"Officially there never was a rebellion in Castamer"

That 'never' I read in tywins voice.

But there are a lot of incests.

​@@rjofusetsudzin8011 Unofficially, approximately 20 years after we were created, a special detachment of the 501st Legion was dispatched to Casterly Rock with orders to eradicate an army of Lannisters that had been raised to take arms against the Empire.

…always pays their debts

Superb voice. He could probably read a death sentence and the condemned man would give him a standing ovation!

Absolute treasure, as befits The Patrician.

What a fool 😂

If he and Judi Dench ever coupled up the world would freeze solid with the Britishness of it all

@@youseeit916 Maybe in one of those bone-dry Brit comedies? Or since I can't get Tywin out my head, a series where the character, dying after being shot by Tyrion, sees his whole life in retrospect, but he is accompanied by his wife Joanna (had she lived to old age and played by Dench) and they provide commentary and narration.

Doing what he does best regardless of the universe / timeline 😎

"Do you really think a crown gives you power?"

@@lukethomas.125 In this case, yes.

With Bronze Yohn Royce as one of his co-conspirators, as well.

🤣

Sad

and unlike caesar, the queen died of natural causes.

You are pretty much right

😂 (that's a yes)

He also played Chief Inspector Hyne in Andor.

Thought I recognized him, good call out

I know! I thought the Royce’s hated the Lannisters.

@@imissnewspapersHe also played the chief of the military in the drama where Charles breaks up parliament like his namesake a few years ago. King Charles goes to him and says he might have to take on the parliament and asks where his and his military’s loyalties are and he says we swear an oath to the king, and to the king we will serve. So badass

What?! I can’t believe I never made the connection 🤯

Check out Tywin Lanister Game of Thrones

More gravitas than the real Mountbatten had.

The real Mountbatten was a complete ning nong given to kinky sex. Very much one to trifle with. He was in important jobs only because of his family connections - he was pretty incompetent. When he met Stalin at a war planning conference, he told Stalin he was related to the Russian royal family and would like to visit them sometime. Stalin couldn't believe his translator.

I knew I that I knew his voice from somewhere

and the Disney+ Series Savage Kingdom (Essentially GoT but with lions/animals)

-maestor einstien

I sure taught the Japanese a thing or two...

I know he has that command to him that very few have. However I feel the emperor should look about 40 due to spice making him look younger than 100 years old.

Nah that would've been a little too on the nose lol.

I adore Mr Dance, but I disagree, precisely *because* he exudes such power and authority. ShaddamIV used to possess these qualities, but over his long reign they have given way to complacency and ineffectuality imho.

​@@gozerthegozarian9500Boom.

Shaddam IV wasn't a notable enough ruler, he was mediocre at best.

"I have seven continents to look after, and three of them are in open rebellion."

America, Australia and Oceania: Are a a joke to you?

And America

*Caesar ;)

Kaiser Tzar

​@tobiasphilippwittlinger8753 England's system was more akin to the German Empire's Kasier. Russian Empire with the Tzar was way too vulnerable, and the Constitution wasn't exactly concrete amid the later revolutions after Napoleon's defeat against the Romanov dynasty for nearly a century.

@@benusmaximus3601 ty

South Korea is far more important in the world stage, than people give it credit for.

This happens before the coup of Chun do Hwan alas. Park's coup was far less...thoughtful.

Why Korea will not be mentioned??? It is quite important to the world.

That’s America spreading democracy for you.

@@zeitgeistx5239 It had nothing to do with America.

The mark of a true (and dangerous) leader!

Ask Jefferson Davis.

Charisma

@@tonyburzio4107 in living memory. How old are you?

​@@MrDicelingNot much of a leader

And never wins

Even if she had consented to it, there would have been a serious possibility of civil war. The source of what brought these men together was the industrial unrest caused by Marxists who controlled the trade unions and the labour government's repeated capitulation to their outrageous demands which had crippled the British economy. Some of the union leaders at the time were later exposed as Soviet agents. All it would have taken was for a few large weapon shipments to be smuggled into the country by the USSR and there almost certainly would have been gun battles in every British city in resistance to the coup.

She had all the power and he had none except that which came through her, and they both knew it.

Oh please. This is a TV show about the crown. Not an exact or even accurate depiction of the events. First what's shown here is completely blown up for drama purposes and second it's not factual since Moundbatton was not involved in the alleged plots against Harold Wilson as he expressed it as treason and left the meeting according to wittnesses. I quote : "In his 1976 memoir Walking on Water, Hugh Cudlipp recounts a meeting he arranged at the request of Cecil King, the head of the International Publishing Corporation (IPC), between King and Lord Mountbatten of Burma, then-Prince Charles' great uncle and mentor. The meeting took place on 8 May 1968. Attending were Mountbatten, King, Cudlipp, and Sir Solly Zuckerman, the Chief Scientific Adviser to the British government. (...) Mountbatten asked for the opinion of Zuckerman, who stated that the plan amounted to treason and left the room. Mountbatten expressed the same opinion, and King and Cudlipp left."

@@CrniWukYes I know the story is not well documented. But a long time ago in the book "Up Front" Bill Mauldin wrote something that stuck with me: sometimes the stories written/spread about a person are illustrative even if the stories themselves are not true. The fact the screenwriters put Elizabeth in the role of standing up to her formidable uncle-in-law, and the audience ate it up, says a lot. To contrast, has anyone ever heard a story of Donald Trump acting generous, patriotic or self-effacing? No and you never will.

​@CrniWuk precisely, had it gone any further than that meeting they knew that the death penalty still stood for high treason, and any action going against the prime minister was effectively going after the monarchy itself as the prime minister is at the behest of the monarch in charge of the country. The monarchy does not forget what the country did to Charles the first and their siding with the coup would have put her own head in peril had the coup gone badly and lead to civil war with the coup failing. She was never going to back them.

David abdicated in 1935, he probably didn't know who Hitler was then

Much like the US President is the commander in chief that does not guarantee the military will follow his orders without question. So yes, David could have ordered them to stand down but no guarantee they'd listen. The important part to remember is this is post WW1 UK the same UK that caused the royal family to change its household name because of hatred for Germans. So highly unlikely that would have worked. Now for Elizabeth the II though it could have been a possibility.

What's scarier is our boy Charlie is very much in bed with the current would-be dictators, and may well ask him to do exactly the same thing. I don't think it's out of the bounds of possibility that he may do just that 'for the common good' of course.

I am convinced that "David's" pro-Nazi sympathies were known as well as his desire to rule and just reign, and these were the reasons he was forced to abdicate. But, let's say David was smart enough to hang around. Maybe WW2 ends with a negotiated peace and the Nazis controlling Europe. Maybe the Tories became more right-wing. Maybe Labour never enters or forms a Government. And, if Wilson does in the 1960's, Mountbatten goes to Edward VIII, not Elizabeth, and presents the case for "Caesar", wouldn't Edward jump at it?

Idk for an empire that was so prideful of being the vanguard of human civilization, answering to no-one, and hating the "Krauts", submitting to Germany would have been outrageous to every level of social class. A coup? Maybe. Nazi banners? No.

This is fake. This meeting never took place like that.

@@CrniWuk how do we know this?

Labour were in power at this point in time, not the Conservatives, Maggie wasn’t the Prime Minister yet.

@@madcapmagician3130 "Madge" was one of the nicknames used for Her Majesty. Majesty -Madge. Not Maggie.

As pointed out by madcap, it was Labour and Harold Wilson who were in power ... hence the 'need' for a coup (against Socialism) by Old School Establishment types. This is a very believable scene.

You say that in every video.

@@sarcasticstartrek7719 he must really mean it

Except perhaps in an unprecedented extreme situation, a monarch removing a democratically elected leader will never go over well. If, say, Mountbatten's scheme had succeeded here and Harold Wilson was ousted undemocratically, I can guarantee you that either the UK would currently be a dictatorship or they would have long done away with their monarchy. It's precisely because the British monarchy has remained politically neutral and simply maintained an advisory role that they've lasted to this day whereas so many others European monarchies are a relic of history. Many people like the image of the monarchy, but far fewer would be willing to actually have their lives dictated by non-elected public figures in modern western society.

@@EXCLMaker I agree.

Very very very interesting that it was a step to far to do this in the UK.... but she did precisely this in Australia... just a couple of years before Thatcher in the UK the non-consecutive Labor gov in Australia was famously dismissed in the the Queens name.

Well, that depends on what's going on about the Place...It needs a 'Gentle' pair of Experienced Hands to Steady the runaway Horse !!!

@@oipic Governor-General John Kerr did it without the consulting the Queen. Even Gough Whitlam repeatedly stated it. The only involvement the Queen had was several months prior to the dismissal when Kerr wrote to her private secretary Martin Charteris asking for clarification on whether he had the authority to dismiss Whitlam or if Whitlam had the authority to dismiss him. Charteris replied that in the event, she would be inclined to side with her Prime Minister.

Ever since the English Civil War and the Glorious Revolution there's been the unspoken understanding that the Crown maintains those reserve powers at the pleasure of Parliament. They could exercise them, yes... but if they did so, they risk the existence of the monarchy itself. Therefore, they would only be exercised in the most extreme sort of case. My usual examples are from WW2, when governments were in impossible situations. Positive examples are King Michael's coup in Romania, Victor Emmanuel's dismissal of Mussolini, or the Norwegian royal family giving the government-in-exile legitimacy. The negative side of the ledger is going to point straight at King Leopold's surrender and subsequent collaboration with the Germans to try and secure the least damage for Belgium during the war.

These are great points. It does seem like the reserve powers only exist to address very extreme circumstances. Trump's rise to the presidency in the US and his attempts at a coup are good reminders that checks and balances are essential. In the US, we rely on teamwork involving the legislative branch, the courts, the military, and the civil service to contain threats from a rogue president. The UK has the monarch to play this role, working in concert with the military, civil service, courts, and sympathetic elected officials. Fortunately for the UK, the scenario of a rogue prime minister has never come to pass. @@phytonso9877

Something similar happened in Japan. They did not have a democracy, but the shogunate. The emperor had ultimate sovereignty and legal power, but for centuries this was in name only, with practical power lying in the hands of the Shogun and, to a lesser extent, the Daimyo. The Meiji reformers used the Emperor's reserved powers to oust the Shogun and restore absolute imperial rule.

Very interesting - I do not know the history of the Meiji restoration. It is ironic that the monarchy provided a path to modernization for Japan, which enabled it to stand up to the European powers unlike the Qing Dynasty. The Qing had a path to reform, but ultimately the Dowager Empress had the dynasty in a death grip. @@johnhoney657

Actually, it has long been rumored that Mountbatten did plot against the Labour government of Harold Wilson.

I doubt that it would actually work out like that. Even if she can technically do it that does not mean that is something which works practically. If she would actually dissolve parliament it would create all sorts of instability, confusion and chaos. Because what would you do if the Parliament doesn't dissolve? Send in the military? On British soil? Acting against their own government? Even if they are sworn in on the crown, what if most of them refuse? No one with a sane mind would order something like that if they can not be sure to have the full support of the institutions behind them. And most officials would not follow trough with this if they are not absolutely convinced that it's necessary. Like a very serious governmental crisis and catastrophy. Maybe if a government lost the election and it wouldn't step down peacefully, then maybe the Queen could order it. But outside of such scenarios? I don't see it really working out.

Australia 1975.

@@markmh835 Glorified mining colony. Not the same.

the monarch would have no check on this in this scenario, so it would not be a checks and balances of power situation, it would simply be autocracy

Man imagine if she took power, the UK might actually continue exist as a country

Except for literally any decent person ever. This show is biased. Take ten minutes to educate yourself.

Yes she pissed away the country now the country pisses on her.

What about Elizabeth the 2nd?

Yes

He himself mentioned that he was past his prime ... "even in my heyday"

Implication that the Queen could be influenced. Each of the civil institutions mentioned could be influenced by threats the same way. It's all fake news "Gov", the Queen would never ....

With some prodding from the CIA! And if you don’t believe me go read “The Falcon and the Snowman” or watch the movie which was ok, not great, but ok.

Yeah...that's was the Americans. Ambassador Green was fresh from couping Indonesia. Kerr was on their books.

@@sonarmb True. Elizabeth was never "our Caesar". Whoever pulls the strings in Washington DC was and is for the time be(j)ing. Democracy is a delusion, and a republic has a very limited shelf-life. It's been like that at least since Athens and Rome. We should have learned that by know. Democracy is mob rule manipulated by demagogues that ends in tyranny and a republic is a cover for oligarchy which inevitably devolves into an imperialist bureaucracy. Look at Trump and Biden: they embody a failed democratic republic behaving like an increasingly tyrannical empire.

Almost sparked a civil war?

@@mulamulelilumadi4717 Nah. Too well fed and entertained. It's how the caesars manage to rule so long: "bread and circuses"...

Trump through his acolytes and mob of supporters attempted a coup on January 6, 2021, hoping that somehow stopping Congress from certifying the results of the 2020 US Presidential elections would somehow stop the transition of power to President Biden, or at least delay it long enough when in fact Most legal experts (including conservative legal scholars William Baude and Michael Paulsen) agree that even had the Trump supporters successfully held on to the Capitol, even if members of Congress fled the Capitol and even if the electoral count was stopped, Trump's term in office would have still expired on Jan 20, 2021, as the Electoral Count Act of 1887 and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 had safeguards in place just in case of delays or if for whatever reason, Congress was not able to certify the election result. Essentially, had Trump's coup attempt successfully stopped the certification, his term and that of Vice President Mike Pence would have still expired on Jan 20, 2021, but while President-elect Joe Biden wouldn't have been certified, under the Presidential Succession Act of 1947, the Speaker of the House of Representatives (then Nancy Pelosi) would serve as Acting President of the United States until Congress could go back to certifying the election results. This goes to show how little understanding of the Constitution Trump and his associates had, hence I don't think a video or really any amount of lecturing would have gotten through Trump's head that a coup d'etat would have no legal grounds to succeed in the United States.

center-left wing lol

@@googlevsf I failed to find whats so funny on my statement. Care to point it out for me?

@@ChairmanofAlabasta euphemism to say the least

LBJ and Nixon.

@@margaretash9706 Reagan, Bush Jr and Sr

The Crown isn't factual, it's a work of fiction. None of this happened

Well, only the show version of him at least. There's little evidence he took this idea seriously and probably walked out of the room almost immediately.

Lol says who?

@@vulpes7079 Me. We called them railway stations in that era.

@@vulpes7079 It’s probably an American scriptwriter.

@@janel342 true

@@paulkirkland3263 fair enough, TIL

I think it's worth noting that this is a case of Unreliable Narrator, Mountbatton has constructed a scenario where He is the only one whom can achieve what these other powerful people want. this maintains his station as the leader and primary benificiary of the coup. his five examples are all very compelling, but just as he is suggesting a sixth way to gain power there is likely to be a seventh and an eighth way

Yes, Mountbatten was an evil man but he was a very kind and generous person in his private time especially when he was back in Cassiebawn Castle

Queen Mary was on to Dickie and disliked him and thought he was an interloper. Read up on that, it's very interesting.

@@lizh4933 yes, Queen Mary disliked Dickie Mountbatten but don’t forget they were related through marriage so you have to keep on eye on your bedfellows and all that. Just say history is repeating itself right now with all the controversy surrounding Kate, William, Charles and so on.

@@PoliticalSligo Was he kind and generous to the boys he was rogering?

@@ostrich67 that’s disgusting 🤬

How do you know?

Watch me

Unless you have the monarch's support.

What king ? Only just had Charles 3 and Wilson wasn’t even the pm when the last king was Alive , you meant prince phillp

@@jonmel No...he means King. As in Cecil King, the chairman of the IPC at the time and one of the supposed co-conspirators, and in fact the main architect of this meeting. Go read up on your history or even just check the context of this scene from the show before you start getting nitpicky.

Yeah the Pentagon could easily shut down DC and deny access to all three branches, but the trouble is the governors. That's 50 other governments you have to deal with who can very easily say "we'll take our chances" and lead a popular revolt against your coup. If you get NY, Cali, Texas, Ohio, Florida to agree to a sudden cessation of a federal government, you might have a chance, but there will be enough states who are willing to say "fuck you, come here and kill us all" and if they can get the rest of NATO's support, all of a sudden the USAF and USN aren't as impossible to go against.

It didn't seem like he was from what I read.

@@zacmumblethunder7466 Yeah, it's frightening how many take this "show" as factual. LIke, it's really well made ... but it's still in a lot of places rather drama than reality.

@CrniWuk I know. I've stopped watching any dramas about real events. I only watch these clips as I can remember most of the actual events and have a sort of morbid fascination with how much they get wrong.

Parliamentary republics often give reserve powers to the ceremonial president too. And presidents in presidential republics like the USA and France have even more sweeping powers. The issue isn't the monarchy

@@IrishCarney Presidential authority derives from popular mandate; and in no serious democracy do they have traditional and ceremonial power within an inch of a monarch's, nor are the armed forces and public servants expected to swear to them before the constitution. A sick or authoritarian society may elect a false president who will act against the republic, but a stable and democratic society will not, and even a society in collapse will not elect an open sociopath. A monarch though? Genetic dice and a very suspect upbringing. For every Elizabeth the second you get a Henry the eighth. Their power is arbitrary and a relic of tyranny. They are a point of institutional weakness that would not otherwise exist, as the scene, and Charles Dance's character points out.

the army still swears allegiance to the monarch as Commander in Chief. Parliament is required to pass an act to continue to maintain a standing army though.

@@ChaseWright516I thought the practice of an annual Army Act ended in 1955. There is no doubt an act that establishes and regulates the army but I don’t think it has to be renewed periodically.