ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
Who was England's Greatest Prime Minister?
We're settling this.
- Thread starter ParkCungHee
- Start date
- Status
LightSpectra
me autem minui
Of those two, Pitt; though I'd say that Macmillan was the best.
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
Who? What? What is 'England?'
nonconformist
Miserable
D L-G for sure.
Quackers
The Frog
There isn't an option for Churchill.
WTF
I thought you would be more of an Atlee man tbh.
WTF
I thought you would be more of an Atlee man tbh.
Gotta side with Moe and Boggs on this one, chief. 
People don't tend to recognize "Prime Ministers" before Walpole. Marlborough did more or less head the government for awhile though.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
Somehow I thought you'd be the first one to pick up on what's going on here Dachs.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
I'm not exactly sure a traitor -- one that was highly proficient in slaying Frenchmen, but a traitor nonetheless -- would be qualified as a great statesman.
dannyshenanigan
Emperor
I think this is a Simpsons reference to when Barney is arguing with Wade Boggs at Moe's tavern as to who is the greatest British Prime Minister. Lord Palmerston and Pitt the Elder being the only two argued for.
madviking
north american scum
Attlee?
I don't really know much about British politics but he stands out as the good one for me.
I don't really know much about British politics but he stands out as the good one for me.
Was that his brief return to official duties after the death of Anne ? Seems most of his life was a struggle to achieve that role he never got.
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,204
Lightspectra: I never realized he was charged with treason, but after a brief skimming if the Wikipedia article, it appears he was never actualy convicted on that. Afterwards he went to win the battle of Blenheim so that sort of equals out.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
He wasn't convicted of treason because the traitors ended up winning the "Glorious Revolution."
LightSpectra
me autem minui
Betraying a man you swore your loyalty and trust to, for the purpose of nothing but political gain, is treachery, regardless of whether it's legal guilt.
It's never treasonous to betray a monarchy being the scum they are representatives of the archaic and decadent feudal system. Indeed it is right and just.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
Ideologizing history being a bad idea notwithstanding, Marlborough betrayed one monarch for another. In fact, one could even say that Marlborough's efforts prolonged the English monarchy, given that he proceeded to sustain the Williamites with military victories against the French.
Marlborough could be defended for his betrayal of James at the time, but had second thoughts under the regime that came after. Not that their being Royals somehow justifies it. His victories were won almost in spite of them, since they could not trust him, but he would not betray the interests of his country.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
- Locked
