- If the Queen is on the screen you must be drinking. The woman has ruled the country for over 50 years, the least you can do is get destroyed in her honour.
- Any time Prince Harry appears all players must produce a Nazi salute. The last player to do so must consume 5 fingers/mouthfuls for their poor reactions.
- If Elton John is spotted, the last person to shout "Candle in the Wind" must drink 5.
- Any time time parallels are drawn to the Diana and Charles wedding (or any previous Royal Wedding for that matter), by commentators or otherwise, all players must consume 3 fingers/mouthfuls of their drink.
- We're British (or shall assume the role for the day), which means we're a simple folk who enjoy comforts such as bacon and beer. With this in mind then, what better way to greet our anthem than with a hearty chug. As a result when the National Anthem is playing, everyone must be stood up and drinking.
- William will one day become king of this fine country, a fact that needs to be celebrated no? Every time the word "future" is said, in the mentioned context or not, an amount no less than 1 finger must be added to the "Future Kings Cup" by any player. This should then go in a clockwise direction from the first player to do so everytime future is mentioned, to ensure the cup has a good mix of drinks.
- And following on from Rule 6, The last person to shout "God save the future King!" upon the proclamation of "I now pronounce you man and wife" has to down the Future King's Cup. I fear for those that are last here, I really do.
- Prince Phillip has found a warm place in many of our hearts, his "Racist Grandad" appeal simply too hard too dislike. As a result, whenever he is shown independent of the Queen (to avoid complications with rule 1), the last player to shout "Bloody Foreigners" must drink 3 fingers. Penalties can be awarded for anyone who makes no attempt to imitate his accent.
- Prime Ministers never tend to be popular but our current one is hated even by those standards. So to allow you all to "stick it to da man" whenever our fearless leader David Cameron appears on screen, the first player to shout "CUNT" is allowed to come up with a rule of their own. Enjoy your one chance at tyranny!
- Whenever the union flag appears on screen, the first to shout "rule brittania" is bestowed with the honor of delegating four measures however they see fit, one for each nation of the UK. This can either be to single player, or spread amongst them. Make sure our great flag is honoured with the drinking it deserves!
Thursday, 28 April 2011
The Royal Wedding Drinking Game (via @StarShaped_Girl )
Just fuck the fuck off, please!
Christ. So Cameron said something vaguely in touch with the common parlance and now lefties are predictably going off the deep end.
The faux moral outrage is depressing. Anybody with half a sense of humour would have smiled and moved on. But no, already we're seeing articles about how the Prime Minister's (mis)use of an advertising catchphrase is a gateway to reverting to Victorian attitudes to women and how we can expect a rise in wifebeating and clitorectomies as a result.
Angela Eagle has predictably responded with a chippy article about how she's "been condescended to by better people than Cameron." Well, then, she should be fucking used to it by now and not fucking writing articles in the Guardian about how not upset she fucking is.
On the other side of the coin, I actually read someone criticising Ed Balls for not standing up for Yvette, when it was originally thought that Cameron might have been talking to her.
Christ Almighty. The economy is in the toilet, we're engaged in illegal wars, Libya is shaping up to be another Vietnam, we're taxed for more than half our income, social democrats are chipping away at the handful of freedoms we have left and all we can get exercised about is a fucking throwaway line from an advert.
I need to get out of this shithole. Enough is enough.
The faux moral outrage is depressing. Anybody with half a sense of humour would have smiled and moved on. But no, already we're seeing articles about how the Prime Minister's (mis)use of an advertising catchphrase is a gateway to reverting to Victorian attitudes to women and how we can expect a rise in wifebeating and clitorectomies as a result.
Angela Eagle has predictably responded with a chippy article about how she's "been condescended to by better people than Cameron." Well, then, she should be fucking used to it by now and not fucking writing articles in the Guardian about how not upset she fucking is.
On the other side of the coin, I actually read someone criticising Ed Balls for not standing up for Yvette, when it was originally thought that Cameron might have been talking to her.
Christ Almighty. The economy is in the toilet, we're engaged in illegal wars, Libya is shaping up to be another Vietnam, we're taxed for more than half our income, social democrats are chipping away at the handful of freedoms we have left and all we can get exercised about is a fucking throwaway line from an advert.
I need to get out of this shithole. Enough is enough.
Monday, 18 April 2011
Populism vs principle
The success of the True Finns party in Norway* is currently rocking the world. Apparently, they have populist left-wing economic policies and populist right-wing views on things like social liberties and immigration.
I've no idea why so-called "libertarians" from UKIP are congratulating them for their win. Left-wing economic policies and right-wing views on immigration sound horribly like the BNP to me.
But the truth of the matter is that every party has fallen prey to populism. Gordon Brown's "British jobs for British workers" would have caused a national upchuck from Labour members if Nick Griffin had said it. Ed Miliband is currently avoiding populism by bashing bankers. Cameron's NHS "reform" U-turn is as populist as anything. And even Farage's burqa banning bollocks was just a straightforward bit of populist playing to the gallery.
It may well be that in years gone by, political parties had a set of principles that they would strive to, occasionally lapsing as realpolitik necessitated uncomfortable compromises. But it seems to me that since Tony Blair arrived on the scene, politics has been completely restructured so that expediency is the sole objective.
David Cameron's team of half-wit fuckmongs are resuscitating policies that even the snot-munching cockwomble gave up on. The LibDems, who actually probably led the way in having populist expediency as a raison d'être but were just too irrelevant to matter before, have gaily indulged in faux "investment" cutting and loads of authoritarian bollocks, just like Labour did before them.
To a disinterested observer with no particular tie colour to endorse, the parties and their policies are indistinguishable. This is because their principles are indistinguishable:
This focus-group-driven crap where people indulge in showboating for votes really fucks me off.
But really, who can we blame? Voters don't think about politics any more. They don't vote or they vote tribally.
Politics is tired. Electoral reform may help some aspects of it, but the truth is, if you put a yellow background on Labour's manifesto, a Lib Dem tribal voter would vote for it. If you put a blue background on it, a Tory tribal voter would vote for it.
Anyone who is actually thinking about his or her vote has to choose between three parties that offer no difference in outcome. Some minor details may differ, but most people will not really notice anything.
The disconnect between voters and the government will not be addressed by AV, PR or abolishing the monarchy. Voters are being led by unprincipled, on-the-make fucks who think they know better than we do what is best for us. Does it matter who you vote for between Dave, Nick or Ed when you get no fucking difference who you elect? Does it matter if there's a coalition between the "left-wing" Lib Dems and the "right-wing" Tories if you can't tell the difference between that and the previous "left-wing" Labour government?
Does it matter whether you vote for one shyster huckster, or rank up to five of them?
Electoral reform is not the problem, a sea of completely unprincipled politicians is the problem.
People give me grief for my anarcho-capitalist views, but at least there are a coherent set of principles that underpin it. And they will not be compromised by political expediency if there is no political body to gain from that expediency.
*It's time to fess up, this was deliberate.
I've no idea why so-called "libertarians" from UKIP are congratulating them for their win. Left-wing economic policies and right-wing views on immigration sound horribly like the BNP to me.
But the truth of the matter is that every party has fallen prey to populism. Gordon Brown's "British jobs for British workers" would have caused a national upchuck from Labour members if Nick Griffin had said it. Ed Miliband is currently avoiding populism by bashing bankers. Cameron's NHS "reform" U-turn is as populist as anything. And even Farage's burqa banning bollocks was just a straightforward bit of populist playing to the gallery.
It may well be that in years gone by, political parties had a set of principles that they would strive to, occasionally lapsing as realpolitik necessitated uncomfortable compromises. But it seems to me that since Tony Blair arrived on the scene, politics has been completely restructured so that expediency is the sole objective.
David Cameron's team of half-wit fuckmongs are resuscitating policies that even the snot-munching cockwomble gave up on. The LibDems, who actually probably led the way in having populist expediency as a raison d'être but were just too irrelevant to matter before, have gaily indulged in faux "investment" cutting and loads of authoritarian bollocks, just like Labour did before them.
To a disinterested observer with no particular tie colour to endorse, the parties and their policies are indistinguishable. This is because their principles are indistinguishable:
- Get into power
- Stay in power for as long as possible
- Er....
- Thats' it!
This focus-group-driven crap where people indulge in showboating for votes really fucks me off.
But really, who can we blame? Voters don't think about politics any more. They don't vote or they vote tribally.
Politics is tired. Electoral reform may help some aspects of it, but the truth is, if you put a yellow background on Labour's manifesto, a Lib Dem tribal voter would vote for it. If you put a blue background on it, a Tory tribal voter would vote for it.
Anyone who is actually thinking about his or her vote has to choose between three parties that offer no difference in outcome. Some minor details may differ, but most people will not really notice anything.
The disconnect between voters and the government will not be addressed by AV, PR or abolishing the monarchy. Voters are being led by unprincipled, on-the-make fucks who think they know better than we do what is best for us. Does it matter who you vote for between Dave, Nick or Ed when you get no fucking difference who you elect? Does it matter if there's a coalition between the "left-wing" Lib Dems and the "right-wing" Tories if you can't tell the difference between that and the previous "left-wing" Labour government?
Does it matter whether you vote for one shyster huckster, or rank up to five of them?
Electoral reform is not the problem, a sea of completely unprincipled politicians is the problem.
People give me grief for my anarcho-capitalist views, but at least there are a coherent set of principles that underpin it. And they will not be compromised by political expediency if there is no political body to gain from that expediency.
*It's time to fess up, this was deliberate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)