As we discussed on Sunday, The Sun got their hands on some archival footage from Queen Elizabeth II’s childhood. The footage is pretty disturbing – it shows then-Princess Elizabeth at age 7 (-ish?) with her sister, her mother and her uncle Edward all making the “Heil Hitler” salute. My take is that it looks like Edward was teaching the salute to his nieces and sister-in-law while his brother, George, possibly filmed it. As I said yesterday, the Queen was just a child. She didn’t know what she was doing and no one should “blame” her for anything. But… questions remain as to how The Sun got their hands on this archival footage that – let’s face it – should have remained in the vault, if not been destroyed entirely. The Daily Mirror says the Palace might be to blame – as in, the Palace released a bunch of old footage to some documentary filmmakers last year and the footage might have been in that package.
Controversial home movie footage of the Queen making a Nazi salute may have been inadvertently released by palace officials to documentary makers last year, it has been reported. It is thought the footage formed part of a Royal exhibition called Royal Childhood, which featured a series of films made public for the first time.
Although the exhibition did not feature the 17 second clip of the Queen’s apparent Nazi salute, footage of Princess Elizabeth and her sister Margaret talking seconds after the incident did feature in the exhibition at Buckingham Palace. The exhibition generated a lot of interest from documentary makers keen to have the footage and it is believed the unedited version may have been accidentally passed on to interested film makers then found its way to The Sun.
The claims pour doubt on speculation a palace insider released the footage after stealing it from Royal archives. Last night Royal biographer Hugo Vickers, told the Daily Telegraph: “I do not believe this was stolen from the archives. What may have happened is the footage was inadvertently left in or the person releasing it did not see the sensational possibility of it.”
Dickie Arbiter, the Queen’s former press secretary, added: “I would like to think it was released inadvertently as a bit of harmless 1933 footage without anybody really knowing what was on it.”
But the Royal Family is steeling itself for more embarrassment from leaked home movies and documents. One well-placed observer described the royal archives in Windsor Castle’s Round Tower as “a very sensitive area”.
The source said: “Inevitably going back over, say, 150 years there are things they are keen not to put in the public domain. You would imagine for every royal generation there has to be some degree of embarrassment. There are all manners of things that can cause embarrassment 100 years later if taken out of context.”
While there may not be anything damaging relating to the Queen, it is thought there could be more material on Nazi sympathiser Edward VIII and even secrets about Princess Margaret.
Ah, yes, Princess Margaret. Margaret was always a mess. I’ve heard stories – mostly terrible tabloid reports – that Margaret was a racist and an anti-Semite as well. No one ever talks about that stuff at this point because Margaret passed away in 2002. But she was a boozy, unpleasant elitist on her best day, you know? If someone wanted to dig through the Margaret archives, I’m sure it would be quite embarrassing. As for the Queen… if the worst thing she’s ever done in her life is some kind of coached Nazi salute when she was a kid, then she’s in pretty good shape.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
You mean Charles “accidentally” released the video. Wonder if she’ll finally step down ?
LOL, ouch!
Seriously though there is no reason for her to do so. She was a small child and anyone who puts blame on her for this is an idiot.
If Charles did it, her last act as Queen might be ordering his execution.
Honestly, I would not be surprised. All these people have a record of selling each other out.
You are joking I’m guessing but tarnishing QE 2’s reputation only hurts Charles more. She has the respect of even the anti-monarchists so if she were to abdicate it would only give Republicans ammo.
It would be very funny (not really) if Charles released this footage, BUT there are several factors that rule him out….
1. Tarnishing HM, tarnishes him. And he isn’t beloved to begin with.
2. He adore the QM, no way in hell would he allow anything except glowing positive press to keep her sugar plum fairy and the nation’s beloved image.
I don’t see how it helps Charles to release a video that makes his mother look bad. If anything people would assume whatever prejudice she has was passed on to him and from him to his children and that’s why we saw Harry in a Nazi costume. It will turn the public against him and his entire family. I don’t think he is suicidal, an idiot or that he hates his mother just because he is hated for cheating on Diana. LOL. The Queen is the most respected member of the royal family, if she goes down they all go down. She has always taken her role seriously and would never, ever, ever turn her back on her responsibilities by stepping down. Very strong and courageous woman.
I do find it interesting from Kaiser’s breakdown of their family history that with all the anti-immigrant sentiments in Europe, the most famous British family is German. I wonder if the “bad” immigrants are the non-European ones?
Actually the ‘bad immigrants’ in UK tend to be the East Europeans….you should hear the rhetoric against polish people.
Where non white immigrants aare concerned, it’s the non Christians that are the problem. Not in the american way of being christian since we mostly keep religion private, but in an ‘they are muslims’ way which covers any number of grumbles.
Yes. The IMMIGRATION we are afraid of is Eastern European. There was even a recent TV show called THE ROMANIANS ARE COMING (deary me).
The MINORITIES we don’t like are Asian Muslims – these aren’t immigrants; most families have been here for 3/4 generations.
That “we” obviously doesn’t include LAK, or me, or any of the nice Brits!
It’s basically called ‘scapegoating’ blaming the ‘other’ for all the perceived ills of the country whilst willfully ignoring the real culprits. Recently it’s been let’s all have a go at Eastern Europeans and the entire Muslim community and ignore the elite, privileged Bankers who bought us to our knees. So we’ll ignore the small and inconvenient fact that immigrants actually contribute far more to the economy than they take out and are helping rebuild it, nothing must be allowed to interfere with the propaganda that they only come to the UK for the Benefit system. This has been done before of course, in fact we have even been discussing it on this site. A national leader encouraging the scapegoating of an already distrusted minority ethnic population and blaming them for all the economic ills of the nation – and we all know what that eventually led to.
Someone once said the definition of insanity is repeating the same action whilst expecting a different outcome. As we seem to keep doing precisely that I’ve come to the conclusion most human being are basically barking mad and unfortunately they tend to be the ones in charge.
Thanks Sixer and LAK for the info on the general British public’s feelings regarding the various immigrant groups. I always learn so much about previous and current history from you and other British ladies on Celebitchy 😀
frisbeejada woad alert!
(Kiss kiss, dearest).
frisbeejada: So true. It’s eerily reminiscent of pre-WW2 and the prevailing attitudes then against the Jews. Very disturbing.
@ Sixer – yeah I know, I do get riled over the sheer unfairness of it all and offended by the cynical misinformation perpetrated by the more disreputable tabloids. It’s just comforting to know there are people like you out there who get as riled as I do…
For those who want an eye-opening plate of tidbits about the royals, the abdication and the Nazis, read chapters 9-11 in D.V., the autobiography of Diana Vreeland from the 80s. I think you can still get it online as used. She was friends with them, and various insiders including the man who spirited Mrs Smpson out of the UK as the abdication went down. People hVe suggested her memories were on the creative for some things, but two people I worked with who knew her said she was flamboyant but pretty precise. Anyway worth a read.
I half agree but I strongly feel that the fear that many Brits have over immigrants is mostly lead by the media. All nations have their immigrant worries, all have media to tell them who to be afraid of and all have a percentage of the population who will believe what they read without questioning it at all. This isn’t unique to us in the UK.
This is a bit of an oversimplification, especially since the British public has (collectively) some of the most repulsive responses to those immigrants who drowned trying to cross over into Europe. All immigrants are bad immigrants in the eyes of the British collective. Some are just more annoying than others.
pinkish: well, yes, but everything in a comment section like this is an oversimplification. But what is important for non-Brits to understand about British attitudes to immigration is that is overwhelmingly tied in with its attitudes towards the EU. When people oppose immigration, in large part what they are doing is opposing the free movement of people within the EU (often as a proxy for opposing membership of the EU). Hence the concentration on Eastern Europeans.
That’s the BIG debate here.
Notwithstanding, we certainly have our fair share of xenophobic arsewipes, as you say.
Weren’t the Brit Royals all related to Russian, Belgian and German Royalty anyway? Not that Hitler was royalty, but I choose to believe there is more context here than we are lead by the Sun to believe.
I mean, yea she’s an old biddy who probably put the hit on Diana, but hey- she likes dogs now, so its all good…
Yeah, I mean do you honestly think it was a coincidence that a documentary is being released re- Prince Philip’s family of origin and their Nazi links by marriage? Also, when Diana and Charles were separated, do you really think it was a coincidence their private phone calls were recorded and released to the press and public?
This was 1933…not 1944. Back then most people were not aware what Hitler was capable of. What Harry did was worse – wearing Nazi uniform when he should have been well aware of all its historical connotations, of all the atrocities perpetrated by men in such uniforms.
Correct. At this point George V was on the throne, and Bertie (the future Edward VIII) was the Heir Apparent – Elizabeth was just a cute and popular princess. Hitler had just risen to power in Germany, and WWII was almost a decade away. Bertie was known to be a Hitler fan, and remember the BRF were, in fact, more German than English that this point. I’m sure they had no inkling what a madman Hitler was and the atrocities he would commit. Elizabeth was, what, 6 years old? No blame is attached to her for this – I can’t believe it incited any controversy in the first place.
Sorry epiphany but Bertie, TQ’s father became George VI. I think you’re referring to David who was to become Edward VIII. He was the big fan of Hitler and the Nazis.
World War II was not “almost a decade away” and most everyone in Europe and the west knew what Hitler was about by then in terms of his nationalism and racial superiority indoctrinations. At that time, THEY AGREED WITH HIM or just didn’t care that much because it didn’t directly affect them. Plus, this guy was willing to exterminate people they too considered at the very least pests and at most threats (to their way of life). This “hands off approach to living unless It benefits me” is kind of the way Libertarians and the vast majority of others on the extreme (maybe even center) end of certain political parties operate. Evil triumphs when good people do nothing and all that. And the U.S. didn’t care much about Hitler either, folks–at least not In terms of his eugenical beliefs, but only in terms of his increasing influence and power enacting/espousing economic theories that threatened capitalism. Wars are not fought on principle most times. It’s all about the Benjamin’s and gaining positions of power in order to gain more wealth. Let’s be honest. If we can’t be honest on Celebitchy, then we can’t be honest anywhere.
I wonder if we’re so different now, seeing as we’re being honest. We are watching ISIS commit its atrocities. We watched the Bosnian conflict and that genocide. We watched the Rwandan genocide. We’ve got a refugee crisis in Europe because people are trying to escape, and the Daily Mail runs articles about how British tourists’ holidays are ruined because of the misery they are looking at. We sit and watch everything wringing our hands until it impacts us, and those don’t have an 80 year old filter to make it safe to judge. Are those things the same as what the Nazis did? No; not on the systematic level. But if you were a villager in one of those villages that was exterminated you might not see the nuance. And if you’re a refugee on one of those boats in the Mediterranean you might not see it either.
My point, you ask? That it’s easy to condemn people from 80 years ago for what they didn’t do. And I think those points are valid. But we shouldn’t get too comfortable is all I’m saying. And I’m scared shitless to even post this.
No bluhare you are absolutely right, this is what’s happening.
I’m with you bluhare. Was it Sixer who wrote something similar yesterday? What will people 80 years from now condemn us for doing or not doing? In the middle of it, what are we failing to see?
I know for many people, they’re struggling so hard to keep jobs, feed their families, and pay their bills that seeing beyond that daily struggle is near-impossible. Will they be condemned 80 years from now for not doing everything to fight against X when they were spending their time working 3 jobs to pay for their elderly parents catastrophic health bills?
You’re absolutely right, bluhare. And I’d add that we aren’t being nearly critical enough of the narratives and spins fed to us by the people who lead us. With regard to ISIS – as somebody else (not me) said yesterday, one minute we’re lauding and arming the “Syrian opposition” and the next minute the same people are called ISIS and we’re told they’re coming to get us at 6am tomorrow unless we bomb them to smithereens with bombs that cost $billions.
Not that I’m sticking up for ISIS, of course, but you know. Where’s the difference from the 30s where one minute we loved Hitler because, well, communism, and the next he was invading half of Europe and murdering all the Jews, Roma, gays and dissidents?
Props to Bluhare, you said it like it is.
Oh Bluhare, thank you so much for saying that, we are pretty much doing the same, not caring… I totally agree with you…
@bluehare No, we’re not different. Not at all. And we have to live with that. Thanks for those thoughtful comments.
But it was known that the Nazi party hated Jews by 1933. It isn’t QE2’s fault of course because she was a child but it does lend a lot credence to rumors of anti-semitism within that family.
As I posted yesterday, my grandparents FLED Bavaria in 1932 specifically because of the Nazi’s and anti-Semitism. While they were in Israel (Palestine) house-hunting, the predecessor of the SS stopped by their house to arrest my grandfather–for being a Jewish instigator of sorts. He stayed in Israel and my grandmother returned to pack up the house, kids and my grandfather’s medical practice.
So yes, people knew.
Hell, even my other grandfather knew. He purchased passage to and a house in Uruguay for the family. Unfortunately, my paternal grandfather kept waiting “just a bit longer” to see what might happen. They didn’t try to leave until 1939 and were arrested at the German/Belgium border.
I feel the BRF would be in the know more than Hannna’s family would have been about what was going on. Hanna, I have to say hearing what your family has been though just breaks my heart.
There’s a really fascinating Erik Larsen book on this, In the Garden of Beasts, that follows an American ambassador and his family over there. TL;DR people may have known about the general anti-semitism but thought the Jewish people had it coming, but didn’t know the breadth and scope of nazi pogroms. So no, not everyone agreed that Jews should be executed. They agreed with German nationalism, with kicking immigrants/non-natives out, but had no idea what Hitler’s endgame was.
THIS!
The British monarchy has had a history of anti-Semitism for centuries. The kings used Jews as money lenders, and when they didn’t need them, they would expel them from the country. Only, to allow them back, when they needed money again.
Their feelings never really changed, only got passed down from one monarchy to the next. Just ask Prince Harry and his unfortunate choice of a Halloween “costume”..
The same applied to every country in Europe, Jew’s have often been used as money lenders and segregated in Europe, gradually over time things have improved, but they have been the racist target of Egyptians, Babylonians, Romans on and on down to the Nazi’s. Britains anti-Semitism has been pretty tame compared to Catholic European countries remember the Spanish inquisition and at the moment is very low. In my experience over the last few years the only Jewish people who are shouting anti-Semitism in Britain are those who don’t like the Israelis being called out on their Palestinian policies.
While I know most of Europe was anti-Semitic, there is no such thing as “tame” anti-Semitism. Britain does not get a pass because they weren’t as bad as other countries like Spain, etc.
Also, while I don’t wish to discuss what goes on in the middle east, suffice it to say, if you were being bombarded by rockets everyday, who knows how you would feel? Also, any race that encourages their children to strap bombs to themselves to become Matyrs, is sick and abusive. Even animals will kill to protect their young, not encourage them to kill themselves, and countless innocent others, for a “cause.”
Really it just makes the adults look bad, which I guess is upsetting the Queen. The Queen Mum in particular being so enthusiastic about doing the salute is a little disturbing. And it’s obvious her husband is coaching her on. Ugh…
Buckingham Palace needs to calm down though. As long as The Royals want to live off tax dollars, they have no private archives.
My thoughts exactly, why should anyone but the adults be blamed?
Also, it’s not exactly a secret that the family had Nazi leanings way back in the day. I mean, Edward VIII was even being “watched” by the US government because of it. This is news only because QE2 is in the video, IMHO.
She was just doing it to impress David and stay on his good side. She was always partial to the heirs, and at this point-he was still the heir.
Well, it was known that one of the major reasons Queen Mary , wife of King George V in 1933, was not a fan of David, Edward Vlll. He was reported to be having affairs (sound familar?) with many married women such as Lady Furness. He was a party prince with no spine. No sense of duty. Then came Wallis Warfield Simpson. who had a history of being a spy in WW1 married and divorced twice. Worked in a brothel in China. ( CIA and FBI archives) It’s kinda strange to see the Queen Mother saluting since she later on perhaps couldn’t stand him. Blamed him for the early death of her husband. Anti- Semetic? Oh yes definitely.
Yeah but this was 3 years before all that.
Wallis Warfield Simpson had a dicey reputation well before she ever met Edward VIII, but the rumor of her having worked in a Chinese brothel has been denied by almost every historian and biographer who ever wrote about her.
Most of the ‘evidence’ against Wallis eg that Chinese brothel thing – apparently she learnt ‘chinese tricks’ with which she kept David enthralled, that WW1 spy, her alleged affairs with Nazi officers etc came in a british govt dossier that has been debunked as complete fabrication on the part of the British govt.
I’m surprised the FBI is still peddling it as fact.
Further, David’s affairs with married women weren’t rumoured. They were fact. He never hid the fact that he preferred to date married women and flaunted them in public.
Lots of his private letters to various paramours prove this fact.
I’d rather they release all that footage. It is fascinating. Have they learned nothing from Ben Affleck, our new Nixon? It’s the cover up that’s the real problem! Accept your heritage and denounce it, but don’t try to pretend it’s not there or didn’t happen because then when it gets out–and it will get out– you look like you were hiding something for nefarious reasons.
And Princess Margaret was the original sex-tape queen wasn’t she? Release that footage, BP!
indeed, they got the reputation of being racist/jewhater in Europe.
That’s hilarious!
I don’t think hilarious is the right word… murderous maybe. Both my husband and I lost many family members in those years. Horribly. Although the BRF had nothing directly to do with it, Britain was bombed partially because Edward Vlll had a deal with Hitler. How many thousands of Jews fled Europe to America because of those days. It’s not forgotten in Europe even to this day, that’s probably what the Queen would not like to be reminded of.
I meant about the photo being released by them. “Buckingham Palace probably ‘accidentally’ released the Nazi-salute footage”
Actually, I think this is a good thing, because so many of my fellow Brits like to pretend that fascism wasn’t as big in the UK as it was in Germany in the 30s. The Queen’s uncle Edward married a woman who openly fraternised with members of the Nazi party; Baldwin’s conservative government at the time may have condemned Oswald Mosley’s Blackshirts, but they had a lot of support from the public (particularly the rich).
When I see people my age (I’m 36) talking about the Nazis like it couldn’t happen here, I want to shake them. It DID happen here.
Yip.
I blame the way history is taught these days.
It’s edited such that only particular periods and geographical areas are covered, without reference to the threads that connect them all. The history syllabus is shockingly inept. I’m not surprised by the young generations’ ignorance. It’s all media studies these days.
The other point to make is that people are also less aware of the propaganda that surrounds us from our own governments. Easy to condemn and laugh at North Korea’s propaganda without realising that our own ‘democratic’ governments are also doing the same to us.
LAK, that is so true. I guess we like to think of ourselves as being too clever to fall for all that rubbish, without realising that we only get to see the stories the government wants us to see.
Like in WWI when Wilfred Owen was writing about the horrors of war, people preferred to brand him a traitor than accept that our government knowingly sent 900,000 men to die.
Yes I agree, I do not like the way history is taught either. You’re taught it one way in school then a few years later down the line you read a few books about it and realize it was totally different than what you learned.
This.
LAK: Spot on.
SO true.
You also have increasingly-conservative School Boards deciding textbook standards and curriculum. Think the Texas Textbook Massacre. Because of the size of the contract, publishers re-write history to please the extreme right wing. Those are the textbooks that can end up at school districts all over the US because the publishers aren’t going to create new textbooks for everyone else.
Don’t know how it is in the UK but in the US you can thank Texas (textbooks are written for the big markets, Texas is the biggest market) and standardize testing (you have to cram so much history in before the state testing in April). I teach history and every year I tell the students and their parents “I don’t sugar coat history” (ever look at a 5th grade history textbook?). And it still amazes me when I bust their little bubble on information. With today’s society, it’s not just the schools. It is society in general. So many people think that what happened 70+ years ago, can’t happen again. And to that I say “look at ISIS”. There is naiveness all around.
M.A.F. I found some of the best books questioning the war in the Middle East were recent children’s and teen books about WWI and WWII. Propaganda, white feather campaigns, what is “right”, treatment of people from different cultures. Authors knew books criticizing the current war wouldn’t be published, so they focused on trying to tell the hidden stories of WWI and WWII to try to draw comparisons then and now.
LAK/Nota/Others
It’s amazing! How you want your country or state perceived is all that matters.
MAF
Have you seen John Oliver’s LWT show? There’s a part easily found on youtube of his rant on standardized testing. It goes into textbooks too. It’s funny and frustrating all at once.
It’s not that bad for history teaching here… yet.
FLORC – that John Oliver segment on standardised testing was an eye-opener for me as a governor at my local school. I know better which government “reforms” to beware of!
@FLORC: Yes, I watch John Oliver and I remember that segment. Spot on. I’m now at a private school where we don’t do state testing but at the public school level? It’s terrible. Trying to get a bunch of high school students to study and care? AHHH. I’m in the minority who likes the Common Core direction (more empathize on writing and having an opinion because dear God, some of these student can’t write) but state/national testing needs to go.
@notasugarhere: you are talking about children books, which means that it is up to the parent to expose their child to those resources. Textbooks are a totally different matter and some times those are the only resources. It would be awesome if us teachers had the extra time to bring those resources into our rooms but alas…
Fascism was popular in many countries in the 1930s, including the U.S. It was perceived as being “strong enough” to stand up to communism, which was the primary threat that the Establishment worried about. It resonates even now, which is why some elements on the right like to call President Obama a communist, when he is clearly nothing of the kind.
I’ve heard him be called a socialist, not communist. Those are two different things.
He’s been called a communist (not a socialist, a communist) by many people, most notably Rudy Giuliani.
If people are calling him a communist then they need to look up the word. Socialism fits.
Wow. Socialism is “a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” If President Obama has ever advocated that, I’d like to see a quote on it.
Denial is a universal disease. It does not discriminate and it’s affecting a whole lot of people these days. spreading like a plague of Walking Dead. Patient Zero is Camille Cosby.
“When I see people my age (I’m 36) talking about the Nazis like it couldn’t happen here, I want to shake them.”
I gotta laugh at this because when you look at British history, the powerful conquering colonial slave-owning racist empire kinda stands out.
Not to defend the British (except i am), but they were no different from the empires that came before them or the ones running parallel to them.
This is what I was complaining about upthread. People learning history in periods and only a few geographical regions without connecting the dot or looking at the wider picture.
The Belgiums sparked off the scramble for Africa and their policies are still being felt in Congo.
The French and Spanish were no pussycats.
Don’t get me started on the Japanese, Chinese, Indian, Russian or Ottoman empires and so on worldwide, Etal going back to the greeks.
Right now we are in the American Empire. There are quite a few things that have happened as a result that aren’t admirable.
It’s the thing that all conquering Empires do.
Stop being so isolationist and revisionist in what you choose to read.
People act like the British were the first conquering imperialist empire or that they invented the wheel when the fact is as every empire falls, it’s replaced by another which has more or less acted the same way. And in the case of the British Empire, there were other Empires running parallel to it that were acting just as badly, if not worse.
Oh golly. I really don’t think that there was such a thing as an “Indian” empire ever. What did you have in mind when you included India in that list? The idea of India as a nation-state evolved while they were under the colonial rule of the British. Before that, there were kingdoms (smallish) that did not really nurture “empire-building” ambitions in the vein that others did.
I take your point that the British were empire building the same way that other countries were. They seemed to have been better (ergo more destructive) at it than others.
And as for the effects still being felt: perhaps you should speak to a South Asian asking how they feel about the 300 years of British rule and its aftermath, specifically the partitionning of India into India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
I would not be so quick to minimize the role of Britain in destroying nations. Particularly if we are cruicifying the CIA for doing the same.
@LAK – the “Indian” empire? I’m with Maia, what even are you talking about? There are more “Indian” empires than there are fingers on my hands, but they all went by their dynastic names and even the most powerful of them didn’t cover all of what we know today as India/Pakistan/Bangladesh.
@Maia – I can’t speak for all Indians, but I definitely think our feelings regarding the colonial era are very mixed. On one hand, it was a foreign power that treated people as second class citizens in their own land, and we’re not likely to forget that part, ever (the other invaders and empire-builders at least stayed here and became Indian, instead of holding themselves apart like the British did). On the other, they stuck around for a solid two centuries and for better or for worse, the colonial influence is part of our culture in many ways. I think most Indians at least sort of accept that that influence is part of who we are as a nation, despite fundamentalists insisting otherwise. And I think since the UK lost the political power to play Big Brother to the rest of the world, most of us aren’t really mad at them now. Except there is a sense that they took a LOT out of our country to build theirs, and now that we broke off they don’t want anything to do with us anymore (paraphrased of course!).
the Partition is something that didn’t affect me personally since my family didn’t belong to the two provinces that were split, but many older people belonging to the generations that did experience it, were traumatised. One of the things I think a lot of people despised Britain for was their ‘divide and rule’ strategy and how it got away from them, based on some of the literature I’ve read of the time – the splitting of the countries on religious lines is something that all our leaders of the time are responsible for, but a lot of people feel it was the British who are most responsible, if that makes sense. But 70 years down the line, the tension between India/Pakistan is pretty much all about the two countries, the British don’t really factor into it at all. Hope that makes some sense, I feel like I rambled.
teacakes: I completely agree with you. The British Empire enriched itself at the expense of the Indian people. They were taxed in numerous ways and the tax was directly transferred to the Crown and subsequently converted into public goods for the British people. There is now quantifiable evidence that links India’s poverty to the policies adopted by the British Empire. It is not a myth and not an illusion. Of course they also did build some institutions in India, but they did the bare minimum that they needed to “rule”. Indians were second class citizens, victims of strict apartheid. They were there to serve the masters but not to fraternize. They could not even travel in the same cars in trains, FFS. They were educted insofar as they could perform the role of civil servants, emphasis being on the word “servants”. You summarize it accurately when you say that they were second class citizens in their own country.
I think that it is quite sad to read anything that minimizes the role the Crown played in plundering a nation for centuries.
I have travelled extensively in Britain and am amazed that many British people are not educated at all on the role that they played in converting India into a poor nation, from one that was rich in natural resources. Of course the French and the Belgians did the same to countries in Africa – but that does not minimize what Britain did. I have met students at Oxford, no less, who basically only know that India is no longer a Commonwealth country and was once part of the British Empire, curry and kidchi come from India, and that’s about it.
In my mind, what the Americans do in the name of “empire building” today or have done in the past century is a fraction of what the British colonial Empire did to the rest of the world.
Maia/Teacakes: for whatever reason I couldn’t edit my previous comment to remove ‘indian’ empire and substitute it for ‘successive and parallel kingdoms on the Indian Subcontinent’. And then I had to go away for abit.
Apologies for that.
The point still stands. Every empire, wherever you find it has behaved appallingly to the conquered and or mimicked the horrible practises that went before it. You can’t say one was worse than another. They all had the same goals in the end.
To continually bring up the British Empire as if it was the only empire that has ever existed and or the only one that has behaved abominably to those it ruled is a blinkered view of history.
You can list all the bad things the British did, and you would be right, but you can list any of the bad things all the other empires did which were just as bad and which, like the British, continue to affect their former colonies.
@LAK – not saying the other empires were lands of milk and honey to all their subjects (Spain and Portugal systematically drained resources out of Latin America, The Open Veins of Latin America is a good read on that subject).
but the British Empire was by FAR and away the largest one, with the widest geographical reach, and lasted the longest into the modern age. And, UNLIKE the empires set up by previous invaders in India/China/the Ottomans etc (think the Shakyas, Mughals, Manchus, Mongols, etc), the Europeans (with the British being primary among them) tried their very hardest not to assimilate themselves into the society of the conquered country – which helped them exploit it worse and remain completely unmindful of the country’s interests because all they cared about was the home country.
Our pointing out the massive damage the British Empire did in terms of plunder is in no way excusing the actions of France, Belgium, Spain, Germany etc. But these countries did take a different approach to their colonies than invaders to conquered countries before them (the refusal to assimilate), and I don’t think that is unrelated to the scale of the damage inflicted on said colonies.
@Maia – of course what the US was restricted to proxy empire-building in the last century post-WWII wasn’t a patch on Britain etc’s actions, because the kind of tactics Britain and other European countries had engaged in to build their empires, wasn’t exactly feasible to any country that wanted to retain some moral high ground on the world stage.
Much easier to just let people have illusions of their country’s sovereignty while making endless demands in the interests of American trade and lobbies. And then paint the people of those countries as being in need of “democracy” aka American-approved governments. (‘Democracy’ is to this century what ‘Christianity’ used to be to the 19th century aka an excuse to justify meddling in other countries’ politics)
@LAK
I didn’t say the British Empire was different than any other empire. That’s precisely my point, it is no different. Which is why I find it hilarious that Brits today think they’re better than other nations. They’re not. Especially when it comes to contentious history.
When Embertine says Brits today think Nazism could never happen in the UK, I have to really laugh out loud and remind everyone that slavery, racism, blood libels and colonialism all very much happened in Britain, and for better or for worse, made it the dominating empire that conquered half the globe.
Saying, gee well others were as bad as the British doesn’t really absolve anyone, you know.
I’m inclined to side with LAK. And before you all say, well you would say that, wouldn’t you, you bloody Britisher (!)…
… I’m under absolutely no illusion about the British Empire.
Let’s replace the term with something more modern: superpower. I think an inevitable function of superpowers throughout history and right up to today is the abuse and exploitation of other states/societies/peoples. That’s how they get to be superpowers!
And the citizens of the superpowers themselves are inoculated against facing up to the abuses and exploitations that allow them their privileges as citizens of the superpower by national myths of superiority and that, far from exploitation, they’re actually doing the exploited a favour.
For today’s superpower, the US, that myth is exceptionalism and the favour is democracy/freedom (provided your democracy doesn’t do anything the superpower disagrees with).
When it was Britain’s turn, the myth was a “mission to civilise” and the favour was the gift of legal and civil service institutions (while those institutions just enabled the transfer of resources to the superpower).
All superpowers throughout history have had the same national myths and the same way of persuading their populations that they are virtuous.
In 20 or 50 or 100 years time, when China’s taken over, it wiil have the same myth and the same favour.
Thank you teacakes and A.key. You said it much better than I could.
@teacakes: I agree – hegemony comes in various shapes and sizes and flavors in modern times, unfortunately. Most of us are quite despondent about the role of American foreign policy in today’s world.
@LAK: It helps to know the history of the nation one is defending or naming, which I am sure you do, although your initial comment had me flummoxed.
I am sure you know this, but I will still humbly repeat what teacakes said : India was home to quite a foreign emperors that invaded for the purpose of settling in – the Mughals being the longest reigning ones that built the largest kingdom (comprising a small fraction of modern day India in area). The reigns of these kings and emperors are nothing like the rule of the other countries you name, either in flavor or in implementation or in policies adapted. A “colony” does not equate empire. Colonists had no desire to live in, assimilate with or develop their colonies. The colonies were looked down upon. There is VAST amounts of literature on subalternism that speaks to how colonists looked at the natives of the land. Europeans created colonies, for the purpose of exacting revenue and shipping back to their home country. The Ottomans, Persians, Chinese did not do this. They invaded countries for the purpose of assimilating and settling and built empires by annexing land which they then taxed and developed.
This distinction is a key one. So, equating Ottomans, Persians, Indians and Chinese kingdoms with the colonies of Britain France and Belgium is not accurate, in my humble opinion.
PS and ETA to my last comment (I missed the edit window):
BTW – it’s my belief that the remnants of Empire and its attitudes is what makes the UK such an obnoxious partner in the EU. There’s enough of a whiff of it left for us to sneer at the continentals. But if you suggested that to any EU sneering Brit, they’d be outraged. Just as true believer exceptionalist Americans are outraged today if confronted on the topic. What we have to be grateful for is those of us that try to see through it all – as EVERYONE on this thread is doing their best to do
@Sixer
“I think an inevitable function of superpowers throughout history and right up to today is the abuse and exploitation of other states/societies/peoples.”
Sure, but it still doesn’t excuse the horror that was committed. I don’t honestly understand the reasoning behind comparing the British Empire to everyone else. It still committed atrocities.
Also, isn’t it a bit ironic to compare the US and the British Empire? I mean the US was created by the British Empire. You could call it its greatest achievement. And boy did these expats learn really well how to be in charge and dominate global affairs. The US learned from the best since hey, it came from the best. I gotta say it’s a brilliant twist of fate how the biggest colony became the biggest colonial master a few centuries later, taking over from its predecessor.
But whatever you want to call it, empire, superpower, Britain, USA, Russia, China, Persia, Rome, Third Reich, Napoleon… It doesn’t change the fact that it was wrong and that unless we accept it and learn from it, we’ll never change anything.
I’m not sure why you seem to think that I think it wasn’t/isn’t wrong?! Of course it was/is wrong!
I think it’s the furthest thing from ironic possible. I think superpowers are a cycle of abuse. The abused grows up to be the abuser.
In terms of the way they dealt with their subordinates, the Roman Empire was wrong more often than it was right. The British Empire was wrong a lot more often than it was right. And today, the US is wrong a lot more often than it is right. Not much learning done so far in the upper echelons of geopolitics, I’m afraid.
But you know. Let’s keep talking about it. If we do it enough, maybe the next cycle will finally change things. We can only live in hope!
A.Key:
I finished typing that comment. Went off to make a coffee. And suddenly thought of a Thomas Paine quote I think you’d like and is germane:
“A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right.”
Which of us gets to claim him? Me because he was born here and because he’s my favourite of favourites? Or you, because he saw the evil superpower light and ran into your arms? Meh. I suppose it’s you!
Nighty night. It’s late here.
A. Key: what Sixer said.
And I think we all agree that none of it is right. Human beings are horrible to each other especially when they are empire building and conquering and keeping the status quo. Until they are overthrown, directly or indirectly, and the cycle restarts with the new empire.
In my opinion the point is not a child doing the nazi “heil” in1933, the point is: they should have gone public with this 50 years ago, otherwise is censorship.
Well, yesterday, Lord Mountbatten was finally explicitly named by a whistleblower/victim of the Establishment paedophile scandal, in an interview with the main investigative journalist outfit looking into it all. Rumours have swirled since forever, but nobody respectable has come out and said it before.
So you know. Perhaps a gin-soaked Margaret making disparaging remarks about the natives or somesuch is the least of their worries right now!
Slightly off topic, but when hints were made earlier this year or was it end of last year about an unnamed royal family member involvement in this scandal, everyone immediately jumped to the Andrew conclusion. Nevermind that he would have been too young and also showed clear prejudices because of Andrew’s own horrid judgement and disasters.
Back on topic: The dickie rumour has been around for some time including the sexual shenanigans his wife and he got upto during their time in India. When hints were made about an unnamed royal, I immediately jumped to Dickie.
I’m surprised the royal family allowed a beloved family member to be named publicly or even hinted at.
It’ll end up like Paul Barrell’s theft trial where HM suddenly ‘remembered’ details that absolved Paul on the morning he was to take the stand.
Crikey I’d forgotten the Burrell trial, that was another HM staff blunder.
Mountbatten was considered a royal?
Bluhare: technically not the British royal family, but he was in the royal club, like his nephew Philip.
He was thirstier than the Middletons and insinuated himself into royal life.
it’s been common knowledge even in India that Edwina Mountbatten was probably having an affair with independent India’s first Prime Minister, and Mountbatten himself sort of turned a blind eye.
but it’s been very well suppressed and hardly much got written about it because between his descendants and his party ruling the country, well, you can imagine they don’t want the narrative to be that dear dapper freedom fighter dad/grandad was involved with an Englishwoman, and the Viceroy’s wife at that.
teacakes: Now that fact is not well-suppressed anymore. They did try to suppress it while Nehru was alive, but now that he and most of his clan are dead, the secret is out. Now most households in India, and everyone who has spent any time in India knows this. There is a brilliant book written about it: “Indian Summer: The Secret History of the End of an Empire”.
Maia: I should have spoken in the past tense, because of course it’s well known now, ha. But there was a lot of talk in publishing circles (secondhand information from a friend who works in that industry) just how much tip-toeing they had to do to be able to release that book, and for magazines to even review it.
And Jawaharlal Nehru is very much dead, but his clan is still very much alive and present in Indian politics. And his unprepossessing nincompoop of a good-for-nothing great grandson is being groomed for the role of Prime Minister one day, if the Congress party (not the same meaning as US Congress btw!) ever comes back into power. I love nepotism.
if you want a frame of reference for them, they’re like the Kennedys of India – about equal on the assassinations score, too.
@Sixer-wow, wait, WHAT?!
Had no idea the rumours were around Mountbatten, I had the idea it was the Duke of Gloucester! If a whistleblower is prepared to name Mountbatten gawd knows what will come out next, they must be firefighting left right and centre.
frisbeejada: Google Mountbatten and Elm Guest House, also Mountbatten and Kincora Boys’ home. It’s hair-raising.
Interesting factoid: It was Lord “Uncle Dickie” Mountbatten who first introduced Jimmy Savile to the Royal family.
http://www.express.co.uk/expressyourself/43798/How-Jim-really-did-fix-it
There has been talk for a long time that he abused boys from an orphanage in Ireland, he went there surprisingly frequently and that this was the main reason his boat was blown up and only co-incidentally because he was a high ranking memberof the English establishment and relative of the Royals. The family of the young boy killed on the boat with him were said to have been ‘delt’ with, by either intimidation or bribes.
Sorry, guys. I should have given you the link. It’s from Exaro News, who are the ones doing the original research used by Tom Watson et al in Parliament to get the enquiry set up, the MSM reports and that 60 Minutes show that aired in Australia this week.
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5608/richard-kerr-names-powerful-men-who-covered-up-kincora
That’s the report where Mountbatten is named.
http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5601/video-kincora-was-used-for-political-leverage-richard-kerr
LAK – that second one will interest you (I miss LadySlippers, she would have been interested too) – it’s suggesting that the British secret services let it all go on because they used it as political leverage during the Troubles in Northern Ireland. If that is true, it puts a whole new spin on why the IRA assassinated him, does it not?
(American readers: and you thought the Duggars were bad!)
Sixer: I hope the real reason behind the establishment cover up is revealed.
It’s never as simple as it looks, and the using some of it to have leverage over IRA is despicable.
Sixer: The rumour regarding Mountbatten has been rumbling underground for so long now. I’m relieved it’s finally coming to light because THAT is the real scandal. He’s always been portrayed as quite the hero figure, but rumours abound regarding his links to Kincora and his alleged exploits in India while serving as Viceroy. The mainstream media won’t be able to ignore this much longer after the 60 Minutes interview with Richard Kerr.
This is what happened to Willie McCrae, a former aide-de-camp to Mountbatten who was in possession of a certain dossier of names. Utterly chilling.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/541793/SNP-activist-killed-over-child-sex-files
@ Sixer – American readers think Cosby is bad and despicable POS as he is, he’s not Jimmy Saville and I haven’t the heart to suggest anybody Google’s that evil swine.
Lady – yes. The Express is the only national newspaper to have done a decent job on this. Otherwise, the silence is DEAFENING.
Fris – I wouldn’t recommend it either.
@Sixer – WHOA.
if the IRA knew about what he was doing, it certainly puts a new spin on the assassination (and frankly, I wouldn’t be sorry about the death of any child abuser).
But I’m confused/maybe don’t have a good knowledge of British/Irish politics back then…..how was MI5/MI6 using it as leverage on him? Were they covering up for him while making him do what they wanted? Sorry if I sound thick today but it’s been a long day at work and I just can’t join the dots.
teacakes – all’s I know is what Exaro have published above. But it’s well known that British secret services were up to their necks in NI. There were infiltrators at every level in the IRA and many agents in the RUC. I think, at one point, the IRA person in charge of rooting out moles was himself a mole, it was that incestuous.
Presumably, a bit of child sex abuse was just grist to their mill of leverage in that situation – so it was probably more that Mountbatten got away with it because they were busy blackmailing everyone else.
Or something!
No it wasn’t Charles who did it, it was William. His PR is in overdrive right now b/c he’s such a lazy jerk.
I saw this story over the weekend. Of course, the kids aren’t at fault. The adults who showed them this “salute” and laughed and filmed it are. I get that it was in 1933, and alot of Europe, if not totally pro-Hitler, was definitely watching what he was saying and doing. Many people started out intrigued by him and his economic plans etc. I doubt any of them imagined what was to come. Europe as a whole was pretty anti-semitic at that time. Ugh. But no, I don’t blame the kids. And the Queen went on to be a stalwart during the war. And lastly, F*** Hitler. Not eloquent I know, but I said it anyway.
iMM: Accidents WILL happen, as we know, my lad! So buck up and do as I say, Willy boy. Put on this hat, this mustache and these specs, and now you’re Jingo Scottson-Harrisby, documentary film-maker keen on that footage Cammie and I snapped from your sodding relies, and a man of the people and proper succession, so you’re handing to the boys at the Sunshine Vomitorium for the good of the nation who deserve a King Willy straight off, not some saluting old bag or the jug-eared son she probably raised to be just as dreadfully German!! The nation can have a King groomed by lovely party planners instead! Oi, don’t muck this up, or you shall be having to pretend to fly copters for years, eh?
iPW: Oi, Mrs Mum, got it! But tell me again, why? Why will it make Gran look skilters?
iMM: No questions! No one questions me! “Why balloons! Why parties! Why future Queen of England! Why bum-building pants under a bridesmaid gown? Why a beard?” Do you imagine others have questioned me? And has it all turned out? Has it? HAS IT?
iPW: Yes, Ma’am, but uh, I, I say, uh. ,begging your pardon, Mrs Mum, please put down that frying pan for a moment, the thing is, well, I say, I simply cannot fathom why the peasants would be anything but jollied by these pictures! I often enjoy wearing an armband and goose-stepping around the tennis courts whilst giving this same historic salute! It’s quite funny! It makes me laugh!
iMM: And THAT is why we have to movie the courts and THAT is why the peasants are being quite rude to my Princess, and so from now on, just do as I say! I assure you the plebes and button sellers and laborers will want Granny in retirement after they see this! At last, at last, I shall have my title whilst I still look good in a bathing costume!
iPW: I say speaking of costumes, mightn’t I wear my Adolph jacket when I meet the Sunshine man? It would be simply hilarious!
iMM: No more thinking! no more planning! Just take that packet and go! I’ve got the story about the “accident” running this morning. You think this is easy? You think this timing is simple? You think getting Harry out of the country in the nick of time, and sacrificing my own son to reality tv to throw Harry and that strumpet Cressida 2 off the trail was a cake walk? You think I haven’t broken a heel leaping over that hedge while being chased by that monstrous Aunt Anne of yours? My god, her horse was fast! But I was faster! Now, go! You do this, and you can go spend August trapping bats with Jecca!
iPW: Yes, Mrs Mom! Jolly good!
I’ve now started to hear Mrs Mum in the voice of Edina from Absolutely fabulous, this is getting really vivid!
Is this Mrs Mum’s revenge after Kate the hungry told her about the tea they had with HM?
Honestly, Liberty, you should find an agent and get yerself a publisher.
Threatening litigation for breach of privacy and claiming outrage is akin to saying we the BRF are above the democratic principle of a free press. Perhaps the upside of their ongoing arrogant bullying is that maybe just maybe it fuels the UK’s republican movement.
If the tapes had been stolen then they have every right to be outraged and pursue the perpetrator. However it seems they were actually given away so they now look doubly stupid. Still not clear on the legality of the Sun buying them from someone though as they would certainly know that said person would not own the copy right to the film.
I miss Christopher Hitchens. He would have had a field day with this story.
Amateur move by the Palace. This thing clearly should have been destroyed. The adults are nauseating. Edward VIII was a know Nazi sympathizer, and except for an idiotic attempt by Madonna to turn him into a romantic figure, no one harbors any illusions about his character. Seeing the Queen Mother doing that Nazi salute is stomach-turning, especially when considered in light of the fact that she was a rumored anti-Semite who spoke highly of Hitler’s Mein Kampf before the outbreak of war and the subsequent white-washing propaganda campaign that painted her as a heroic anti-Nazi crusader. Though this was 5 years before Kristallnacht, the anti-Semitism of Hitler and the Nazis was already known, even if its full scope could not yet be appreciated. Because of Great Britain’s fortitude in the war, we often forget just how anti-Semitic the British aristocracy was at the time.
True.
Watch and read:
“The remains of the day”
Wow – the press really have the knives out for the BRF. Wonder what they are building up to?
off with their heads!
j/k
Just prior to WWII, England accepted a Kindershipload of Jewish refugee children…the children’s’ lives were spared because of this. President Roosevelt refused to allow them to come to the United States.
They barely accepted them–they had to pay and had to have foster parents willing to take them.
Doesn’t negate the fact that they were taken in while America refused them. Nobody has clean hands where the Jews of WWII are concerned.
I wonder if all of this isn’t a well organized cover-up/deflect from the Lord Mountbatten’sscandal and the british royal family involvment in the multiple paedophile’s rings. Isn’t it weird how some of their close ones are linked to this (Andrew, Saville, Mountbatten, high ups politicians from each side…)..
At least with the video, she can say she was a young child but tis scandal???
Naw! They knew and couldn’t care because they see themselves above the laws.
Andrew isn’t old enough for the Jimmy Saville/Mountbatten scandal.
But Andrew is/was friend with a paedophile who lends money to him, Fergie and who knows who.
Lord Mountbatten of burma was a father figure to the duke of Edinburgh, and a dearly, closer “grandpappy” to Charles, ANDREW and Edward.
His memory is preserved in the windsor male line with the name Louis…
Hm, would an angry Charles, devoted to Mountbatten, arrange to release the Nazi footage to draw attention away from this revelation? a clumsy attempt to bury that Lord M story?
So I think I posted this incorrectly somehow earlier — a just for fun tidbit:
an Australian magazine astrologer/psychic and author is posting on her blog that she feels July 23- July 25 and thereafter are pivotal days for the Brit royals and succession issues, etc. She uses the words “compelling” and “unusual focus” too. Retirement? Abdication? I wonder!!!
I saw it when you posted it earlier. Did you post it on a different thread? Because I read the whole long paragraph including that she published it the first week of July.
It could be my pages aren’t loading or refreshing on my iPad too, it has been screwy all day.
I agree, The Queen was a child back then, only doing what her father instructed her to do. However she is married to Philip who has said some pretty racists things. I don’t think anyone could be married to someone like that and stay married to someone like him without sharing some of those same exact views. Only difference is that The Queen is PR savvy enough to know not to be vocal about such things that apparently her husband didn’t get memo on.
When she dies, I bet there will be more things “accidentally released” that will shock some but not others.
As everyone has noted, the children, of course, are not at fault. But this does tell us about the culture QEII was raised in and doubtless absorbed and can tolerate (e.g., Philip’s awful comments, Harry’s Nazi uniform costume, etc.). They ALL think they are above everything and everyone — don’t be fooled by the gramma purse and shoes and the “normal” bloke PR. In many ways I’m glad William married Kate — knowing that their blood line has been invaded by coming working people (coal miners, flight attendants, lawyers, etc) must be a VERY bitter pill to swallow.
….Not to mention actual Jewish blood via Kates Grandfather and Carole Goldsmith.
BTW there has been a lot of ‘What do you expect they are German after all’ in the press recently with this controversy so it’s interesting to see what % of the Queen is ‘German’ and what % British.
Here is Queen Elizabeth’s actual % of blood per race based on the last 4 generations
38.5% English,
37.5 % German,
12% Scottish
12% Danish
So basically 62.5% of her blood line has no German ancestry.
You have to go back to before the Roman invasion of Britain to find a completely British monarch who would have been basically a tribal chieftain rather than a true Sovereign of Britain. The Belgae (Belgians) conquered first, then came the Romans and later the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons – Germanic tribes from which Surprise! Surprise! much of the current native population of England is descended. Then the Danes , Normans (French) and at last the Welsh (Tudors), so basically there has never been such a thing as a pure blood British man/woman on the UK Throne.
The Queen’s mother is the only one who looks bad in all of this. Not that I held her in high regard before…
Is my memory of my history lessons wrong? Didn’t WWII END in 1945? I get the queen didn’t know what Hitler was about in 1933 but I’m not understanding excusing the adults. I feel like people are saying Hitler was alright until 1944…
Exactly. “Oh, it was 1933 so Hitler was good then”- that’s crap. QEII may be excused since she was a child then, but others? Hell no.
Like EVIII said once about Indigenous Australians, “they are the most revolting form of living creatures I’ve ever seen!! They are the lowest known form of human beings & are the nearest thing to monkeys”.
No wonder the dude was in love with Adolf.
Hitler said about EVIII’s abdication: “I am certain through him permanent friendly relations could have been achieved. If he had stayed, everything would have been different. His abdication was a severe loss for us.”