5 ms·

Not to mention that she was the last monarch to have any memory of WWII and served as an ambulance mechanic. Now that generation that remembered the horrors of

Not to mention that she was the last monarch to have any memory of WWII and served as an ambulance mechanic. Now that generation that remembered the horrors of fascism has mostly passed and we find ourselves in a period that seems to have many echos of the 1930s with a new rise of authoritarianism and fascism around the world.

sofixa 4y ago
> Not to mention that she was the last monarch to have any memory of WWII That's probably not true. There's the Dalai Lama and Simeon II of Bulgaria, who were minors but at least Simeon surely remembers (his father died in suspicious circumstances, he had an unconstitutional regency, and then he was dethroned, expelled and spent his life in exile). > Now that generation that remembered the horrors of fascism has mostly passed and we find ourselves in a period that seems to have many echos of the 1930s with a new rise of authoritarianism and fascism around the world It's honestly infuriating that with the wealth of information available at everyone's fingertips so many people are so easily making the same mistakes as a century earlier.
- tialaramex 4y ago
  Is the Dalai Lama a monarch? I see a resemblance in how monarchy works to how the Dalai Lama is chosen, but it's not obvious to me this is the same kind of thing.
  - valarauko 4y ago
    Not a 'monarch', but a 'sovereign' would be a better fit.
    - JAlexoid 4y ago
      Single Ruler for life is still a monarch. The Pope is a monarch in Vatican. Monarchy is not necessary hereditary. And replacing monarch with sovereign, doesn't change the fact that it's a monarchy.
      - sofixa 4y ago
        Yep, one of the most popular monarchies, the Holy Roman Empire, was an elective monarchy (mostly theoretical after the Habsburgs took over, but still).
      - School-Cotton 4y ago
        Monarch is not a precisely defined term. It usually (though not in the case of popes) also requires that the holder be part of the country’s traditional aristocracy or nobility. Lifetime heads of state of regimes issued from modern revolutions (North Korea or Iran, for example) are not usually considered monarchs. I guess the only real definition of monarch is social and cultural: someone who claims to be one and is broadly recognized as such.
        caf 4y ago
        Are not the Cardinals the "traditional nobility" of the Vatican?
        sofixa 4y ago
        > It usually (though not in the case of popes) also requires that the holder be part of the country’s traditional aristocracy or nobility. Not really. Reza Khan was just a colonel in the army before the coup that later established him as Shah of Iran. Osman of the Ottoman Empire and his descendants for a very long time had no aristocracy or nobility to speak of, only temporary (land reverted to the Sultan at death) land owners.
    - IncRnd 4y ago
      A monarch is literally a sovereign head of state.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - 1024core 4y ago
    I believe HH gave up his position a few years ago, and there have been elections (among the Tibetan exiles) ever since.
  - Mikeb85 4y ago
    The Dalai Lama is believed to be the reincarnation of the previous Dalai Lama so he's not chosen, as per the beliefs of his own cult anyway.
- vages 4y ago
  King Harald V of Norway (born 1936) and Queen Margrete II (born 1940) are old enough to remember WW2. So is Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands (born 1938, abdicated). I think the grandparent comment’s author forgot to insert a “British” in front of monarch. Edit: > [Simeon II] is, along with the current Dalai Lama, one of only two living people who were heads of state from the time of World War II. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simeon_Saxe-Coburg-Gotha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simeon_Saxe-Coburg-Gotha However, Elizabeth II did not become Queen until well after WW2. (Removed erroneous statement about the Swedish king being old enough to remember WW2; he was born in 1946.)
  - gizajob 4y ago
    I think you're picking hairs, given how much influence Nepal and Bulgaria have on the world stage, compared to QEII's 70 years as one of the most powerful heads of state on earth, probably the most powerful, given the duration.
    - valarauko 4y ago
      Tibet, not Nepal
      - thghtihadanacct 4y ago
        kinda makes the point
        seanmcdirmid 4y ago
        Ya, let’s not talk about the Nepali royals again. I’m still not sure what really happened when they imploded in 2004 or so.
    - unmole 4y ago
      > one of the most powerful heads of state on earth The British monarch is one of the least powerful heads of state on earth. The president of Barbados has more discretionary power.
- nmz 4y ago
  > It's honestly infuriating that with the wealth of information available at everyone's fingertips so many people are so easily making the same mistakes as a century earlier. Alas, there is no algorithm yet for "truth".
  - brigandish 4y ago
    I think it's more about wilful ignorance than truth. I saw a video the other day with a US student protesting a speaker at his uni, and saying how he thought that some political violence could be useful. He then went on to admit he didn't know what the speaker looked like, nor what they believed, nor had he ever seen or heard anything they'd done. He'd just seen a poster saying that this person was bad, that was enough for him. I've thought for a long time that when the generation that fought in the war, or even grew up in it, has died out, that's when idiots like this student will be free to make something terrible rise. Fight for freedoms like speech while you can.
    - nmz 4y ago
      I think that while its certainly ignorance. it's more about complexity (which ignorance thrives in), wherever complexity lies, divisions do as well. ignorance itself does not necessarily have to be wilful. I suppose I'll say, this is not a counterargument, I somewhat see your point and wanted to expand on it.
      - brigandish 4y ago
        That's a good point. It's also often the case that the differences aren't as big as they seem to outsiders. One of the benefits of going abroad for a while is to be able to see your own country's politics from a distance, and the one your in's closer. It's easy to see that the Overton window is often quite narrow. However, I don't know many places where mainstream politics would accept political violence as anything but extreme in almost every case. I'm not sure the fringe is growing, but to come round to my initial point, I'm worried that it will after the last WWII generation dies out.
    - kingkawn 4y ago
- jimmygrapes 4y ago
  >It's honestly infuriating that with the wealth of information available at everyone's fingertips so many people are so easily making the same mistakes as a century earlier. I agree, but for me it's more infuriating how often I see this comparison used when when the modern version is primarily head-canon catastrophizing despite the same people making the comparison advocating and practicing behaviors that are even closer to what they decry, all while pretending they're not. Nuance and introspection are sorely lacking everywhere.
  - eclipxe 4y ago
    Strongly disagree. "The antifascists are actually the facists because they won't tolerate my facism!" Strong paradox of tolerance vibes you've got there.
    - qu4z-2 4y ago
      And I, in turn, strongly disagree with you. The paradox of tolerance is a product of sloppy thinking and mostly amounts to tribalism in a fancy coat. And antifascists refuse to tolerate many things substantially milder than actual fascism.
      - kingkawn 4y ago
      - eyelidlessness 4y ago
        Yep I’d definitely refuse to tolerate mild fascism, thanks I don’t want to go to shooting war over it. It’s bad enough seeing people I love and care about beaten or harassed out of their homes.
- btilly 4y ago
  Perhaps we should define what a "monarch" is. The Dalai Lama and Simeon II of Bulgaria were both heads of state during WW II. But China invaded Tibet in 1950, and by 1960 the Dalai Lama ruled nothing. And Simeon lost his throne in 1946 (though he did get elected prime minister many years later). I wouldn't count them as monarchs any more. That said, looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_monarchs_of_sovereign_states https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_monarchs_of_so... I find the following currently reigning monarchs who were born before WW II and probably remember something from it: - Emir Nawaf Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah of Kuwait - King Harald V of Norway - King Salman of Saudi Arabia - Pope Francis of Vatican State
- bloqs 4y ago
  It's very interesting how written history vs history described by grandparents are totally different functional things
drieddust 4y ago
- dang 4y ago
  We've banned this account for repeatedly posting flamewar comments. That's not allowed here. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. I don't lightly ban an 11-year-old account, but we've warned you many times, and you've done little but post flamewar comments lately, including nationalistic and religious flamewar.
  - drieddust 4y ago
    To be fair if responding to nationalist and religious comments is considered flamewar, then I do not care that you have banned my account.
    - dang 4y ago
      No, flamewar comments are considered flamewar. The site guidelines do ask people not to respond to egregious comments, since those just fuel the flames (this is HN's equivalent of "please don't feed the trolls"), but the problems with what you were posting were much worse than that. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
throwaway1777 4y ago
This is basically where Howe’s 4th turning thesis comes from. The cycle repeats over the course of around 80 years more or less as the generations die off.
mlindner 4y ago
I think you're exaggerating quite a lot.
tacostakohashi 4y ago
> served as an ambulance mechanic. Ahh yes, that photo of Elizabeth changing an ambulance tire, one of the great public relations triumphs of the 20th century. So humble! She's just like one of us...
- timc3 4y ago
  Well according to my Grandmother she did actually work, as my Grandmother was around her at the time.
someperson 4y ago
> the last monarch to have any memory of WWII Saudi Arabia's King Salman was born in 1935
29athrowaway 4y ago
I am just going to leave this here. Enjoy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_tour_of_Germany_by_the_Duke_and_Duchess_of_Windsor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_tour_of_Germany_by_the_Du...
dang 4y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32769695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32769695.

sofixa 4y ago

> Not to mention that she was the last monarch to have any memory of WWII That's probably not true. There's the Dalai Lama and Simeon II of Bulgaria, who were minors but at least Simeon surely remembers (his father died in suspicious circumstances, he had an unconstitutional regency, and then he was dethroned, expelled and spent his life in exile). > Now that generation that remembered the horrors of fascism has mostly passed and we find ourselves in a period that seems to have many echos of the 1930s with a new rise of authoritarianism and fascism around the world It's honestly infuriating that with the wealth of information available at everyone's fingertips so many people are so easily making the same mistakes as a century earlier.

tialaramex 4y ago
Is the Dalai Lama a monarch? I see a resemblance in how monarchy works to how the Dalai Lama is chosen, but it's not obvious to me this is the same kind of thing.
- valarauko 4y ago
  Not a 'monarch', but a 'sovereign' would be a better fit.
  - JAlexoid 4y ago
    Single Ruler for life is still a monarch. The Pope is a monarch in Vatican. Monarchy is not necessary hereditary. And replacing monarch with sovereign, doesn't change the fact that it's a monarchy.
    - sofixa 4y ago
      Yep, one of the most popular monarchies, the Holy Roman Empire, was an elective monarchy (mostly theoretical after the Habsburgs took over, but still).
    - School-Cotton 4y ago
      Monarch is not a precisely defined term. It usually (though not in the case of popes) also requires that the holder be part of the country’s traditional aristocracy or nobility. Lifetime heads of state of regimes issued from modern revolutions (North Korea or Iran, for example) are not usually considered monarchs. I guess the only real definition of monarch is social and cultural: someone who claims to be one and is broadly recognized as such.
      - caf 4y ago
        Are not the Cardinals the "traditional nobility" of the Vatican?
      - sofixa 4y ago
        > It usually (though not in the case of popes) also requires that the holder be part of the country’s traditional aristocracy or nobility. Not really. Reza Khan was just a colonel in the army before the coup that later established him as Shah of Iran. Osman of the Ottoman Empire and his descendants for a very long time had no aristocracy or nobility to speak of, only temporary (land reverted to the Sultan at death) land owners.
  - IncRnd 4y ago
    A monarch is literally a sovereign head of state.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- 1024core 4y ago
  I believe HH gave up his position a few years ago, and there have been elections (among the Tibetan exiles) ever since.
- Mikeb85 4y ago
  The Dalai Lama is believed to be the reincarnation of the previous Dalai Lama so he's not chosen, as per the beliefs of his own cult anyway.
vages 4y ago
King Harald V of Norway (born 1936) and Queen Margrete II (born 1940) are old enough to remember WW2. So is Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands (born 1938, abdicated). I think the grandparent comment’s author forgot to insert a “British” in front of monarch. Edit: > [Simeon II] is, along with the current Dalai Lama, one of only two living people who were heads of state from the time of World War II. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simeon_Saxe-Coburg-Gotha https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simeon_Saxe-Coburg-Gotha However, Elizabeth II did not become Queen until well after WW2. (Removed erroneous statement about the Swedish king being old enough to remember WW2; he was born in 1946.)
- gizajob 4y ago
  I think you're picking hairs, given how much influence Nepal and Bulgaria have on the world stage, compared to QEII's 70 years as one of the most powerful heads of state on earth, probably the most powerful, given the duration.
  - valarauko 4y ago
    Tibet, not Nepal
    - thghtihadanacct 4y ago
      kinda makes the point
      - seanmcdirmid 4y ago
        Ya, let’s not talk about the Nepali royals again. I’m still not sure what really happened when they imploded in 2004 or so.
  - unmole 4y ago
    > one of the most powerful heads of state on earth The British monarch is one of the least powerful heads of state on earth. The president of Barbados has more discretionary power.
nmz 4y ago
> It's honestly infuriating that with the wealth of information available at everyone's fingertips so many people are so easily making the same mistakes as a century earlier. Alas, there is no algorithm yet for "truth".
- brigandish 4y ago
  I think it's more about wilful ignorance than truth. I saw a video the other day with a US student protesting a speaker at his uni, and saying how he thought that some political violence could be useful. He then went on to admit he didn't know what the speaker looked like, nor what they believed, nor had he ever seen or heard anything they'd done. He'd just seen a poster saying that this person was bad, that was enough for him. I've thought for a long time that when the generation that fought in the war, or even grew up in it, has died out, that's when idiots like this student will be free to make something terrible rise. Fight for freedoms like speech while you can.
  - nmz 4y ago
    I think that while its certainly ignorance. it's more about complexity (which ignorance thrives in), wherever complexity lies, divisions do as well. ignorance itself does not necessarily have to be wilful. I suppose I'll say, this is not a counterargument, I somewhat see your point and wanted to expand on it.
    - brigandish 4y ago
      That's a good point. It's also often the case that the differences aren't as big as they seem to outsiders. One of the benefits of going abroad for a while is to be able to see your own country's politics from a distance, and the one your in's closer. It's easy to see that the Overton window is often quite narrow. However, I don't know many places where mainstream politics would accept political violence as anything but extreme in almost every case. I'm not sure the fringe is growing, but to come round to my initial point, I'm worried that it will after the last WWII generation dies out.
  - kingkawn 4y ago
jimmygrapes 4y ago
>It's honestly infuriating that with the wealth of information available at everyone's fingertips so many people are so easily making the same mistakes as a century earlier. I agree, but for me it's more infuriating how often I see this comparison used when when the modern version is primarily head-canon catastrophizing despite the same people making the comparison advocating and practicing behaviors that are even closer to what they decry, all while pretending they're not. Nuance and introspection are sorely lacking everywhere.
- eclipxe 4y ago
  Strongly disagree. "The antifascists are actually the facists because they won't tolerate my facism!" Strong paradox of tolerance vibes you've got there.
  - qu4z-2 4y ago
    And I, in turn, strongly disagree with you. The paradox of tolerance is a product of sloppy thinking and mostly amounts to tribalism in a fancy coat. And antifascists refuse to tolerate many things substantially milder than actual fascism.
    - kingkawn 4y ago
    - eyelidlessness 4y ago
      Yep I’d definitely refuse to tolerate mild fascism, thanks I don’t want to go to shooting war over it. It’s bad enough seeing people I love and care about beaten or harassed out of their homes.
btilly 4y ago
Perhaps we should define what a "monarch" is. The Dalai Lama and Simeon II of Bulgaria were both heads of state during WW II. But China invaded Tibet in 1950, and by 1960 the Dalai Lama ruled nothing. And Simeon lost his throne in 1946 (though he did get elected prime minister many years later). I wouldn't count them as monarchs any more. That said, looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_monarchs_of_sovereign_states https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_monarchs_of_so... I find the following currently reigning monarchs who were born before WW II and probably remember something from it: - Emir Nawaf Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah of Kuwait - King Harald V of Norway - King Salman of Saudi Arabia - Pope Francis of Vatican State
bloqs 4y ago
It's very interesting how written history vs history described by grandparents are totally different functional things

drieddust 4y ago

dang 4y ago
We've banned this account for repeatedly posting flamewar comments. That's not allowed here. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. I don't lightly ban an 11-year-old account, but we've warned you many times, and you've done little but post flamewar comments lately, including nationalistic and religious flamewar.
- drieddust 4y ago
  To be fair if responding to nationalist and religious comments is considered flamewar, then I do not care that you have banned my account.
  - dang 4y ago
    No, flamewar comments are considered flamewar. The site guidelines do ask people not to respond to egregious comments, since those just fuel the flames (this is HN's equivalent of "please don't feed the trolls"), but the problems with what you were posting were much worse than that. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

throwaway1777 4y ago

This is basically where Howe’s 4th turning thesis comes from. The cycle repeats over the course of around 80 years more or less as the generations die off.

mlindner 4y ago

I think you're exaggerating quite a lot.

tacostakohashi 4y ago

> served as an ambulance mechanic. Ahh yes, that photo of Elizabeth changing an ambulance tire, one of the great public relations triumphs of the 20th century. So humble! She's just like one of us...

timc3 4y ago
Well according to my Grandmother she did actually work, as my Grandmother was around her at the time.

someperson 4y ago

> the last monarch to have any memory of WWII Saudi Arabia's King Salman was born in 1935

29athrowaway 4y ago

I am just going to leave this here. Enjoy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_tour_of_Germany_by_the_Duke_and_Duchess_of_Windsor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_tour_of_Germany_by_the_Du...

dang 4y ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32769695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32769695.