Alexandra’s favorite sister wed the Czar of Russia. This sister’s oldest son was Czar Nicholas, ruler of Russia. When communist revolution began happening, Alexandra begged her sister to flee to England. Alexandra even convinced her husband to send a ship from UK to Russia to give them an escape. Alexandra’s sister and one niece made that ship and escaped to exile in UK. The nephew Czar Nicholas and his family were murdered. So the British royal family cared a lot about Russia, and not just due to threats of similar unrest in UK.
6.) Google Czar Nicholas (Alexandra’s nephew) and then king George V (Alexandra’s son). They’re cousins, but look like twins.
My point I meant was that 1933 British royal family was embarrassed by their German nephew starting WWI and wanted to distance themselves from their family German ties. They also hated communism on a political and personal level, since the Russian Revolution had killed extended family cousins who were close friends with BRF. I’m sure embracing fascism and Hitler were convenient ways to do both of this. Obviously a big mistake.
I was scrolling down to find where I could mention this, yes. Maybe it was partially about being afraid for their money, but they also *lost family in a bloody massacre* due to communism. There’s “if this political philosophy takes hold in the world, I will stand to lose a great deal of money” and then there’s “they *are killing my family* and if this political philosophy succeeds, those people will be coming for me and they’re going to drag my children out of bed and murder them in cold blood”. Then it turned out the Nazis were, obiously, planning to do the same thing.
This is amazing, wow!
It’s a well-known fact that Nicholai II abdicated (so actually, when he and his family were murdered, he wasn’t a king anymore) on the condition that he would leave the country and go into exile to England. He wanted that very much. British government at first reluctantly agreed to give him and his family sanctuary in England, but the initial decision was overruled by George V and the offer was withdrawn. Apparently cousin Georgie did not care enough about his beloved cousin Nicky to welcome him in nis country after all.
Yep. They specifically denied the Romanovs aid, though they didn’t realize that they would be executed. While Bertie and Tsar Nicholas were close, Elizabeth and Alexandra were NOT. Once Victoria died, without her keeping the family together the ties weren’t exactly as binding.
Well, she and her family are still technically Germans ruling Britain – and have been since George I had ascended to the throne.
imaginryPHarry: Hello? Cressida 2? It is me! Just the jolly sodding boring second son, ha! Tell me, are you doing well, safely in France or your Spanish homeland, C2?
imaginaryCressida2: Oh! Sir! Is it really you? Oh! I faint! Oh, but, first to tell you, yes! I be sending thanks to you, Sir, ten millions time! I be free at last! Never, never again will I place even one foots inside royal palace! Never!
iPH: Well, er, I say, don’t get ahead of yourself, there! Who knows, really, there may be a new future of serving the people ,as the perks of royal life can make possible! Even though I feel sure we both can agree that royalty must in future be entirely self-supporting with profits from a posh line of sportswear, craft whiskey, pet-friendly hotels, youth-giving facial crèmes, dessert sauces, chips and game apps. However, until that time, I hope I shall be able to make my countrymen and countrywomen proud once I return to serve them in a clearly non-lazy way! I think at last, it can happen…I can now…actually, be in a place to make them proud!
iC2: ….but, oh sacred-smelling beautiful savior of me, what means this words?
iPH: Let’s just say, more than rhinos are being de-horned this week. Perhaps you you have seen the latest shocking royal blab from the vomitous old sunshine-out-the-ass news?
iC2: Oh I did, in lobby table of nice hotel where I hide now! Such pictures of the bad salute! Such shame! I weep for nice old Queen of you! Poor good lady! But, how could she have to know? She was just little child!
iPH: Ah, true, of course! Gran was just a quite smallish child who would certainly not know how really awfully appalling her gesture was. Like, for example a young brainless Prince, just larking about for a costume party with other stiff drunks, who might also have shot forth a grave Nazi-ish sort of stink-fountain of a mistake himself, thinking he was mocking the mad stiff old world-screwer Adolf, certainly nothing like these images of madness, but still ,not the thing. And thus, then he grows up with guilt in his heart, to strive to be the opposite of a great big wanker, much smarter and wiser, and to work double-hard to make his amends.
iC2: But you say this word “smarter” and “wiser” and from this I know, can not be the Duke Willy? or the Pops Chuck? What means you?
iPH: No, not the Duke Willy, darling girl! I just mean that these dreadful images are one hopes no harm to Gran, who was just a small sprog at the time. And her mother, well, she was a just always famous gin monster, wasn’t she, always gargling the stuff, you know, just jolly fun and loop the loop at times, probably thought she was learning a Maypole dance with Fred Astair! Fun old gal in the end, harmless, but her people were total drizzlers anyway, you know. So, you see, the REAL message of these dreadfully squidgjlious images to our British people is this —- “just LOOK at what a dreadful bugger of a sod’s warted ass King an oldest son and heir MIGHT be! Are you sure you trust the oldest son? Look at THIS poxy fiend right here for example, eh?!!
iC2: Oh! I see this! But did you to arrange this, Sir? Surely I thinks, no?
iPH; No. As it happens, I just learned about it yesterday. It was my Aunt Anne and Sophie who thought of it, and showed the images to Willy, and as expected, he, Mrs Mopeds-to-the-top and Camel-lip and poor old Pops did the green dodgy under the sweater vest grab-and-go, so we can guess one of them then sent the pictures to the tabs to discredit Gran, all to grab the crown and the jewel-boxes a bit early from her! Of course, Aunt Anne and Sophie knew it would backfire from the start, clever things! Aunt Anne always says. the biggest tactical error in kingdom war, is to forget the wrath and beady knowing of the oldest not-in-line daughter!
iC2: But what does this mean?
iPH: Well, the photos show a a horrid fart-brained firstborn on a lawn with two little children and a daft brunette! Remind you of anyone? What could be a nicer way to suggest that the abdication of a very similar damp useless consuming hambone of a royal eldest rump of a son has worked quite well before when needed? Because…well, suppose that one happened to find out that someone plans to sell the UK to Dubai for twenty million dollars and a pair of beach condo as soon as they and their mother-in-law inherit the throne, and so, others in the Firm wanted to stop it for history’s sake and for the good of the people. But one can’t quite just tell the people or even Number 10 about it, can one? Panic-maker, madness in Piccadilly, spilled beverages, trials on tv, rents shoot up, more of a mare’s nest to upset Gran! So, one would have to find another way to alert the kingdom of the potential pitfalls of firstborns, and thus, save it!!
iC2: Oh my, poor god of gingerness! To bear such burdens of knowing things!
iPH So marvelous old Aunt Anne thought of this and Sophie flipped the press apes, and they will show Gran today — Sophie is a PR whiz you know — and Gran will encourage that honking Willy to jump ship at the end of her sword, or he loses his allowance. Oh, he’ll get the beach condo and Kitty will get enough to doze away on forever, and they can go be happy, eh? Then I step in, in due time, and start some ripping good works for people in the name of the crown! I have so many ideas to be of use! I am planning now! May I add that I hope…..this will please…you!
iC2: Oh, is good thing! But, rosy-cheeked thunder-lord of goodness, Sir, why should I, just a humble Spanish literature student, no longer a kidnapped nanny servant, be who you please with this most of all?
iPH; Because…..my Cressie 2….. as I wrestled the rhinos to the ground here to save them from poachers, I could only think of Miss Charlize Theron, and then, suddenly, you! Yes, you being so brave back home with baby Gary George and that giant pudding-noggined cashmere scab, Willy! And I think you are the very bravest, truest, most hardworking girl in a small skirt I know and…. and…I feel……my future and yours, if I may be so lucky, may I dare to say, our futures, with you as my loyal helpmate, and lithe soul dancer, I can do anything, and that together, Cressie 2, you and I, we can or could, we shall be able to – somehow, even though you are just a formerly kidnapped nanny with no passport, we must be able to find a way to —
iC2: Oh, Sir, before to say one more word of charming story, my name, okay it is not Cressie 2. It is…..Elizabetta Maria Victoria Charlotta Caterina Anna Henrietta Grace, and I was raised in humble secretness in a village,and I am a licensed nanny yes, but also I am a conservationist of the wildlife tigers, and also medical doctor and doctor of literature with all my degrees at age 17. Oh, I forget to say, I am also human rights barrister too, but this is just job for fun, is so easy, mostly just wearing many outfits and grin at camera like crazy fool, so I do not like it so much. But all this is being nothing! For I have found now a good true man, I think, who like and care for the whole world of peoples! A ginger man, who is not lazy, or entirely stupid, he can learn, I know it in heart of me! And even though you be having the curse of the British crown, and many packs of Hobnobs in suitcase, I like you anyways, as you are being! I see you are good man when you help the warriors! And no to being with the worry, yes, I will to be helping you, and we do find way to being to yes! Because…okay, is really nothing, so small, but, I am also to being secret daughter of……the King of Sweden, and the lovely Princess Caroline of Monaco. I am to being poor and common all my life, yes, I never to be seeing these parents, but I have Swedish signet ring in my pocket of coat back in village, we use ring to catch the fishes in river for our foods. So, it can to be perhaps okay, Sir? And we turn Kitty’s Kensington closet into nice big hospital for very needy warrior family people too, and I be doctor there?
iPH: Is it possible? Smart, hardworking, kind, big ideas, great long legs and now, great fun in-laws too, who throw good parties? I say, I am gobsmacked with love! I have hit the royal jackpot, Elizabetta Maria Victoria Charlotta Caterina Anna Henrietta Grace! Say you will be mine! You can help us save the kingdom! We have work to do!
iC2: We to see! But please, firstings, just to call me Buffy. In my village, means, “the royal vampires slayer.”
Awesome, Liberty! Who knew this was a Middleton plot to make Carole queen? 😀
So do Harry and Cressida2 get married? 😉
bluhare, “We to see!” 😉
I hope you have all these saved, Liberty. I want to buy the book.
I would personally like to honor you for the incredible use of the word “squidgilious”. Brilliantly obscure even if you did misspell it. 😉
Liberty, I have no idea what it is you’re on – but can I have some? This is brilliant, one day you will make me wet myself… 🙂
NO!! We do not want it diluted! I want to see what happens to James Middashian when he rolls out his cough syrup line! And whether Harry and Cressida2 get married! If you make her give you some, she’ll lose the plot line!
Holy crap, I used a lot of exclamation marks there. I must be pretty invested in the plot. 🙂
Gin monster probably thought she was learning a Maypole dance with Fred Astaire — HILARIOUS!
And again! Dear Americans, just because somebody is german or grew up in Germany, or his or her relatives are merrried to germans and just because your background is german that does not make you a nazi does it? Yes the english royal family comes from Germany, just as sooooo many americans do. Are those people all nazis? I am so tired of people making equal sign between germans and nazis.
They’re clearly making the salute though, in 1933. To pretend otherwise is silly. They were not nazis, I don’t think anyone is saying that, except for the well-documented case with Edward.
A huge percentage of Americans are German and we fought against them inWWII. I think most people can differentiate between lineage and actively participating in making the nazi salute. My grandpa was 100% German and volunteered for the marines in WWII to fight against an ideology, not a bloodline. Most people get it.
The BRF had close ties with Germany, but ultimately chose to stand against those ties and side with an ideological position against fascism. I think this video just showcases the times in which it was made, they didn’t know what was coming.
I see the same comments (and more so) on the DM written by UK readers. It’s not just Americans or other nationalities, for that matter. Most Americans don’t know and don’t care that the family changed it’s name or who TQ’s great- and grandparents were.
it’s great to see a lot of people realizing that the media is just trying to make something out of nothing with this footage. This publishing would be a hit mostly with the uneducated that don’t even know much on history, and to be honest, what kid at 6 knows anything about politics. Just because she was the future Queen she was supposed to know? no. all kids are raised and influenced by adults just like everybody else. And a lot of people were on board the movement. Nobody knew what Hitler was really doing half the time. He was amazing at motivating people through his speeches and they were essentially brainwashed by him but this movement was all fresh and amazing until they caught on to what he was doing behind closed doors. Those camps weren’t out in the open and pretty sure Britain was against Germany during war time. Had they been real Nazi supporters, they would’ve been allies.
There were thousands of orphans and Jews that fled to Britain during the war. Not a huge fan of the Royals or any government to be honest, but for this stupid newspaper to twist things around like that it’s quite ridiculous and unfortunate.
I agree 100%
I still haven’t forgotten the attempt at making a thing out of an elderly German spectator at the 2012 Olympics supposedly doing the Nazi salute……….and then it turned out he was one of the hostage negotiators during the Munich Olympics, and had even offered to give himself up to the kidnappers, in place of the Israeli athletes they took.
1. Nobody demands a 6-year-old should stand trial.
2. The older Royals present and the Royal family as a whole should be investigated for their pro-Nazi pro-racism attitude but that has never happened.
3. The educated readers of such news would support 1. and 2.
4. There is enough text material to understand that most people KNEW that the Nazis were bad. Under the contracts of Versailles and just coming out of a world economic crisis and not having employment let alone food … people would do a lot to get that stuff.
5. In 1933 there were approximately 60 million people living in Germany. The Nazis killed at least 6 million Jews in KZs and in other ways. That means that at least 10% of the whole German population of the time (the Jews) were killed. Now can anybody seriously imagine to not notice when one in ten people vanish or are transported off and never seen again? Is there anybody who would seriously claim that he or she wouldn’t notice if one in ten of their friends and acquaintances vanished? Seriously?
After the defeat of Nazi Germany most Germans claimed they hadn’t known anything. Well, they hadn’t wanted to know.
I am German and I am quite ashamed of that as were others. Btw. some of those who were ashamed did a little revolte in 1968. (The Hippies).
@ teacakes
Display of Nazi symbols is a crime in Germany and this law was made to acknowledge how utterly bad the Nazis were. They were so bad that even displaying their symbols is a crime even nowadays. History books and such are exempt, though.
If it was a salute, then it was done in the context of what was known in 1933.
But for me, it could be anything, like George 6th asked who wants ice cream? Because if Edward 7th was pro-Nazi, then why is his salute so wonky? He raises his arm up high near 90 degrees like a schoolboy does when he wants to ask a question instead of at the usual 45 degree like the Queen Mum and QE2 did.
Anyhoo,
Please keep in mind the Queen is half Scottish and Prince Philip is half Danish so, not entirely German. And William isn’t very German at all since Diana was as English as you can be,
hard to imagine the Queen Mum having any love of Germans, considering she lost a brother in WWI and ended up helping care for wounded soldiers in her own home.
Thanks to all who posted–very interesting!!!
Rather than rehash what’s been posted above, I thought I’d present my family’s experience in Germany and their interactions with the Brits during that time period.
Both of my parents were born in Germany. My maternal grandparents were from Bavaria which is where Hitler first came to power. In 1932, my GP’s decided that the anti-Semitism in Bavaria was untenable and decided to move to Israel. My GF had been active in Jewish groups–my GPs met at the Jewish Hiking Club of Munich. While my GPS were in Israel house hunting, the forerunner of the SS came to the house to arrest my GF. So, my GF stayed in Israel and my GM returned to Germany to pack everything up and move. In other words, things were starting to be uncomfortable for Jews.
My GF was not arrested by the Germans but he WAS arrested by the Brits. He was a physician and was arrested for treating members of the Haganah and not reporting it to the Brits. During that same time period my uncle fought in the Jewish Brigade of the British Army. (A brigade of soldiers from what was then Palestine)
My GPs were able to help others escape to Israel. However, I know of at least one cousin who was taken to London via the Kindertransport and grew up there.
My paternal GF was not as savy. My father is a concentration camp survivor. More specifically, he was liberated from Bergen Belsen by the British Army. He tells a detailed story of being helped out of the front gates by 2 medics from Scotland.
Things were bad enough for one set of grandparents to decide to leave. My other set just waited a little bit too long
Thank you for sharing your amazing story.
How can they tell it’s a Nazi salute? It looks like goofing around with various types of waves.
I think it’s worth mentioning that the official statements have not tried to deny that they were playing at a Nazi salute. The official statements accept that this is just what it appears to be: an evocation, however much in play, of the political salute of the newly elected (in 1933) leader of Germany.
I stand by my claim that this only looks shocking to us now, in a world where “Hitler” is just about the worst word anyone can utter. But back in 1933, Hitler was just another world leader, and not as scary as Stalin to many/most. Yes, people might have thought he was uncouth or a buffoon, or they might have thought he had great ideas for inspiring the common person and rebuilding his nation. Vanishingly few of them were bothered by his anti-Semitism, although more were worried about resurgent nationalism.
It’s just not tenable to argue that the (adult) Yorks or the Prince of Wales didn’t know what Hitler was about. These are some of the laws passed in 1933, as soon as Hitler came to power, as described at the American Holocaust Museum website:
“The Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service of April 7, 1933 … excluded Jews and the “politically unreliable” from civil service.
In April 1933, German law restricted the number of Jewish students at German schools and universities. In the same month, legislation sharply curtailed “Jewish activity” in the medical and legal professions. Subsequent decrees restricted reimbursement of Jewish doctors from public (state) health insurance funds. The city of Berlin forbade Jewish lawyers and notaries to work on legal matters, the mayor of Munich forbade Jewish doctors from treating non-Jewish patients, and the Bavarian interior ministry denied admission of Jewish students to medical school.
At the national level, the Nazi government revoked the licenses of Jewish tax consultants, imposed a 1.5 percent quota on the admission of “non-Aryans” to public schools and universities, fired Jewish civilian workers from the army, and in early 1934, forbade Jewish actors to perform on the stage or screen. Local governments also issued regulations that affected other spheres of Jewish life: in Saxony, Jews could no longer slaughter animals according to ritual purity requirements, effectively preventing them from obeying Jewish dietary laws.”
Genocide rarely happens as a great and sudden event. Much or most of the world looked the other way as Hitler slowly, systematically dehumanized an entire ethno-religious group. They thought it was not a very big deal that people lost their jobs and their places in school, just because they were Jews.
We warn against “another Hitler” and forget that the world didn’t even recognize the actual Hitler for what he was until it was too late.
As has been written already here, the question this video poses for us really should be, what dehumanizing laws and ideas do we casually accept today, what political ideas do we laughingly dismiss, not standing up and stopping the dehumanizing acts that slowly, inexorably strip people of their rights, their liberties, and their lives? What joking games are we playing with our children today that will horrify their grandchildren 80 years from now? Because that’s the context for this video.
“What joking games are we playing with our children today that will horrify their grandchildren 80 years from now? Because that’s the context for this video.”
Really? Everything in moderation, I say. God forbid instead of enjoying being goofy and silly with my family, I try clairvoyance and guessing what will be acceptable in 80 years from now! I don’t know, neither do you and don’t tell me it’s very clear based on today’s moral and political frame because, by the same token, in 1933 it was very widely acceptable to salute people like that, in fact it was fun.
In fairness to Prince Philip, three of his sisters married Nazis… but his mother, Princess Alice, saved three Jewish people from the Nazis by sheltering them under her roof in Greece until liberation – she was even questioned by the Gestapo, and didn’t bend. She is remembered in Israel’s Yad Vashem as one of “the Righteous Amongst The Nations” as a result. http://www.yadvashem.org/yv/en/righteous/stories/princess_alice.asp
No excuse for Edward VIII, though. He was just a toad.
Let’s not make a mountain out of a molehill–ive seen pictures of children giving the peace sign, I’ve also seen fotos of children giving the finger, they might not have even realized what they were doing. Speaking of children, as the hatred was ramping up toward war in the early ’40s..President Roosevelt was asked to accept a shipload of jewish refugee children; he refused. However, England accepted them, and this bit of history is incorporated into the story: The Lion, The witch and the wardrobe..
There are reports that a researcher was given access to the archives for a documentary and the researcher made copies of the clip that they then sold to The Sun for a 4 figure sum. Whether that clip may have been used in an exhibition at the palace is irrelevant – the fact that the researcher copied the clip and then sold it on without permission of the copyright holder is theft, regardless of how long they waited. Permission would never have been given for the researcher to keep that clip. The Sun may have obtained it legally but the researcher didn’t.
And why release it? What is the aim they hope to achieve other than make money?
Given that there is now a Channel 4 documentary coming out about Phillips sisters – conspiracy or what. Channel 4 you are just as bad as The Sun – i wouldn’t be surprised if they leaked it to generate publicity for their ‘programme’. Disgraceful.
Nobody cares what a 4-year-old or a 6-year-old does. They often do what either their parents tell them or what a lack of maturity tells them. Not important.
But the then Duchess-of-York later Queen doing the Nazi salute is an absolute disgrace and should be remembered whenever she is mentioned. There is no excuse for that.
Also one should explore in how far racist and fascist ideas are still growing in the Royal Family. Prince Harry called an army comrade “paki” which seems to be as bad as the n-word.
And if you have a look at the rather poor pay of researchers nowadays then I salute everybody who makes some money on the side with such interesting stories.
It is telling that the Queen does not assure the public that she will investigate the Nazi connections of her family. That would be the proper thing to do.
Betti: I don’t quite understand why making the documentary or releasing this clip is considered disgraceful. Do you believe that the public should not be aware of the nuances of one of the costliest institutions that it supports?
I guess that I personally think that the more information people have about these sorts of things, the better it is. You seem to be advocating huge restrictions on what people should be aware of. And you said above that you studied history – are you advocating historic revisionism at a stretch?
Kaiser, your overall comment about the royal family whitewashing their family history is why I started posting on these blogs.
Today, the royal propaganda machine is very much at play. It fashions and molds what we think of them. The more important members are positively showcased at every turn whilst the ones deemed less important are thrown to the wolves.
For that reason, I am forever anti-the ones that use the PR whitewashing to enhance their images, whatever that image may be and I will always speak up for the ones thrown to the media wolves to burnish the halo of the previous ones. Not that they need my 2pc, but the point remains.
David is an excellent example of the propaganda at play. Until he abdicated, he was the golden prince who could do no wrong. After the abdication, the reverse happened to him. He was both negatively propaganda-ed, and his negative qualities not hidden as they came to light.
The QM is a woman who was very shrewd and active political wife behind the scenes whilst appearing as a benign sugar plum fairy in public. The later image sticking to posterity.
HM has become beloved by doing absolutely nothing whilst the propaganda machine has painted her as a loving grandmother with echos of her own mother’s sugar plum. Her umbrella extends to Philip.
In many ways I welcome charles and those younger being exposed publicly because it gives a truer picture of who they are and what they represent.
Hear, hear, LAK. Here in Britland, our constitutional monarchy is a public institution. It should be open to scrutiny and it shouldn’t be spinning us. It belongs to us; we don’t belong to it.
ETA: On a lighter note: does anyone ever get a sudden feeling that a common word sounds ridiculous when you say it or looks ridiculous when you see it written down? I just got that feeling about “belong” and I’m now repeating it over and over in my head, only for it to sound more and more silly. Is this an early sign of madness or does it happen to other people too?!
I wouldn’t say that she has done absolutely nothing as thats not true – what she has done is not rock the boat or changed anything. She has continued with the image that her grandfather started – as a family who represent the best of British values (duty, morals and the stiff upper lip). In this modern time that image or perception is not really relevant – it has in a way become stuck in the past. While TQ understands change and the need to move with the times – she’s the nations Grandmother in a time when they want someone younger they can relate to – there is no one that fits the bill at the moment, well maybe Harry but certainly not Chuck or Willy&Waity.
Charles’s reign will be interesting as I think he will break the mould or at the very least put cracks in it. The reign that will shatter the illusion will be Willy’s -whether for better or worse is yet to be seen but i bet on the latter – his terrible character is too obvious.
Re: David’s image. His image only started going bad when the war ended. He was still pretty much loved by the people after the abdication – it was only when the war ended that people saw him for what he was. A lazy Nazi sympathising playboy who showed great disrespect to those who fought in the war by siding with the Nazis. I would go as far as to say he was viewed by some returning soldiers as a traitor because of it. He was never going to be allowed to return to live in the UK – he shot himself in the foot several times. The people were relieved he abdicated.
@ Betti
There is both the legal and moral concept of being guilty by not doing what one is obliged to do. And in that sense Queen Elisabeth is VERY guilty. Some British politicians did things that killed people and that left people absolutely devastated and devoid of hope. (for example: Thatcher / destruction of the northern industries and falklands war, Blair / iraq war, Cameron / social cuts led to suicides). And to not do anything as a Queen does certainly mean to be guilty by neglecting one’s duties to serve one’s subjects.
Though the Queen does support many charities that doesn’t mean she does her job sufficiently. There is such a thing as a priority of duties. And stopping certain political policies would have ranked higher than supporting another charity decorating flower pots. The latter merely requires the Queen to roll out of bed in the morning. But stopping political policies or forcing parliament and courts to reconsider these policies would have been a more important duty. And she failed on those.
@Pondering – TQ is a constitutional Monarch – she maybe the head of state but she doesn’t have any political power and she is not allowed to interfere in how the gov runs the country. She basically does what the gov tells her to. If they want a law passed and it is backed by parliament she has to sign it into law even if she doesn’t agree with it.
Blinkin’ ‘eck, Pondering thoughts! You’re advocating an absolutist monarchy!
Whatever the rights and wrongs of ER, whatever the rights and wrongs of things our government has done (and I sympathise with your examples), I don’t think we want to go back to the days when a member of the royal family could stop legislation put forward by a democratically elected government, thankyouverymuch!
Betti – not rocking the boat means the same as doing nothing. Doing something rocks the boat.
HM continuing her grandfather’s policies is my point. She hasn’t changed anything argo she’s done nothing. And sometimes, that thoughtless adherence to her grandfather’s time has come back to bite her eg the tax question or Diana’s funeral.
The irony is that her grandfather was an active monarch for his time. He presided over a period of sweeping change and challenge and adapted accordingly.
The reason HM looks old fashioned is precisely because she’s still stuck in her grandfather’s time.
I am looking forward to Charles’s monarchy because he will shake things up.
Apart from the constitutional aspect of the monarchy, there is nothing that says every monarchy has to be the same and or follow the rules laid down by the previous monarch. HM has fetishised her rule of nothing, pinned it to the banner of her grandfather and people assume that every monarch needs to be the same.
I quite agree with you about William’s rule. Not because I can predict the future, but because he hasn’t shown any indication otherwise.
It’s really amazing that the closest previous monarch he resembles is David. Edward 7, the forever party prince, had already shown his mettle even if Victoria barred him from working.
@ Betti
Nope, I don’t advocate an absolutist monarchy and you should be both fair and educated enough to not put such statements into my statements. Power-wise there are several concepts between absolutist monarchies and merely representational heads of state/queens.
The spanish monarchy is largely representational only but the former spanish king (Juan, father of the current king) once saved his country from the military who attempted to overthrow the government.
The German head of state is the president and he is mostly a representational figure head but he can refuse to sign laws. (Just don’t expect that of the current one. In fact one shouldn’t even expect him to understand that.)
Even the British Queen could have done a lot more to serve her people as I indicated above with my short notes: Thatcher / industries in the north and falkland war … .
Betti, the Queen has the right to refuse to sign a law. Else there would be no point of her signing it let alone reading it. Except it is not called a “veto” but there are informal ways how this is done. And that is her job: to limit the governments powers as is described.
And she has done pretty much nothing and that is not something I would pay 30+ mio Pounds for let alone that I would let her off the hook morally. Yes, in my opinion she has failed her job and her duties by doing nothing. I would attribute this partly to her very deficitary education. Yep, she may be well read but that ain’t enough for a monarch. One of her latest statements include her refusal to excuse to anybody because only domestics would ever say sorry. Now this indicates that she very much has a concept in her head that she were above the law and above the government. In other words: she probably thinks she were an absolutist monarch. So she doesn’t get the difference between an absolutist monarchy and a constitutional monarchy let alone that she could tell th difference between Hobbes who would agree with her and Locke who would not. And yes, that is bloody ridiculous that Great Britain is ruled by a monarch whose education doesn’t even cover the very basics of the last 5 centuries of political philosophy. Because else she wouldn’t have made her comment : “only domestics excuse”.
The British Queen: surely stuck in the middle ages and sadly lacking education.
Aristocrats did bond well with the Nazi’s racist ideas: e.g. there are better people and the aristos usually believed that they were the better ones.
What I am more astonished about is that the Aristocrats aren’t seen as racists nowadays although most of them secretly believe that they are the better people as the term “aristocrat” does more or less imply one were better than the great unwashed masses. But in an hereditary aristocracy is being “better by birth” and this simply is a racist concept.