I have two words for Rick Mercer...F*** Off! He is such an idiot. Every country has a place of residence for their head of state. As a proud Canadian I say..God Save our Queen!
@48dodea No. It's simply a matter of formality recognized by the constitution. Most issues dealt with by the Governor General, Canada's representative of our head of state,
It would take away the pomp and ceremony, make the country less politically stable, & make it all about the elected politicians (and that's totally democratic, isn't it? Politicians never lie to get elected, always fulfill their campaign promises, and they're representative of Canadian society, aren't they? - not!), politically distance Canada from the commonwealth & leave Canada to be swallowed up by the US, yet republicanism would add NOTHING! I'd rather our Queen than what the US presidents!
@Ilionabebe This is one thing I do not get: Monarchists keep repeating this completely irrational idea that if Canada became a republic, we would somehow become the 51st American state. JUST BY BECOMING A REPUBLIC? That is completely ABSURD! We are not giving up our sovereignty, by giving up the monarchy. If YOU want to bend over and take it up your ass, just because Canada becomes a republic, you had better look out because I will be right there to KICK YOUR ASS!
@sweiland75 - Giving up the monarchy that underpins the political fabric of the country and acts as a bulwark against the unthinkable, do you want to get rid of the French as well? If so, why not just join with the USA? And you better believe that they will gobble up provinces like Alberta straight away! ... and next... Ontario and those Northwest Territories and the Yukon, Nunavut too...! :(
@sweiland75 - Don't be so bloody rude. As for proof, we are talking in the theoretical, so why don't you show me proof that it won't happen... And besides, the USA has a long history of gobbling up other countries and provinces/states/regions - California, Texas, all of New France below the 49th parallel, Puerto Rico, etc., and there are always people from the US talking about seizing parts of Canada. Alberta would just be the most logical first step & plenty to dig up up north.
I dont agree. It's nice to have the British at arm's length. Keep 'em there. it's more customary then anything. British Politics don't seem to get in our way of Business anyway. Maybe one day we'll call in a favor when the bloody yanks decide to march north... Looking for Canada's WMD's (hahaha)
And in todays world, it'd very beneficial to be in the commonwealth. Business/Travil wise.
@sweiland75 Give me an example... Back yourself up their buddy. Commenting on Canadian Education? Where are you from and where did you go to school. Back up your talk.
@sweiland75 An example your country calling in the favors. And which country are you representing exactly? As I read more on this forum you seem to enjoy arguing.
Abolishing the monarchy would be the most positive, self-determined thing that great old Canada could ever do! It is high time that we stop acting like a bunch of subservient bees in a hive. Are we a colony still, an adjunct of Great Britain?? Or are we a mature, self-confident-in-ourselves country; which is ready at long last to cast aside the vestiges of feudalism & colonialism?? This is a big political issue, and the Australians are very much ahead of us on this.
@YoYoYoYoYoYoYoYoYo36 No. Xenophobe is directed at all other cultures not a bias for or against any particular culture.
We use the word bias because it does not presume to judge the feelings of the individual. A person can have a perfectly justified negative feeling toward other cultures depending on the history. Your dislike of British could be justified. I don't know.
Bigotry as applied to religion most often, My God is better then your God can seldom be so justified.
@YoYoYoYoYoYoYoYoYo36 If I judged by race yes it would be racist. If I judged by Religion that would be bigotry.
That's not what I'm doing.
I'm making a cultural judgment & since American culture promotes itself as "the greatest" there by insinuating all other cultures are inferior I'm simply returning the gesture.
If I randomly picked a culture that had not made such a provocative claim for example started picking on the French. That would be "bias".
@YoYoYoYoYoYoYoYoYo36 Near as I can tell it was your anti British remarks that inspired those replies.
Your activity casts Canada in a negative light far worse then their response to it.
You have a week old account as such I'm far more likely to cast a suspicious eye your way in any argument as it is almost certainly created for the express purpose of trolling.
I have invested years in my account.
You are not Canadians you act like Americans ignorant & loud. Go Home.
Yet your anti-American comments have done no damage?? Why do you accuse my friends of casting Canada in the wrong light when they merely are expressing their political opinions?? You accuse them of being anti-British and making Canada looking bad. Yet your brand of anti-Americanism does no damage?? That is nothing more than double standards, bud...
If an American citizen joined Al quada then began a long campaign of trashing everything your nation stands for do you still acknowledge him as American or do you erase his ass with a drone strike?
We don't do that in Canada but I don't have to acknowledge them as Canadian not when there is evidence they are in Fact Americans pretending to be Canadians so as to crap on my country.
He was an Islamist terr looking to kill Americans. He is not mine to disavow, he was never one of us. Just a fifth columnist here......
As for the rest, I have nothing but friendship and love for our neighbors up north. I want what's best for them. Republicanism is bold, new step, and as an American, I would be overjoyed at the prospect,
As for China and Russia they are Republics in name only. They are pseudo Republics.
@Eddythebeast666 This has been part of Canadian Culture and so has been independence and separation from Great Britain. Our Canadian Culture and history is the Nickle resolution, then becoming a Commonwealth, Westminster, Then opening our own independent embassies, flags, exclusive citizenships... the list of Canadian Culture goes on.
If you want to reject our Canadian Culture and go against it then feel free to move to the UK. Im sure they would love to have you.
@Eddythebeast666 Absolutely yes we have. Its not about 'rejecting' but yes we have constantly been cutting ties to Britain. I mentioned just a few of them. We have been constantly separating for well over a century. It's why we don't celebrate Dominion Day.
@ElProximo A Rose by any other name is still Canada Day.
We don't celebrate the name we celebrate the event. Does it matter what language we sing Oh Canada in?
I'm part Mi'kmaq. All treaties we have are with the British Crown. If you speak English in Canada your right to be here comes from that relationship we have established with the British Crown.
Not sure if you are aware but Native peoples have had a real problem with Republics in North America.
@Eddythebeast666 Then a rose by any other name solves your treaty concerns. Look, for example if you go back to the original mikmaq arrangements it was with a parliament in London and that is long since gone. They can't change or pass our laws anymore.
I don't think you get to be mikmaq and then get to co-opt some problem some other peoples had. mikmaq had success and so you don't get to have victim status too. And it wasn't because of 'Republics' anyways.
@Eddythebeast666 Becoming a republic would prove to the world, and to Canadians, that we are entirely capable of running our own show without some de jure head of state who serves no legitimate function.
@Eddythebeast666 it's ironic that you say that the world is not admiring isolationism yet you mention the US which is the most jingoist country. I have no issues with being a member of the Commonwealth. We can still be independent. I've seen this stated before that it's either we are with the UK or the US. That's ridiculous. Have you heard the story of Mouseland? There is more than two options. Another option is independence - from both the UK and US.
@sweiland75 The problem with discussing cultural loyalties & National loyalties is that the two aren't always the same.
There are those in the UK that want to become a Republic as well as it was during the English civil war(1642–1651) Which always reminds me of Paradise Lost as a metaphor.
If the UK became a Republic then screw them.
A republic is all about stripping away all those old school elites.
The Problem is you just whined up with a new class of elites
Indeed there are many Republics that are members of the Commonwealth. The majority of the countries in the Commonwealth are Republics. EddytheBeast is is offering the fallacy of two choices that are mututally exclusive. In reality nobody is putting a gun to your head. Choose whatever is best for you! The US will always be a friend. Not sure if I can say the same with the Brits, given they ran off to join the whole European project some decades back.
Whatever you choose, the US would always embrace you as a friend and partner. Republicanism for Canada is a wonderful idea. Obviously there are many types of Republicanism and Canadians should choose whatever form that suits them best. :)
Also the government claims to care about the British peoples health, but happily sends British healthy young soldiers into areas of Afghanistan, where those soldiers cannot shoot a hostile enemy unless they are 100% sure where the enemy is.
So if they cannot see who is shooting at them, then they cannot shoot back, in fear of upsetting the crazy left wing upper class rich nutters.
The first flaw was refering to Elizabeth II as the 'queen of England'. This is the mistake all fucking retarded foreigners make. Is it really too difficult to work out the difference between England & Britain?
As with everything there are people for and people against. Makes me laugh that people care so much as to start immature rants. No matter who your government is in any society, the regular people don't matter a damn. Whether you have a Queen, President, Prime Minister - it's all irrelevant . No one has a real say in how their country is run, you may vote someone in from a very select group of people, but once in power they will still do what they want.
@sweiland75 So you are waging a hate campaign against someone that has no impact upon your own life? Someone who gives Canada a link to its history and traditions? Someone who generates tourism money for canada? You want to abolish all of these things just so that you can disapear up Americas arsehole even more? Enjoy being America jr, idiot. Look at me I hate the monarchy, am I being angsty and edgy enough yet?
@sweiland75 Oh irony thy name is stupidity. The only thing that you have proven is that you are in fact the ignorant one and that you have somesort of complex. You really need to do some growing up.
Say what?! I thought the queen was dead. I didn't even know she was still alive. Damn! By the way, is there a lovely stable they have outback that prince Charles and camilla parker bowles stay in when they come to visit?
1 look at our choices, we didn't have a lot to work with.
2 The best/worst fascist's know how to use propaganda/suppression well enough to get the job done.
One of his few selling points was he doesn't want another election for as long as possible. Surprise surprise, he likes staying in power. That seems likely considering the contempt of parliament was legally supposed to forbid him from re-election.
Thank U Rick Mercer... now say it a little louder please so that the Queen & the Gov. hears u. There really oughta be a referendum on this. We don't need her! Also, 2 become a CANADIAN citizen u have to say an oath to the queen of ENGLAND?.. Why not our much more Canadian flag?! MM.. there's a thought! An Oath to something that was born IN CANADA!!! To something that actually represents CANADA! Who would she have been rooting for during the Olympics?!!! Who will she be rooting for next year?!!
@turtleh Complete Gibberish. Besides having a state sponsored celebrity we call ''The Queen' Canada has a great deal of differences from America. For one, we indulge in a lot more personal freedoms then they do, our right wing politicians aren't quite as extreme as American right wingers, and we've got a party that has a completely different way they tend politic (Bloc Quebequois. Say what you will about them but it's true, their politics is practically a topic in its self.
@turtleh The queen does nothing, absolutely nothing good for our country. She hasn't worked a day in her life, and besides just our land she takes everything she can - she is a parasite in the guise of a 'lady'. Besides, politicians are sketchy, are they not? And you can't deny celebrites can be pretty sketchy as well. So, if politicians and celebrities are so sketchy, then why isn't a state sponsored celebrity? And that's exactly what she is, nothing more.
@turtleh *Face palm* I apologize for sending you three of these damn messages but, well, Youtube's character length is kind of short. My closing arguments against your statement -
The very last type of people you should ever trust are the ones that are promoted by the government. Besides, why should we even respect her? She's done her share of terrible, inexcuseable things and her resume basically consists of 'did less then Hilton'.
Canada isn't just Britain's bitch, we're their husky.
@llIIFoXIIll Things will stay status quo for the remainder of the queen's life as it should. Afterwards I believe the consitutional monarchy will be dissolved.
@turtleh You think our connection to the British monarchy is the only thing keeping the Americans from annexing Canada? WOW! That's quite a powerful monarchy. /sarcasm
imho, Canada need to be a parliamentary republic, merge the role of the queen and GG into one, have them elected by the senate once thats fixed up, etc. IMHO we need change, but the minimum change the better, and only the part that's necessary.
She rules by force. Just try to make a change and see when the guns come out.The Canadian establishment counts on her lead in greed. Canada was invented to make beaver hats for aristocrats. The Queen thinks she is better than the rest of us. They are bread like dogs. Regicide I say!
@RichardElden We could remove the queen's link to our system but keep choosing our Governor Generals in the same way. Only this time, we wouldn't need Elizabeth II's permission to appoint them.
She is NOT THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND. There has been no QUEEN OF ENGLAND since 1707. The title is QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN (AND NORTHERN IRELAND). Please catch up, it's been 300 years since that term was used.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@RichardElden Don't like democracy? Hmm, that makes you a fascist, doesn't it? Then again, with the density of Nazis in the British royal family, that's not surprising.
Not having a politician for Head of State does not mean such a state is not a democracy.
Or are you saying that Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Japan, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, Netherlands, Belgium, New Zeeland than say Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba or Belarus which all has politicians as Head of State?
If you look at the Economist's Democracy Index 7 out of the Top 10 countries are monarchies. In comparison the well toted "worlds greatest democracy" USA ranks in as no.17.
I have difficulty accepting opinions from someone who owes his entire existance to a taxpayer-funded broadcaster. How exactly do you see yourself as any different from the monarchy, Mr. Mercer? And when was the last time you visited my neighbourhood? Various members of the Royal Family visit for events quite regularly.
@CPLibrary Of course, the main differences are: the CBC unites Canada, the monarchy divides us; the majority supports the CBC, only 27% support Canada remaining a monarchy (Angus Reid 11/16/09). The majority should not have to pay so that some elitist, disfunctional family can visit your neighbourhood and feed your royalist fantasies. Saving our multi-faceted heritage will be far easier without ties to a *British* monarchy. Finally, yes, God will have to save the Queen, because Canada will not.
@CPLibrary I hate to nitpick, but be doesn't owe his /existence/ to CBC (his parents have more to do with that, I assume. Unless he's some sort of CBC experiment). P.S. - If you like the Queen so much you can borrow her. I assure you we're not really doing anything with her. We'd be particularly grateful if you take Prince Philip and Prince Charles too, but we understand if you have limits.
Thought you guys were a Republic anyway? No? Wow. Same as Australia then, what's stopping you? We probably pour a bucket load of cash into keeping the bloody thing going anyway. Be free. Go away. Have fun. Elect Geddy Lee as President. Wooot.
@sweiland75 What's wrong with Geddy Lee? Lol. Talking of asses, take your head out of yours, look up "irony" in the dictionary and lighten up. Canada should do whatever it wants to do. Quite frankly I wouldn't imagine many people in the UK care very much either way. We're European. The "Commonwealth" doesn't stand for anything anymore.
@sweiland75 would assume you haven't been invited to Will & Kate's wedding later his month then? ;o) No matey, I'm all for the monarchy, but as still "Head of State" for other countries? Nah. I'd still go with Geddy Lee though. You've to admit "La Villa Strangiato" is genius?
Mrs. Mountbatten seems like a perfectly nice lady, but she's not Canadian. All precedence aside, I don't like having a foreign head of state. I admire certain things about the States, one of them being the constitutional stipulation that their head of state must be born in the States. With us it's taken for granted that the head of state wasn't, isn't & won't be Canadian. It's embarrassing!
I like how he makes out Rideau Hall is just being wasted. First it belongs to Canada completely anyway, secondly it in constant active use by the government all year round and has little to do with the queen. Nothing would change in the slightest whether there is a monarch or not!
Canada has not had a queen since 1901 (when Queen Victoria died). Any succeeding monarch of the United Kingdom is simply de facto, and has no such authority. If indeed we are paying for someone else's Queen to have a pile of expensive estates in our country for no reason - well thats just disgustingly wrong.
@sweiland75 Glad you asked. The British North America Act (BNA) 1867, which is our original "constitution", says in section 2 that Victoria's powers and role within the Act extend to her heirs and successors. Now, at that time that means that we WOULD have new rulers. However, The Statute Law Revision Act 1893 [UK] repeals section 2 among other things. This meant that when Queen Victoria died, Canada would be without a King or Queen, as heirs did not inherit any powers in Canada. She died in1901
@sweiland75 And furthermore, if you are skeptical about what I'm saying, then it is saved by the Statute of Westminster, where the UK relieves ALL authority over Canada, and leaves the provinces sovereign and open to create their own government rather than a foreign one that had been ruling in the past. Not only is any monarch since Victoria a de facto ruler, but you could argue that so is our current gov't. Look up a modern version of the BNA and notice it has section 2 repealed. Cheers.
I visited the Citadel in Quebec and all references to Her Majesty were airbrushed, with the G-G apparently ruling the country. I was told it was so as not to upset the French Canadians who always seem to be represented (from the Vancouver Games logo to Historical societies) but the country that so many Canadians were subjects of, believed in and died for is forgotten.Why should we not simply join the US? Constitutional Monarchy created our different countries. imperialflags.blogspot.com
@Lacedaemonia What is it with your braindead monarchists? You always say "Well, if we don't have a monarchy, we might as well become the 51st American state." Is it not possible for your tiny little brain to comprehend that Canada could (and should) be a sovereign country? It is you monarchists who are dragging the country down, by reinforcing this colonial mentality, while us progressive republicans break away from that past.
I love the UK and I am entirely proud of our British heritage and I respect the Queen and all that goes along with it. There is zero benefit or special consideration given to me or any other Canadian in the UK or as a member of the Commonwealth which is a name only now. A German can work in the UK and have certain legal EU rights and privileges and a Canadian is no more than a Yank or anyone else there.
In 2011 there is absolutely zero reason for holding onto someone who let us go already.
@ElProximo As already stated there are benefits for commonwealth citizens; look up 'Commonwealth citizen' on wiki for the list, joining the british army and voting in uk elections are two of them but the main one used by quite a few people is the ability to have a two year working visa in the uk, loads and loads of CW people do that. I'm not disagreeing with the republican arguments just pointing out there are benefits to CW citizens in theUK
@midnightmilo Uh yeah but you also know it doesn't work like this list is available to any Canadian. Yes, you can join the british army but a Canadian can join the US army (and others). Yes, some can get a 2 year work visa depending on this grandfather and that and application processes etc (and a German EU will feel sorry for you as he work visas easier). At the end of the day, overall, for most Canadians most times you are visiting the UK same as anyone else.
how do you know that? i'm sick of hearing this tripe slogan straight out of the palin school of ditzy catchy political platitudes. how great our country is, and doesn't need improvement. Canada may be doing well--but MAYBE it could be doing even better. no one knows. this arrogant and simplistic practice of defending a status quo and dismissing a future which you clearly don't understand is condusive to our motto of "keep exploring"
complacency is not healthy given our voter apathy. we still have a prominent colonial element to our identity, constitution and symbolism. what if canadians were to sever the royal link and little brother mentality and seek out something new to meet the demands of our evolving character and face? i only see more independence, patriotism (not jingoism), and more unity as a result.
@R0773N Ah yes, Impeachment. Lets us see now, the last successful impeachment (cannot count Clinton as he was only impeached by the House of Representatives) was WHEN exactly?? Not exactly a well oiled lever of democracy. Tell me when the last Prime Minister was sacked....much more recently!
people are jealous, of the royal familly, of the wealth, prestige, pomp and ceremony, et al.... if you can live a life under a microscope, allow your time and activities to be scripted and planned well in advance, adhere and stick to a planner and do it all with style and grace, then you will find yourself doing quite well, and sitting opposite the likes of the Queen on occasion, and appreciating the sacrifices made for her position. We would all love to be Olympians, but......
-The "Similar in principal" statement refers to the customs of governance(the PM,cabinet,opposition leader,etc). The monarch has a seperate section of the constitution were All executive power is vested in that office.
-The queen cannot have a Canadian passport because she grants them, as such she cannot grant herself one.
-Changing anything having to do with the monarchy requires the consent of all 10 provinces, the federal government and the crown.
The formula for a Canadian republic may be simple, but so would be the results: a craven career politician whom you are stuck with for four or more years (think George W. Bush, Pierre Trudeau as President) because if you ditch the queen you will need a president whom no one can fire.....but no one ever really thinks about THAT.
@krt1934 "a craven career politician whom you are stuck with for four or more...because...you will need a president"
No, we don't. We can keep the EXACT same political arrangement we have today, except end the political fiction that the GG represents the monarch of a foreign country.
The formula for a Canadian republic is simple, but so would be the results: a craven career politician whom you are stuck with for four or more years (think George W. Bush, Pierre Trudeau) because if you ditch the queen you will need a president whom no one can fire.....but no one ever really thinks about THAT. Imagine not being able to sack the Prime minister.
what about a committee to select which order of Canada recipients will be voted on then a vote in the house of commons by the members of parliament ( I believe there are 305 mp’s) and who ever wins that vote gets the position?
@drfye Sure, there are lots of ways it could be done. My suggestion is merely an idea that appeals to me. It's up to the country to decide the nature of our head of state: who it should be, and how the office is filled. I'd like something that enables us to be a republic, something ours alone, but something as close to the current role and influence of the Governor-General as possible. A quite and respectful retiring of the monarchy.
wouldn’t that goal be achieved by making the GG the head of state instead of a representation of it. So not necessarily doing away with the position of GG, and the parlimentary system would remain unchanged.
so.................... what i described in my previous comments is what your saying, where the position GG basically becomes the president but more or less remains a symbolic position with the same power as the GG and our parlimentary system remains unchanged with the exception being of how we select our head of state ? because like i stated before I don't care for the US system, I personally prefer parlimentary democracy.
@drfye You're missing one vital detail: What is it a symbol of? It should be a purely Canadian symbol and not a symbol of any foreign monarchy. Canada is supposed to be a sovereign country. Let's ensure that fact by abolishing the Office of Governor General.
@sweiland75 I don't agree with getting rid of the GG; God knows, I'd by far rather keep that role than create some sort of presidency that's going to compete with the PM and cabinet for executive power. What I'd like is a GG with the same role and powers as now, but heading the Canadian state, rather than the fiction of representing a foreign monarch. Preferably the person holding the office should be chosen from among members of the Order of Canada; people who've done something for the nation.
The formula for a Canadian republic is simple: cut the link between the governor general and the British monarchy. Period. Instant parliamentary republic. The GG becomes our ceremonial president, everything else stays the same. It's been done before: Ireland, India, Trinidad & Tobago. Also Iceland with the Danish monarchy. France and Russia, despite having both a PM and a president are not good comparisons. They have Semi-presidential republics. The US is a Presidential republic.
@ruttandtuke@ruttandtuke This would require a change to the Canadian constitution, and the ten provincial legislatures, the House of Commons, and the Senate would have to approve it unanimously before it can happen.
Let's face it, a Canadian republic is not going to happen, not in a thousand years, whatever the Republicans say.
@SanSerriffe It's very difficult done the typical amendment route. I'd propose a referendum, agreed to be binding on the legislatures, in which Canadians would express their preference. If they want to keep the monarchy, fine. If they choose something else, we ought not to be held in the constitutional straightjacket we were stuffed into 30 years ago by a dozen WASPs born between the World Wars.
@PatchesRips Interesting idea, except that legislatures do not have the right to decide on another approach, such as a binding referendum. Also, the Queen is, despite all the badly-formulated polls, still very popular in the country, especially with new Canadians.
And in these times, when nations are increasingly adopting the realpolitik approach to international affairs, isn't the idea of a number of countries sharing a common culture having a common head of state rather noble in itself?
@SanSerriffe "legislatures do not have the right to decide on another approach, such as a binding referendum"
There's nothing in the Constitution that addressing HOW that process occurs. If they all agree to be bound by that process and then act subsequently in accord with the Constitution, it would be entirely legal.
I don't say the Queen herself is unpopular. She's very popular in the United States as well. That in itself doesn't equate to a claim to head the state of that, or any, country.
@SanSerriffe "isn't the idea of a number of countries sharing a common culture having a common head of state rather noble in itself?"
In the abstract. There are practical issues with it. First of all, it's ethnically-based. This has been an issue in THIS country in particular since its inception. The older I get, the more astounded I am that French Canada has endured it this long. It's also gender-biased and prejudicial against Catholics in particular. And as Canadians, we cannot change this.
@PatchesRips French Canada didn't have to "put up" with anything. The Crown was popular among the French-speaking Canadians until the rise of Quebec nationalism in the 1970s. In fact, if you talk to the older Quebec generation, you will find quite a few imperialists with pictures of QEII.
Eventually the 16 Commonwealth realms are going to adopt a gender-neutral primogeniture and abolish the Catholic disability. That they have not done so yet is purely because of coordination issues.
@SanSerriffe "The Crown was popular among the French-speaking Canadians until the rise of Quebec nationalism in the 1970s."
I'd like to see the evidence for this. I don't believe it to be the case. I don't deny that it was tolerable, nor that it still is. But that's not the same thing as saying it's "popular", or the preferred governmental arrangement. Quebec nationalism became pronounced in the 1950s and a matter of policy under Jean Lesage at the beginning of the 1960s, not the 1970s.
@SanSerriffe "Eventually the 16 Commonwealth realms are going to adopt a gender-neutral primogeniture and abolish the Catholic disability."
It only takes one to say no. And ultimately, those are ancillary issues. We could do it ourselves, without troubling anyone else or insisting their traditions and sensibilities, and ours, have to dovetail. I've become persuaded we should have our own arrangements, tailored to who we are, beholden to none other, and representative of Canadians alone.
@SanSerriffe "if you talk to the older Quebec generation, you will find quite a few imperialists"
Jean Chretien is a noted monarchist among Quebecois. But even he, in Straight from the Heart, honestly indicated "'I, too, wish I had been able to wake up Montcalm and tell him the English were coming... but I was not there.' ...It was my way of making the serious point that we had to face reality." Honest acceptance, but not exactly a ringing endorsement.
It's my feeling, coming from a family that is partly French Canadian, that a respectful retirement of the monarchy and the institution of something wholly and solely Canadian would go a long way to reconciling the federalist/nationalist fence-sitters to a future in Canada that they could embrace, rather than endure. I'd say the same for those new Canadians for whom the monarchy is a quaint reminder that English Canadians haven't discovered who they are yet.
@SanSerriffe And furthermore, you touch it with a needle: "the older generation". They aren't going to be voting on the future of this country in 15, 25, 30 years from now. People wondering what the hell they're still doing in a country with King Charles III and King William V on their money and issuing them their passports will be.
@PatchesRips Very thoughtful reply. However, do you really think that abandoning the monarchy is going to pacify the Quebec separatists? The Quebec-ROC split goes much, much deeper than that. Also the fence sitters are, by their very nature, more concerned with the practical side of the independence debate than the political side, so it is hardly going to good there. New Canadians, believe it or not, generally like the monarchy. The Crown may be many things, but ethnocentric it is not.
@PatchesRips You also seem to think that only the 65+ club takes any interest in the monarchy. As someone who is still in education, I can tell you that even through lots of people of my age group don't give a damn, their support for the monarchy is probably higher than that of baby-boomers. The upcoming weeding certainly isn't going to hurt either.
One last thing about the popularity in Quebec - It was more than tolerable, Just look at the newsreels of the Royals visits to Quebec.
@SanSerriffe "their support for the monarchy is probably higher than that of baby-boomers"
Again, I'd like to see the figures.
"The upcoming weeding"--
--has exactly nothing to do with how, and by whom, our country is governed. Again: it's a celebrity show that will go over just as big in republics all over the Western world.
"Just look at the newsreels of the Royals visits to Quebec."
Newsreels? Why don't we quote newspaper reports on the Prince of Wales's visit in 1919 while we're at it?
I have two words for Rick Mercer...F*** Off! He is such an idiot. Every country has a place of residence for their head of state. As a proud Canadian I say..God Save our Queen!
brettstrut753 2 hours ago
The Prime Minister needs the Queen's permission to have an erection?
48dodea 2 weeks ago
@48dodea No. It's simply a matter of formality recognized by the constitution. Most issues dealt with by the Governor General, Canada's representative of our head of state,
sweiland75 2 weeks ago
It would take away the pomp and ceremony, make the country less politically stable, & make it all about the elected politicians (and that's totally democratic, isn't it? Politicians never lie to get elected, always fulfill their campaign promises, and they're representative of Canadian society, aren't they? - not!), politically distance Canada from the commonwealth & leave Canada to be swallowed up by the US, yet republicanism would add NOTHING! I'd rather our Queen than what the US presidents!
Ilionabebe 1 month ago
@Ilionabebe This is one thing I do not get: Monarchists keep repeating this completely irrational idea that if Canada became a republic, we would somehow become the 51st American state. JUST BY BECOMING A REPUBLIC? That is completely ABSURD! We are not giving up our sovereignty, by giving up the monarchy. If YOU want to bend over and take it up your ass, just because Canada becomes a republic, you had better look out because I will be right there to KICK YOUR ASS!
sweiland75 1 month ago
@sweiland75 - Giving up the monarchy that underpins the political fabric of the country and acts as a bulwark against the unthinkable, do you want to get rid of the French as well? If so, why not just join with the USA? And you better believe that they will gobble up provinces like Alberta straight away! ... and next... Ontario and those Northwest Territories and the Yukon, Nunavut too...! :(
Ilionabebe 1 month ago
@Ilionabebe You're being completely irrational. Do you have any proof of this?
sweiland75 1 month ago
@sweiland75 - Don't be so bloody rude. As for proof, we are talking in the theoretical, so why don't you show me proof that it won't happen... And besides, the USA has a long history of gobbling up other countries and provinces/states/regions - California, Texas, all of New France below the 49th parallel, Puerto Rico, etc., and there are always people from the US talking about seizing parts of Canada. Alberta would just be the most logical first step & plenty to dig up up north.
Ilionabebe 1 month ago
I dont agree. It's nice to have the British at arm's length. Keep 'em there. it's more customary then anything. British Politics don't seem to get in our way of Business anyway. Maybe one day we'll call in a favor when the bloody yanks decide to march north... Looking for Canada's WMD's (hahaha)
And in todays world, it'd very beneficial to be in the commonwealth. Business/Travil wise.
LafreniereJ 1 month ago
@LafreniereJ Canada doesn't call in favors. We call in favours. If you paid more attention to your Canadian education, you would know that.
sweiland75 2 weeks ago
@sweiland75 Give me an example... Back yourself up their buddy. Commenting on Canadian Education? Where are you from and where did you go to school. Back up your talk.
LafreniereJ 2 weeks ago
@LafreniereJ example of what? proper spelling? no problem
sweiland75 2 weeks ago
@sweiland75 An example your country calling in the favors. And which country are you representing exactly? As I read more on this forum you seem to enjoy arguing.
LafreniereJ 2 weeks ago
Abolishing the monarchy would be the most positive, self-determined thing that great old Canada could ever do! It is high time that we stop acting like a bunch of subservient bees in a hive. Are we a colony still, an adjunct of Great Britain?? Or are we a mature, self-confident-in-ourselves country; which is ready at long last to cast aside the vestiges of feudalism & colonialism?? This is a big political issue, and the Australians are very much ahead of us on this.
smeltriver09 2 months ago
Shes not the Queen of England, she's descended from James VI of Scotland who overthrew the English monarchy and formed the United Kingdom.
Dumbass Paki.
BarryHMFC 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"It is pretty outrageous that Her Majesty the Queen is still recognized as the Head of State anywhere on the North American continent"
--Christopher Hitchens
gobblinmeat 3 months ago
@YoYoYoYoYoYoYoYoYo36 Lol Here him now he thinks we're yank what a loser! This guy should move to the UK if he want the Queen.
MrShoebox77 4 months ago
@YoYoYoYoYoYoYoYoYo36 No. Xenophobe is directed at all other cultures not a bias for or against any particular culture.
We use the word bias because it does not presume to judge the feelings of the individual. A person can have a perfectly justified negative feeling toward other cultures depending on the history. Your dislike of British could be justified. I don't know.
Bigotry as applied to religion most often, My God is better then your God can seldom be so justified.
Eddythebeast666 4 months ago
@YoYoYoYoYoYoYoYoYo36 If I judged by race yes it would be racist. If I judged by Religion that would be bigotry.
That's not what I'm doing.
I'm making a cultural judgment & since American culture promotes itself as "the greatest" there by insinuating all other cultures are inferior I'm simply returning the gesture.
If I randomly picked a culture that had not made such a provocative claim for example started picking on the French. That would be "bias".
I'm not doing that ether.
Eddythebeast666 4 months ago
@YoYoYoYoYoYoYoYoYo36 Near as I can tell it was your anti British remarks that inspired those replies.
Your activity casts Canada in a negative light far worse then their response to it.
You have a week old account as such I'm far more likely to cast a suspicious eye your way in any argument as it is almost certainly created for the express purpose of trolling.
I have invested years in my account.
You are not Canadians you act like Americans ignorant & loud. Go Home.
Eddythebeast666 4 months ago
@Eddythebeast666
Yet your anti-American comments have done no damage?? Why do you accuse my friends of casting Canada in the wrong light when they merely are expressing their political opinions?? You accuse them of being anti-British and making Canada looking bad. Yet your brand of anti-Americanism does no damage?? That is nothing more than double standards, bud...
suryavajra 3 months ago
@suryavajra They are not even Canadians.
If an American citizen joined Al quada then began a long campaign of trashing everything your nation stands for do you still acknowledge him as American or do you erase his ass with a drone strike?
We don't do that in Canada but I don't have to acknowledge them as Canadian not when there is evidence they are in Fact Americans pretending to be Canadians so as to crap on my country.
Eddythebeast666 3 months ago
@Eddythebeast666
Yes, they are Canadian. You may not agree with what they are saying, but that is their right as Canadians to express their opinion.
As for the raghead, he was no American...lol! He was religious zealot. An Islamist terr that got bin Ladened.....
They are pro-American Canadians, and I for one am delighted and extend my hand of friendship and brotherhood to a new Republican Canada.
suryavajra 3 months ago
@suryavajra No they are not Canadians. The double standard is yours as demonstrated by the speed with which you disavow one of your own.
You crap upon Canada for our differences to your own system of governance then pretend its respect.
Go shake hands with the Republic of China or Russia but don't expect a welcome reply if you continue to piss upon Canada's system of governance.
Eddythebeast666 3 months ago
@Eddythebeast666
He was an Islamist terr looking to kill Americans. He is not mine to disavow, he was never one of us. Just a fifth columnist here......
As for the rest, I have nothing but friendship and love for our neighbors up north. I want what's best for them. Republicanism is bold, new step, and as an American, I would be overjoyed at the prospect,
As for China and Russia they are Republics in name only. They are pseudo Republics.
suryavajra 3 months ago
@Eddythebeast666
Since when have I ''pissed'' on Canada's system of governance??
suryavajra 3 months ago
This is part of Canadian Culture if you want to live in a Republic feel free to move to the USA, I'm sure they would love to have you.
Eddythebeast666 4 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 This has been part of Canadian Culture and so has been independence and separation from Great Britain. Our Canadian Culture and history is the Nickle resolution, then becoming a Commonwealth, Westminster, Then opening our own independent embassies, flags, exclusive citizenships... the list of Canadian Culture goes on.
If you want to reject our Canadian Culture and go against it then feel free to move to the UK. Im sure they would love to have you.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo We have never rejected our British ties because those ties have always been to our advantage.
Becoming independent made us more then we were that is true but what you propose can only make us less.
Eddythebeast666 4 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 Absolutely yes we have. Its not about 'rejecting' but yes we have constantly been cutting ties to Britain. I mentioned just a few of them. We have been constantly separating for well over a century. It's why we don't celebrate Dominion Day.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo A Rose by any other name is still Canada Day.
We don't celebrate the name we celebrate the event. Does it matter what language we sing Oh Canada in?
I'm part Mi'kmaq. All treaties we have are with the British Crown. If you speak English in Canada your right to be here comes from that relationship we have established with the British Crown.
Not sure if you are aware but Native peoples have had a real problem with Republics in North America.
Eddythebeast666 4 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 Then a rose by any other name solves your treaty concerns. Look, for example if you go back to the original mikmaq arrangements it was with a parliament in London and that is long since gone. They can't change or pass our laws anymore.
I don't think you get to be mikmaq and then get to co-opt some problem some other peoples had. mikmaq had success and so you don't get to have victim status too. And it wasn't because of 'Republics' anyways.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@Eddythebeast666
May all of North America and South America be a sisterhood of Republican nations proud and free.
suryavajra 3 months ago
Comment removed
MrShoebox77 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Eddythebeast666 Coming from someone who doesn't pay taxes. But i'll bet anything you'll lie and say you do.
MrShoebox77 4 months ago
@ElProximo I agree mate this kid sounds like another troll.
MrShoebox77 4 months ago
Most like a Brtish one.
MrShoebox77 4 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 Becoming a republic would prove to the world, and to Canadians, that we are entirely capable of running our own show without some de jure head of state who serves no legitimate function.
sweiland75 3 months ago
@sweiland75 Not sure if you get the big picture but the world isn't admiring isolationism any more. No one is standing by them selves to do anything.
Do you seriously think the USA needed our help in Afghanistan?
Most of the Nations that fought to get out from British control are lining up to join the Commonwealth.
Pushing farther away from the UK just puts us more in to US hands & their culture is constantly on the brink of imploding.
We share no common bonds with the US.
Eddythebeast666 3 months ago
@Eddythebeast666 it's ironic that you say that the world is not admiring isolationism yet you mention the US which is the most jingoist country. I have no issues with being a member of the Commonwealth. We can still be independent. I've seen this stated before that it's either we are with the UK or the US. That's ridiculous. Have you heard the story of Mouseland? There is more than two options. Another option is independence - from both the UK and US.
sweiland75 3 months ago
@sweiland75 The problem with discussing cultural loyalties & National loyalties is that the two aren't always the same.
There are those in the UK that want to become a Republic as well as it was during the English civil war(1642–1651) Which always reminds me of Paradise Lost as a metaphor.
If the UK became a Republic then screw them.
A republic is all about stripping away all those old school elites.
The Problem is you just whined up with a new class of elites
Eddythebeast666 3 months ago
@sweiland75 A mouse with power is a cat. If you create a government with out power it can't govern.
Eddythebeast666 3 months ago
@sweiland75
Indeed there are many Republics that are members of the Commonwealth. The majority of the countries in the Commonwealth are Republics. EddytheBeast is is offering the fallacy of two choices that are mututally exclusive. In reality nobody is putting a gun to your head. Choose whatever is best for you! The US will always be a friend. Not sure if I can say the same with the Brits, given they ran off to join the whole European project some decades back.
suryavajra 3 months ago
@Eddythebeast666
Do you care to offer any evidence that our culture is on the brink of ''implosion''??
suryavajra 3 months ago
@sweiland75
Whatever you choose, the US would always embrace you as a friend and partner. Republicanism for Canada is a wonderful idea. Obviously there are many types of Republicanism and Canadians should choose whatever form that suits them best. :)
suryavajra 3 months ago
The queen is just another rich person who takes control of everybody else's money.
Get rid of the queen, and you will only find another rich foreigner will replace her!
MadJockLad 4 months ago
Also the government claims to care about the British peoples health, but happily sends British healthy young soldiers into areas of Afghanistan, where those soldiers cannot shoot a hostile enemy unless they are 100% sure where the enemy is.
So if they cannot see who is shooting at them, then they cannot shoot back, in fear of upsetting the crazy left wing upper class rich nutters.
MadJockLad 4 months ago
Only 20,000 Brits attend royal events, whilst millions of non Brits tune into royal events on the T.V.
There seems to be more support for the British monarchy outside of the UK.
And if the British rised up against the monarchy, it would be the rest of the world calling for the republican rising to be stopped.
MadJockLad 4 months ago
It's time to grow up Canada. Get rid of the Monarchy and let put our founding fathers on our money.
Zachattack937 4 months ago
Also, nobody has ever considered Canada-Britain, this is a joke.
mwillis1000 4 months ago
Others can do as they like, but I would NEVER recognize anyone as my queen or king.
R5d4d2 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What a fucking idiot.
mwillis1000 4 months ago
The Queen is an evil alien anyways
IncredibleFishtopher 4 months ago
The first flaw was refering to Elizabeth II as the 'queen of England'. This is the mistake all fucking retarded foreigners make. Is it really too difficult to work out the difference between England & Britain?
TheLiberalKnight 4 months ago
As with everything there are people for and people against. Makes me laugh that people care so much as to start immature rants. No matter who your government is in any society, the regular people don't matter a damn. Whether you have a Queen, President, Prime Minister - it's all irrelevant . No one has a real say in how their country is run, you may vote someone in from a very select group of people, but once in power they will still do what they want.
pugilistofpower 4 months ago 6
@pugilistofpower ...but once in power they will still do what "they are told"
biskitz86913 2 months ago
It comes down to this,; could canada beat england in a war of sedition?
daemonk9 4 months ago
Wow, what a scumbag. Lets all wage a hate campaign upon an old lady, pathetic.
thatguywiththeegg 5 months ago 4
@thatguywiththeegg It's not about her age, you idiot. It's about republicanism.
sweiland75 4 months ago
@sweiland75 So you are waging a hate campaign against someone that has no impact upon your own life? Someone who gives Canada a link to its history and traditions? Someone who generates tourism money for canada? You want to abolish all of these things just so that you can disapear up Americas arsehole even more? Enjoy being America jr, idiot. Look at me I hate the monarchy, am I being angsty and edgy enough yet?
thatguywiththeegg 4 months ago 10
@thatguywiththeegg The only thing you clearly proved, with that comment, is that you are an ignorant fool. Typical American.
sweiland75 4 months ago
@sweiland75 Oh irony thy name is stupidity. The only thing that you have proven is that you are in fact the ignorant one and that you have somesort of complex. You really need to do some growing up.
thatguywiththeegg 4 months ago
@thatguywiththeegg Yeah but who are you to tell others how their country sound be run? You Care about Britain we'll care about Canada.
MrShoebox77 2 months ago
Say what?! I thought the queen was dead. I didn't even know she was still alive. Damn! By the way, is there a lovely stable they have outback that prince Charles and camilla parker bowles stay in when they come to visit?
mcgavocks 5 months ago
@RichardElden Yes democracy is terrible.
13andincradiblycutt 6 months ago
@ajmlkhsa What else? Change to a congressional system?
sweiland75 6 months ago
She's not the Queen of England, and she's not the Head of Government.
Medeasbiggestfan 6 months ago
@RichardElden
1 look at our choices, we didn't have a lot to work with.
2 The best/worst fascist's know how to use propaganda/suppression well enough to get the job done.
One of his few selling points was he doesn't want another election for as long as possible. Surprise surprise, he likes staying in power. That seems likely considering the contempt of parliament was legally supposed to forbid him from re-election.
nerull1025 6 months ago
@RichardElden
How exactly is Harper NOT a fascist dictator?
he's got everything except the mustache.
nerull1025 7 months ago
Thank U Rick Mercer... now say it a little louder please so that the Queen & the Gov. hears u. There really oughta be a referendum on this. We don't need her! Also, 2 become a CANADIAN citizen u have to say an oath to the queen of ENGLAND?.. Why not our much more Canadian flag?! MM.. there's a thought! An Oath to something that was born IN CANADA!!! To something that actually represents CANADA! Who would she have been rooting for during the Olympics?!!! Who will she be rooting for next year?!!
Siobanphotogirl 7 months ago
Ur an idiot. Canadian government alot different and not just because we have a M.P
House4848 7 months ago
Without the crown system we would be completely assimilated into American policy. We would just be a proxy of the United States.
turtleh 7 months ago
@turtleh Complete Gibberish. Besides having a state sponsored celebrity we call ''The Queen' Canada has a great deal of differences from America. For one, we indulge in a lot more personal freedoms then they do, our right wing politicians aren't quite as extreme as American right wingers, and we've got a party that has a completely different way they tend politic (Bloc Quebequois. Say what you will about them but it's true, their politics is practically a topic in its self.
llIIFoXIIll 7 months ago
@turtleh The queen does nothing, absolutely nothing good for our country. She hasn't worked a day in her life, and besides just our land she takes everything she can - she is a parasite in the guise of a 'lady'. Besides, politicians are sketchy, are they not? And you can't deny celebrites can be pretty sketchy as well. So, if politicians and celebrities are so sketchy, then why isn't a state sponsored celebrity? And that's exactly what she is, nothing more.
llIIFoXIIll 7 months ago
@turtleh *Face palm* I apologize for sending you three of these damn messages but, well, Youtube's character length is kind of short. My closing arguments against your statement -
The very last type of people you should ever trust are the ones that are promoted by the government. Besides, why should we even respect her? She's done her share of terrible, inexcuseable things and her resume basically consists of 'did less then Hilton'.
Canada isn't just Britain's bitch, we're their husky.
llIIFoXIIll 7 months ago
@llIIFoXIIll Things will stay status quo for the remainder of the queen's life as it should. Afterwards I believe the consitutional monarchy will be dissolved.
turtleh 7 months ago
@turtleh You think our connection to the British monarchy is the only thing keeping the Americans from annexing Canada? WOW! That's quite a powerful monarchy. /sarcasm
sweiland75 6 months ago
imho, Canada need to be a parliamentary republic, merge the role of the queen and GG into one, have them elected by the senate once thats fixed up, etc. IMHO we need change, but the minimum change the better, and only the part that's necessary.
KangaKucha 8 months ago
She rules by force. Just try to make a change and see when the guns come out.The Canadian establishment counts on her lead in greed. Canada was invented to make beaver hats for aristocrats. The Queen thinks she is better than the rest of us. They are bread like dogs. Regicide I say!
astuc8 8 months ago
@RichardElden We could remove the queen's link to our system but keep choosing our Governor Generals in the same way. Only this time, we wouldn't need Elizabeth II's permission to appoint them.
Conchobhar 8 months ago in playlist Canadian Skit comedy
@Conchobhar A sovereign country should NEVER need the permission, from another country, to do anything.
sweiland75 8 months ago
She is NOT THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND. There has been no QUEEN OF ENGLAND since 1707. The title is QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN (AND NORTHERN IRELAND). Please catch up, it's been 300 years since that term was used.
maureenOWW 8 months ago 2
Make Canada a Parliamentary Republic!
Conchobhar 8 months ago
@RichardElden everyone makes mistakes
nuarius 8 months ago
@RichardElden We already have one as Head of Government, and the monarchy didn't prevent that.
ruttandtuke 8 months ago
I guess Canada should have violently overthrown the UK way back when...
Alien1099 8 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
@RichardElden Don't like democracy? Hmm, that makes you a fascist, doesn't it? Then again, with the density of Nazis in the British royal family, that's not surprising.
ruttandtuke 8 months ago
@ruttandtuke
Not having a politician for Head of State does not mean such a state is not a democracy.
Or are you saying that Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Japan, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, Netherlands, Belgium, New Zeeland than say Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba or Belarus which all has politicians as Head of State?
If you look at the Economist's Democracy Index 7 out of the Top 10 countries are monarchies. In comparison the well toted "worlds greatest democracy" USA ranks in as no.17.
Elldallan 8 months ago
@ruttandtuke Oh yeah, so many Nazi's in the British family. Erh btw German doesn't equal Nazi...
Android18uk 6 months ago
I have difficulty accepting opinions from someone who owes his entire existance to a taxpayer-funded broadcaster. How exactly do you see yourself as any different from the monarchy, Mr. Mercer? And when was the last time you visited my neighbourhood? Various members of the Royal Family visit for events quite regularly.
God save the Queen, and Canada's heritage!
CPLibrary 8 months ago
@CPLibrary Of course, the main differences are: the CBC unites Canada, the monarchy divides us; the majority supports the CBC, only 27% support Canada remaining a monarchy (Angus Reid 11/16/09). The majority should not have to pay so that some elitist, disfunctional family can visit your neighbourhood and feed your royalist fantasies. Saving our multi-faceted heritage will be far easier without ties to a *British* monarchy. Finally, yes, God will have to save the Queen, because Canada will not.
ruttandtuke 8 months ago
@CPLibrary I hate to nitpick, but be doesn't owe his /existence/ to CBC (his parents have more to do with that, I assume. Unless he's some sort of CBC experiment). P.S. - If you like the Queen so much you can borrow her. I assure you we're not really doing anything with her. We'd be particularly grateful if you take Prince Philip and Prince Charles too, but we understand if you have limits.
Faboba 8 months ago
Please support Citizens for a Canadian Republic.
ruttandtuke 8 months ago
If anyone sees a monarchist take a picture of them, and put said picture next to "reactionary" in the dictionary.
AspiringPotato 9 months ago
Canada is our children so BEHAVE DAMN IT
DarkShadowAlec 9 months ago 4
@DarkShadowAlec Oh yes, because brother America is much nicer XD
dave19941000 9 months ago
@DarkShadowAlec Wonderful! That kind of thought will make it much easier to chop the monarchy. Keep it up! :)
ruttandtuke 8 months ago 5
That's because Canada is a breeding ground for pussies who want the liberties lent to you by Britain but want to pretend you're "independent"
You Jelly?
PaperBoyWade 9 months ago
@PaperBoyWade Haha Troll Harder!
MrTechnoBarbarian 9 months ago
Lol @ Canada.
smokeyou85 9 months ago
Comment removed
Harbottle64 9 months ago
Thought you guys were a Republic anyway? No? Wow. Same as Australia then, what's stopping you? We probably pour a bucket load of cash into keeping the bloody thing going anyway. Be free. Go away. Have fun. Elect Geddy Lee as President. Wooot.
Harbottle64 9 months ago
@Harbottle64 Geddy Lee? Well, it's quite a revelation that your knowledge of Canada does not extend beyond thirty years ago. Jackass.
sweiland75 9 months ago
@sweiland75 What's wrong with Geddy Lee? Lol. Talking of asses, take your head out of yours, look up "irony" in the dictionary and lighten up. Canada should do whatever it wants to do. Quite frankly I wouldn't imagine many people in the UK care very much either way. We're European. The "Commonwealth" doesn't stand for anything anymore.
Harbottle64 9 months ago
@Harbottle64 Well, we can agree on something. We need to abolish the British monarchy and all related realms.
sweiland75 9 months ago
@sweiland75 would assume you haven't been invited to Will & Kate's wedding later his month then? ;o) No matey, I'm all for the monarchy, but as still "Head of State" for other countries? Nah. I'd still go with Geddy Lee though. You've to admit "La Villa Strangiato" is genius?
Harbottle64 9 months ago
@Harbottle64 If it's so genius then why are Rush no longer as popular? ;)
sweiland75 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
fuck the queen
NIKKIGORD 9 months ago
lol fuck the queen
NIKKIGORD 9 months ago
whats more ridiculous is that theres still a "prince" and "princess".....in the 21st century.
brokenbones199 10 months ago
wow, canada is still england's bitch? You guys are pretty whipped
ReallyGotYou 10 months ago
@ReallyGotYou true. we really do suck. Among other things
DOWSOE 9 months ago
Mrs. Mountbatten seems like a perfectly nice lady, but she's not Canadian. All precedence aside, I don't like having a foreign head of state. I admire certain things about the States, one of them being the constitutional stipulation that their head of state must be born in the States. With us it's taken for granted that the head of state wasn't, isn't & won't be Canadian. It's embarrassing!
janvandebong 10 months ago
I like how he makes out Rideau Hall is just being wasted. First it belongs to Canada completely anyway, secondly it in constant active use by the government all year round and has little to do with the queen. Nothing would change in the slightest whether there is a monarch or not!
wyterabitt 10 months ago
Canada has not had a queen since 1901 (when Queen Victoria died). Any succeeding monarch of the United Kingdom is simply de facto, and has no such authority. If indeed we are paying for someone else's Queen to have a pile of expensive estates in our country for no reason - well thats just disgustingly wrong.
CanadaDan7 10 months ago
@CanadaDan7 So what caused the line of succession to end with Victoria?
sweiland75 10 months ago
@sweiland75 Glad you asked. The British North America Act (BNA) 1867, which is our original "constitution", says in section 2 that Victoria's powers and role within the Act extend to her heirs and successors. Now, at that time that means that we WOULD have new rulers. However, The Statute Law Revision Act 1893 [UK] repeals section 2 among other things. This meant that when Queen Victoria died, Canada would be without a King or Queen, as heirs did not inherit any powers in Canada. She died in1901
CanadaDan7 10 months ago
@sweiland75 And furthermore, if you are skeptical about what I'm saying, then it is saved by the Statute of Westminster, where the UK relieves ALL authority over Canada, and leaves the provinces sovereign and open to create their own government rather than a foreign one that had been ruling in the past. Not only is any monarch since Victoria a de facto ruler, but you could argue that so is our current gov't. Look up a modern version of the BNA and notice it has section 2 repealed. Cheers.
CanadaDan7 10 months ago
why the hell would i take the time to read any of those paragraphs?
abumubtasim 10 months ago
lol I'm British and I agree
doyoureallythinkso 10 months ago 2
@doyoureallythinkso
its 2011, how come you still have a queen ??? rofl
verbod 10 months ago
@verbod Oh yes, of course, because my comment was clearly IN FAVOUR of the Monarchy. *facepalm.
Back under the bridge!
doyoureallythinkso 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please be careful as you are starting to sound like an American.
We have our own parasites!
molarmama5 11 months ago
I visited the Citadel in Quebec and all references to Her Majesty were airbrushed, with the G-G apparently ruling the country. I was told it was so as not to upset the French Canadians who always seem to be represented (from the Vancouver Games logo to Historical societies) but the country that so many Canadians were subjects of, believed in and died for is forgotten.Why should we not simply join the US? Constitutional Monarchy created our different countries. imperialflags.blogspot.com
Lacedaemonia 11 months ago
@Lacedaemonia What is it with your braindead monarchists? You always say "Well, if we don't have a monarchy, we might as well become the 51st American state." Is it not possible for your tiny little brain to comprehend that Canada could (and should) be a sovereign country? It is you monarchists who are dragging the country down, by reinforcing this colonial mentality, while us progressive republicans break away from that past.
sweiland75 11 months ago 2
I love the UK and I am entirely proud of our British heritage and I respect the Queen and all that goes along with it. There is zero benefit or special consideration given to me or any other Canadian in the UK or as a member of the Commonwealth which is a name only now. A German can work in the UK and have certain legal EU rights and privileges and a Canadian is no more than a Yank or anyone else there.
In 2011 there is absolutely zero reason for holding onto someone who let us go already.
ElProximo 11 months ago 34
@ElProximo
Proud of british heritage ? You mean bad teeth and ugly chicks ? Dumb canadian...
verbod 10 months ago
@verbod You're knowledge of the western world comes from Family Guy writers. Mine is from living in Britain. Reconsider what 'dumb' means.
ElProximo 10 months ago
@ElProximo
I'm Canadian and I voted in the 2010 UK election. Commonwealth citizens that are living in the UK can vote.
There's also a special type of visa that we qualify.
So we do get some benefits but I agree, there is no good reason for keeping the queen around.
coutts12 9 months ago
@ElProximo As already stated there are benefits for commonwealth citizens; look up 'Commonwealth citizen' on wiki for the list, joining the british army and voting in uk elections are two of them but the main one used by quite a few people is the ability to have a two year working visa in the uk, loads and loads of CW people do that. I'm not disagreeing with the republican arguments just pointing out there are benefits to CW citizens in theUK
midnightmilo 8 months ago
@midnightmilo Uh yeah but you also know it doesn't work like this list is available to any Canadian. Yes, you can join the british army but a Canadian can join the US army (and others). Yes, some can get a 2 year work visa depending on this grandfather and that and application processes etc (and a German EU will feel sorry for you as he work visas easier). At the end of the day, overall, for most Canadians most times you are visiting the UK same as anyone else.
ElProximo 8 months ago
@ElProximo As Commonwealth members if we have a British residence we have a right to vote in UK elections.
This is part of Canadian Culture if you want to live in a Republic feel free to move to the USA, I'm sure they would love to have you.
Eddythebeast666 4 months ago
If it aint broke don't fix it!
dadsarmyfrules 11 months ago 2
@dadsarmyfrules
how do you know that? i'm sick of hearing this tripe slogan straight out of the palin school of ditzy catchy political platitudes. how great our country is, and doesn't need improvement. Canada may be doing well--but MAYBE it could be doing even better. no one knows. this arrogant and simplistic practice of defending a status quo and dismissing a future which you clearly don't understand is condusive to our motto of "keep exploring"
gobblinmeat 11 months ago
@dadsarmyfrules
complacency is not healthy given our voter apathy. we still have a prominent colonial element to our identity, constitution and symbolism. what if canadians were to sever the royal link and little brother mentality and seek out something new to meet the demands of our evolving character and face? i only see more independence, patriotism (not jingoism), and more unity as a result.
gobblinmeat 11 months ago 18
@R0773N Ah yes, Impeachment. Lets us see now, the last successful impeachment (cannot count Clinton as he was only impeached by the House of Representatives) was WHEN exactly?? Not exactly a well oiled lever of democracy. Tell me when the last Prime Minister was sacked....much more recently!
krt1934 1 year ago
people are jealous, of the royal familly, of the wealth, prestige, pomp and ceremony, et al.... if you can live a life under a microscope, allow your time and activities to be scripted and planned well in advance, adhere and stick to a planner and do it all with style and grace, then you will find yourself doing quite well, and sitting opposite the likes of the Queen on occasion, and appreciating the sacrifices made for her position. We would all love to be Olympians, but......
bossmarion 1 year ago
Comment removed
R0773N 1 year ago
Canada would not be on the map if not for the Queen
MyMerlin1 1 year ago
@MyMerlin1 BULLSHIT! When was the last time she had a direct hand in Canadian politics? Here's a hint: Canada is a sovereign country.
sweiland75 11 months ago
Just to clarify some points:
-The "Similar in principal" statement refers to the customs of governance(the PM,cabinet,opposition leader,etc). The monarch has a seperate section of the constitution were All executive power is vested in that office.
-The queen cannot have a Canadian passport because she grants them, as such she cannot grant herself one.
-Changing anything having to do with the monarchy requires the consent of all 10 provinces, the federal government and the crown.
NoGoodHandlesLeft 1 year ago
The formula for a Canadian republic may be simple, but so would be the results: a craven career politician whom you are stuck with for four or more years (think George W. Bush, Pierre Trudeau as President) because if you ditch the queen you will need a president whom no one can fire.....but no one ever really thinks about THAT.
krt1934 1 year ago
@krt1934 "a craven career politician whom you are stuck with for four or more...because...you will need a president"
No, we don't. We can keep the EXACT same political arrangement we have today, except end the political fiction that the GG represents the monarch of a foreign country.
PatchesRips 11 months ago
The formula for a Canadian republic is simple, but so would be the results: a craven career politician whom you are stuck with for four or more years (think George W. Bush, Pierre Trudeau) because if you ditch the queen you will need a president whom no one can fire.....but no one ever really thinks about THAT. Imagine not being able to sack the Prime minister.
krt1934 1 year ago
@krt1934 That's a lie, you ever hear of an impeachment?
R0773N 1 year ago
@PatchesRips
what about a committee to select which order of Canada recipients will be voted on then a vote in the house of commons by the members of parliament ( I believe there are 305 mp’s) and who ever wins that vote gets the position?
drfye 1 year ago
@drfye Sure, there are lots of ways it could be done. My suggestion is merely an idea that appeals to me. It's up to the country to decide the nature of our head of state: who it should be, and how the office is filled. I'd like something that enables us to be a republic, something ours alone, but something as close to the current role and influence of the Governor-General as possible. A quite and respectful retiring of the monarchy.
PatchesRips 1 year ago
@sweiland75
wouldn’t that goal be achieved by making the GG the head of state instead of a representation of it. So not necessarily doing away with the position of GG, and the parlimentary system would remain unchanged.
drfye 1 year ago
Replace 'Ottawa' with 'Canberra' and 'Canada' with 'Australia' and this is my view exactly.
Elitist20 1 year ago
@Elitist20 Yeah, but at least you guys are serious about doing this.
PatchesRips 1 year ago
@sweiland75
so.................... what i described in my previous comments is what your saying, where the position GG basically becomes the president but more or less remains a symbolic position with the same power as the GG and our parlimentary system remains unchanged with the exception being of how we select our head of state ? because like i stated before I don't care for the US system, I personally prefer parlimentary democracy.
drfye 1 year ago
@drfye You're missing one vital detail: What is it a symbol of? It should be a purely Canadian symbol and not a symbol of any foreign monarchy. Canada is supposed to be a sovereign country. Let's ensure that fact by abolishing the Office of Governor General.
sweiland75 1 year ago
@sweiland75 I don't agree with getting rid of the GG; God knows, I'd by far rather keep that role than create some sort of presidency that's going to compete with the PM and cabinet for executive power. What I'd like is a GG with the same role and powers as now, but heading the Canadian state, rather than the fiction of representing a foreign monarch. Preferably the person holding the office should be chosen from among members of the Order of Canada; people who've done something for the nation.
PatchesRips 1 year ago
@drfye Hear hear.
PatchesRips 1 year ago
The formula for a Canadian republic is simple: cut the link between the governor general and the British monarchy. Period. Instant parliamentary republic. The GG becomes our ceremonial president, everything else stays the same. It's been done before: Ireland, India, Trinidad & Tobago. Also Iceland with the Danish monarchy. France and Russia, despite having both a PM and a president are not good comparisons. They have Semi-presidential republics. The US is a Presidential republic.
ruttandtuke 1 year ago
Comment removed
SanSerriffe 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ruttandtuke @ruttandtuke This would require a change to the Canadian constitution, and the ten provincial legislatures, the House of Commons, and the Senate would have to approve it unanimously before it can happen.
Let's face it, a Canadian republic is not going to happen, not in a thousand years, whatever the Republicans say.
SanSerriffe 1 year ago
@SanSerriffe It's very difficult done the typical amendment route. I'd propose a referendum, agreed to be binding on the legislatures, in which Canadians would express their preference. If they want to keep the monarchy, fine. If they choose something else, we ought not to be held in the constitutional straightjacket we were stuffed into 30 years ago by a dozen WASPs born between the World Wars.
PatchesRips 1 year ago
@PatchesRips Interesting idea, except that legislatures do not have the right to decide on another approach, such as a binding referendum. Also, the Queen is, despite all the badly-formulated polls, still very popular in the country, especially with new Canadians.
And in these times, when nations are increasingly adopting the realpolitik approach to international affairs, isn't the idea of a number of countries sharing a common culture having a common head of state rather noble in itself?
SanSerriffe 11 months ago
@SanSerriffe "legislatures do not have the right to decide on another approach, such as a binding referendum"
There's nothing in the Constitution that addressing HOW that process occurs. If they all agree to be bound by that process and then act subsequently in accord with the Constitution, it would be entirely legal.
I don't say the Queen herself is unpopular. She's very popular in the United States as well. That in itself doesn't equate to a claim to head the state of that, or any, country.
PatchesRips 11 months ago
@SanSerriffe "isn't the idea of a number of countries sharing a common culture having a common head of state rather noble in itself?"
In the abstract. There are practical issues with it. First of all, it's ethnically-based. This has been an issue in THIS country in particular since its inception. The older I get, the more astounded I am that French Canada has endured it this long. It's also gender-biased and prejudicial against Catholics in particular. And as Canadians, we cannot change this.
PatchesRips 11 months ago
@PatchesRips French Canada didn't have to "put up" with anything. The Crown was popular among the French-speaking Canadians until the rise of Quebec nationalism in the 1970s. In fact, if you talk to the older Quebec generation, you will find quite a few imperialists with pictures of QEII.
Eventually the 16 Commonwealth realms are going to adopt a gender-neutral primogeniture and abolish the Catholic disability. That they have not done so yet is purely because of coordination issues.
SanSerriffe 11 months ago
@SanSerriffe "The Crown was popular among the French-speaking Canadians until the rise of Quebec nationalism in the 1970s."
I'd like to see the evidence for this. I don't believe it to be the case. I don't deny that it was tolerable, nor that it still is. But that's not the same thing as saying it's "popular", or the preferred governmental arrangement. Quebec nationalism became pronounced in the 1950s and a matter of policy under Jean Lesage at the beginning of the 1960s, not the 1970s.
PatchesRips 11 months ago
@SanSerriffe "Eventually the 16 Commonwealth realms are going to adopt a gender-neutral primogeniture and abolish the Catholic disability."
It only takes one to say no. And ultimately, those are ancillary issues. We could do it ourselves, without troubling anyone else or insisting their traditions and sensibilities, and ours, have to dovetail. I've become persuaded we should have our own arrangements, tailored to who we are, beholden to none other, and representative of Canadians alone.
PatchesRips 11 months ago
@SanSerriffe "if you talk to the older Quebec generation, you will find quite a few imperialists"
Jean Chretien is a noted monarchist among Quebecois. But even he, in Straight from the Heart, honestly indicated "'I, too, wish I had been able to wake up Montcalm and tell him the English were coming... but I was not there.' ...It was my way of making the serious point that we had to face reality." Honest acceptance, but not exactly a ringing endorsement.
(cont'd)
PatchesRips 11 months ago
@SanSerriffe (cont'd)
It's my feeling, coming from a family that is partly French Canadian, that a respectful retirement of the monarchy and the institution of something wholly and solely Canadian would go a long way to reconciling the federalist/nationalist fence-sitters to a future in Canada that they could embrace, rather than endure. I'd say the same for those new Canadians for whom the monarchy is a quaint reminder that English Canadians haven't discovered who they are yet.
PatchesRips 11 months ago
@SanSerriffe And furthermore, you touch it with a needle: "the older generation". They aren't going to be voting on the future of this country in 15, 25, 30 years from now. People wondering what the hell they're still doing in a country with King Charles III and King William V on their money and issuing them their passports will be.
PatchesRips 11 months ago
@PatchesRips Very thoughtful reply. However, do you really think that abandoning the monarchy is going to pacify the Quebec separatists? The Quebec-ROC split goes much, much deeper than that. Also the fence sitters are, by their very nature, more concerned with the practical side of the independence debate than the political side, so it is hardly going to good there. New Canadians, believe it or not, generally like the monarchy. The Crown may be many things, but ethnocentric it is not.
SanSerriffe 11 months ago
@PatchesRips You also seem to think that only the 65+ club takes any interest in the monarchy. As someone who is still in education, I can tell you that even through lots of people of my age group don't give a damn, their support for the monarchy is probably higher than that of baby-boomers. The upcoming weeding certainly isn't going to hurt either.
One last thing about the popularity in Quebec - It was more than tolerable, Just look at the newsreels of the Royals visits to Quebec.
SanSerriffe 11 months ago
@SanSerriffe "their support for the monarchy is probably higher than that of baby-boomers"
Again, I'd like to see the figures.
"The upcoming weeding"--
--has exactly nothing to do with how, and by whom, our country is governed. Again: it's a celebrity show that will go over just as big in republics all over the Western world.
"Just look at the newsreels of the Royals visits to Quebec."
Newsreels? Why don't we quote newspaper reports on the Prince of Wales's visit in 1919 while we're at it?
PatchesRips 11 months ago