(Untitled)

[typo_queen]

"Plans to make schoolchildren take part in citizenship ceremonies, pledging allegiance to the Queen, and a new public holiday to celebrate "Britishness" were announced today as part of wide-ranging proposals to strengthen British citizenship." quoth the GuardianSpeaking as a mother of unborn generations, I'm against it.* Seriously though, what kind

Comments

[the_writer666]

to quote my history coursebook on 'creating national identities', 'nationlism must be a daily plebisite by the masses' Therefore forcing people to be patriotic for one day, and making seven year olds with no concept of what they are declaring swear oaths seems rather stupid and a vain attempt to instill national pride in a lethargic nation.
And it all seems very american to me, which makes me suspicious from the out...
xx

[typo_queen]

It is stupid! Okay so a lot of people may not be exactly "proud" of the country they live in, but celebrating your heritage for one day of the year is hardly going to change that. We need a country to feel proud of - and by that I don't mean a golden empire - we just need to improve the conditions within a country.

And if they do feel a need to instil patriotism then perhaps put a bit more emphasis on Britain - not just Shakespeare. Our own history, beyond the Tudors for example, is hopelessly neglected. What about Napolean?

How about a Culture day? To celebrate all the different cultures that exist within our country. Because the goverment want to make everyone a single unit in much the same way everyone in America is "American" but why can't we have a day celebrating our differences? Or something to that effect.

[the_writer666]

it'll never get anywhere, like i said, as a nation we are melancholic and prone to depression so it's unlikely we'll ever warm to a day embracing our 'britishness'
and i can tell you right now, the welsh the irish and the scottish won't care for it, and it'll just be the sad english buggers that are waving flags and feeling like prats.
sigh
stupid government *curses labour and all it's idiocies*
xx

[typo_queen]

Yep, soilwork!

I assume this is a good thing?

[princessjynx]

Just have to say, that book is awesome!

[typo_queen]

Hey!! And yes it certainly is!

But then your talking to an avid and consequently somewhat bias Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman fan. :D

[persephone_20]

Haha, you're awesome. I love that you managed to quote something from a book into your post and then referenced it. :D

And in reply to your post, yes, pledging allegiance to the Queen is stupid. It's not like she has, like, any of the meaning and responsibility attached to her station that any of her ancestors had.

'Tis me still :)

[heavens_sigh]

Awesome meaning geeky? :D

But Good Omens deserves all the quoting it can get!!

And exactly! And even if did I'm still against the idea of oath swearing, it seems almost anti democratic somehow.

Re: 'Tis me still :)

[persephone_20]

(Hah! You're using Anthony!!!)

I don't mean awesome meaning geeky... though I can't agree with you on the book actually being awesome as I have a 'firmly against Terry Pratchett' policy.

:D It is anti democratic. If the Queen has everyone's allegiance, well what allegiance is the prime minister going to get, or the rest of the government who are supposed to speak for the people (even if they don't all the time)?

Re: 'Tis me still :)

[heavens_sigh]

(isn't he so cute looking? :D)

AGAINST PRATCHETT? GET OUT MY JOURNAL NOW!!

Terry Pratchett is amazing and awesome.

And even if you just see the Queen as a figurehead for the goverment (which in a way is basically what she is) then a pledge of alegiance is still forcing me (or whoever swore the oath) to potentially follow their decision when as a citisen of a democratic I have to right to speak against it. Kinda.