Does the UK have anything that resembles the Pledge of Allegiance?

Chat about stuff other than Transformers.
User avatar
Vin Ghostal
Posts: 5972
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2000 12:20 am
Location: Making his summer residence in Alexandria, VA
Contact:

Does the UK have anything that resembles the Pledge of Allegiance?

Post by Vin Ghostal »

During a lively discussion of civil rights, MLK Jr., and a thousand other things, my Talented & Gifted class wondered whether UK students had to do what they do in the morning, which is stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance (not the same thing as the national anthem, I might add) while facing the US flag. Do UK students do anything similar? I know that the UK has the Oath of Allegiance, but I'm pretty sure that's just for people being sworn into public office and other similar such affairs. Help?
Image
Cliffjumper
Posts: 32206
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 5:00 am

Post by Cliffjumper »

Don't have anything like that :)
User avatar
Denyer
Posts: 33033
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Perfidious Albion
Contact:

Post by Denyer »

Nope. The British constitution is largely unwritten and revolves around a national identity of pulling together in times of trouble, putting the kettle on and solidarity in complaining about everything. We have de facto rights -- basically, if governments push too hard we eventually swing back.

We're nominally a Christian country (again, flaunting goes against British character) and schools are expected to do something in assemblies to get the little oiks to think, which is more morality and empathy than spiritual. [We probably do better out of religious education because there's no prohibition separating church and state -- kids actively learn about different religions, cultures, etc.]

A fair number of people would regard a morning ritual of pledging to a flag/nation/god in which everyone's expected to participate as militaristic and in the same ballpark area as Hitler youths and salutes. (Yet wouldn't question reciting the Lord's Prayer in assembly, regardless of whether they place any belief in it -- I don't either, and am very fond of Jerusalem and several other hymns.)

edit:

The Bellamy Salute, for instance, would definitely draw comparison with Nazism, and having that in the history (though it pre-dates WW2) would worry people.

Image
User avatar
Target
Protoform
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:47 pm
Location: The Midlands - Melton Mowbray home of the pork pie

Post by Target »

I think if someone from another country wants to come to the UK to stay they have to take a British-ness test. They (the govt) I believe is now thinking about the radical idea and getting people to learn to speak English when they come here.
This country is now to 'politically correct' and is to afraid of offending people to make them swear to serve Queen and Country. Is seems to me the only time you see a huge wave of patriotism is the last night of the proms, when Rule Britannia rings out of the Royal Albert Hall :)
Oh and the odd sporting event, but that is just national anthems.

Edit, still can't spel!!!
If you can keep your head when all around are loosing theirs...you probably haven’t grasped the situation!!
User avatar
Denyer
Posts: 33033
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Perfidious Albion
Contact:

Post by Denyer »

Plus many expect the monarchy to begin dissolving when this Queen dies -- the royal family's a tourist attraction, and whether they're actually living in the places of public heritage doesn't particularly matter to most people.
Originally posted by Target
getting people to learn to speak English when they come here.
An official national language would be a bloody good idea, IMO. Certainly if I settled anywhere else I'd expect to make a commitment to being fluent in the main languages spoken. Minority languages, not so much (I've only met a handful of people in Wales who speak Welsh routinely.) Even if I'm just popping over, I think it's important to pick up basic pleasantries.

Likewise, the earlier people start learning other languages the more options they have later on. French and German are really useful for learning more about English.
User avatar
CounterPunch
Protoform
Posts: 3394
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2002 5:00 am
Location: What?
Contact:

Post by CounterPunch »

Originally posted by Target

This country is now to 'politically correct' and is to afraid of offending people to make them swear to serve Queen and Country.


God knows where I read it, dont know if it was a paper, or a magazine, but some schools have decided to not tell the nursery ryhme of 3 little pigs, instead it is 3 little puppies, this is to not cause offence to islamic people (I believe its islamic, my religious studies is shoddy)

I'm sorry, I'm not meaning to offend anyone of a different race or religion on this board, but that is ludicrous, either they accept the fact not everyones like them and take it on the chin, or they piss off.
User avatar
inflatable dalek
Posts: 24000
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 3:15 pm
Location: Kidderminster UK

Post by inflatable dalek »

The Queen swears a oath to me every night.

An old school mate of mine just finished his Duke of Edinburgh Award after all these years was suprised that, despite being strongly anti-monarchy- at how exciting it was to be in the same room as the Duke. Apparently he's quiet the wag.
REVIISITATION: THE HOLE TRUTH
STARSCREAM GOES TO PIECES IN MY LOOK AT INFILTRATION #6!
PLUS: BUY THE BOOKS!
User avatar
Denyer
Posts: 33033
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Perfidious Albion
Contact:

Post by Denyer »

Philip seems likeable, if inclined to get his words mixed up -- that whole "furore" about his comment on some building "looks like an Indian put it in" followed by several papers completely missing the intended "cowboy builders" meaning... the guy's going senile, have a bit of sympathy.

Pigs, besides being quite tasty if you don't mind killing and eating them, are pleasant animals. Sod anyone who doesn't like 'em, whether the reason's religious or other. Unless they ate a family member in some Hannibal-esque accident.
User avatar
inflatable dalek
Posts: 24000
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 3:15 pm
Location: Kidderminster UK

Post by inflatable dalek »

Originally posted by Denyer
Philip seems likeable, if inclined to get his words mixed up -- that whole "furore" about his comment on some building "looks like an Indian put it in" followed by several papers completely missing the intended "cowboy builders" meaning... the guy's going senile, have a bit of sympathy.


The Queen and Philip are worryingly like my Nan and Grandad in terms of ones the nice and sensible one whilst the other's the loud "Don't trust johhny foreigner" one.
REVIISITATION: THE HOLE TRUTH
STARSCREAM GOES TO PIECES IN MY LOOK AT INFILTRATION #6!
PLUS: BUY THE BOOKS!
User avatar
Target
Protoform
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:47 pm
Location: The Midlands - Melton Mowbray home of the pork pie

Post by Target »

And Philips classic comment about some people having 'slitty' eyes, mad as a brush is Prince Phil.
If you can keep your head when all around are loosing theirs...you probably haven’t grasped the situation!!
User avatar
Halfshell
Posts: 19167
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Don't complain to me. I don't care.
Contact:

Post by Halfshell »

Originally posted by CounterPunch
God knows where I read it, dont know if it was a paper, or a magazine, but some schools have decided to not tell the nursery ryhme of 3 little pigs, instead it is 3 little puppies, this is to not cause offence to islamic people (I believe its islamic, my religious studies is shoddy)


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/6456961.stm

Common sense won the day.
Image
User avatar
another tf fan
Posts: 1692
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 7:08 am
Location: USA

Post by another tf fan »

Originally posted by CounterPunch
God knows where I read it, dont know if it was a paper, or a magazine, but some schools have decided to not tell the nursery ryhme of 3 little pigs, instead it is 3 little puppies, this is to not cause offence to islamic people (I believe its islamic, my religious studies is shoddy)

I'm sorry, I'm not meaning to offend anyone of a different race or religion on this board, but that is ludicrous, either they accept the fact not everyones like them and take it on the chin, or they piss off.


Such is the nature of religious groups.

We got it bad here in the USA when it comes to this kind of PC back bending. Anyone who's sensibilities are offended by three little pigs or any other nonsense are nuts. You read that right, NUTS.

The earth is 6000 years old: you're nuts
Judgment day : you're nuts
Intelligent design : you're nuts
death to infidels: you're nuts
the holy land is more important than any other piece of dirt : you're nuts
reincarnation: you're nuts
aliens are coming to probe you: you're nuts
"in god we trust" should be on currency: you're nuts

Sorry religious people out there, but you're nuts. some one made up a story as to why we are here and where we are going and you believe it. you believe it simply because you heard it. You'll die or kill for your faith in your fairy tale and the rest of us should do anything to accommodate you: you're nuts.

IT'S ALL MADE UP!

no i won't be tolerant of faith, when faith becomes intolerance of me.
Come on and wind me up.
User avatar
Clogs
Posts: 4278
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 10:00 pm
Location: Leicester, where King Dick is buried

Post by Clogs »

We do have oaths here in the UK and they are frequently directed at government. It is true that they are not oaths of allegience, however :D

Should Mr Blair and his ilk have their way, we'll probably be expected to chant some hymn to the EEC every morning. In response to which I would direct them to read:
Originally posted by Denyer
Nope. The British constitution is largely unwritten and revolves around a national identity of pulling together in times of trouble, putting the kettle on and solidarity in complaining about everything. We have de facto rights -- basically, if governments push too hard we eventually swing back.
That says everything you need to know about us Brits, really.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
User avatar
optimusskids
Protoform
Posts: 6981
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 11:24 am
Location: UK

Post by optimusskids »

We also love supporting the underdog and have a tend to romanticise our great defeats.

see Blitz / Dunkirk spirit
Image
User avatar
inflatable dalek
Posts: 24000
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 3:15 pm
Location: Kidderminster UK

Post by inflatable dalek »

Errr, we did win the Blitz. The Germans gave up and went and invaded Russia instead (which is where it all really started to go wrong for the Nazi's. Shame Hitler didn't remember WWI or Napolean's efforts to do the same. If he'd have kept throwing the Luftwafer at us we'd have been broken sooner or latter...)
REVIISITATION: THE HOLE TRUTH
STARSCREAM GOES TO PIECES IN MY LOOK AT INFILTRATION #6!
PLUS: BUY THE BOOKS!
Cliffjumper
Posts: 32206
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 5:00 am

Post by Cliffjumper »

Not necessarily... evacuation would have just stepped up... The Blitz itself played into the British hands, by giving Fighter Command time to recover when the targets were switched from the 11 Group airfields to civilian targets... The Germans' results against industrial areas were (relatively speaking) poor, and strategic bombing with medium-payload aircraft requires an enemy with very little resolve (especially when you consider that towards the end of the Blitz night interceptor work was coming forward in leaps and bounds thanks to the then-advanced British radar systems and the regeneration of Fighter Command, while accurate bombing techniques was a bit further behind)...

Whereas Russia wasn't such a gamble as may have seemed - initially the Red Army folded for the opening encounters, while the air force and armour were nothing. The Russians somehow lasted until winter (aided by aircraft that weren't obsolete a decade before, and some superb tanks) and then the German supply lines collapsed in the weather... A less resolute government might have been otherthrown (just as the Tsar was in 1917), taking Russia out of the war. Hitler probably underestimated Stalin's hold on his position (and the Nazis in general got carried away with early successes and fell behind in upgrading, especially with aircraft). The Germans also got caught out on a lot of things they'd fluked in France - whereas then the BEF/French were too bemused to realise than Blitzkrieg relies on fragile resupply columns, the weather did this in Russia.

IMO, the Battle of Britain was more of a turning point, as it was the first time the Nazis had really had to stop and rethink things (though I'm skeptical that Sea Lion would have worked even with the RAF knocked out...).
User avatar
Halfshell
Posts: 19167
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Don't complain to me. I don't care.
Contact:

Post by Halfshell »

Originally posted by Cliffjumper
Hitler probably underestimated Stalin's hold on his position


Aided in part by Stalin's general foreign policy consisting of "**** off, rest of the world". Allowing him to dually concentrate on making the country into a badass mother****er, and also let absolutely nobody outside of Russia have any idea how good a military state the country was actually in.

Though my favourite part of WWII almost certainly has to be Benny Mussolini. "Yes, Adolf - we help you. We have built a boat, yes you can have a hundred. What? No, we don't actually have them yet, but when we do - they are yours. See - aeroplane! State of art. We are most technically advanced of all. What do you mean they saw the attack coming? What is this radar? I see. Oh, hello, Allies. I appear to have switched sides."

[/gross oversimplification]
Image
User avatar
Denyer
Posts: 33033
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Perfidious Albion
Contact:

Post by Denyer »

Originally posted by Cliffjumper
Russia wasn't such a gamble as may have seemed
Dunno... Russia's easy enough to get a toe into, but ****ing impossible to hold. Short of adopting the same scorched earth tactics that Russians will if pressed and wiping out everything. Committing resources to a campaign against the territory (and it's the territory as much as the people) is literally throwing them away.
Cliffjumper
Posts: 32206
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 5:00 am

Post by Cliffjumper »

Originally posted by Denyer
Dunno... Russia's easy enough to get a toe into, but ****ing impossible to hold. Short of adopting the same scorched earth tactics that Russians will if pressed and wiping out everything. Committing resources to a campaign against the territory (and it's the territory as much as the people) is literally throwing them away.


I dunno... it's a tight move. Didn't the Germans get into the suburbs of Moscow before the Red Army finally started to bite back a bit? More than a toe, anyway. That's bloody close, frankly, and starting the offensive a couple of months earlier in the year could have made it work. Sure, Moscow wouldn't have ended the USSR, but it would have been a hefty nail in the coffin

That said, Blitzkrieg is the wrong tactic for something the size of Russia - in somewhere of its' makeup, the support columns are just facing too many things that can go wrong. I also think Hitler unestimated just how insanely hard the Russians would fight, especially in the cities (which was pretty naive, really, when you consider the trouble they'd had in Poland) - had the Russians made the same sort of effort as the French (not at all attacking a stereotype here, but the high command of France basically lost the will to fight when the German army just didn't drive up to the Maginot line and die), for example, it'd have been a piece of piss.

Mind, I've always seen the attack on Russia as partially influenced by the desire to bring Japan into the war, and thus split the British (especially the fleet, which would still have been a major threat to Sea Lion even with Fighter Command disabled).

EDIT: Isn't historical discussion just that bit more interesting when you know someone isn't going to pop in and say "Well, Hitler was right, and anyway the Yakuza had Nazi agents in Stalingrad since 1936, I saw it on the History Channel"?
User avatar
slartibartfast
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 11:40 pm
Location: paris.
Contact:

Post by slartibartfast »

Originally posted by Brendocon
Allowing him to dually concentrate on making the country into a badass mother****er, and also let absolutely nobody outside of Russia have any idea how good a military state the country was actually in.
didn't they like have not enough rifles to go around though ? My piss poor recollections of history class seem to include the nazis being overwhelmed by sheer weight of numbers as waves upon waves of empty-handed russians ran towards them, the lucky ones managing to grab guns off the dead.
Post Reply