Off topic: Do we Canadians care about the Monarchy

[argh1]

Prince Chuck got married. To me so what?

Do we only keep the Monarchy around because it's cheaper having a G-G than having a President. Or are we fearfull that if we elect a President he/she may think that they have some power.

Does the Monarchy have any revelance left in Canada?

Sorry .....

[Daniel]

It's a symbol like any other.

And personally, I think it's harder for our Head of State to muck stuff up if it's a royal than, say, Chretien, Martin or Harper...

Mainly, I figure we get some advantages by being Commonwealth so let's keep them.

[Richard]

I value our history and the monarchy is an inseparable, undeniable part of our history and part of the fabric of Canada. It is also an important differentiator between us and the USA. I certainly would prefer to have Queen Elizabeth, Prince Charles or his son as head of state than Stephen Harper, Paul Martin, Jean Chretien or even Pierre Trudeau if he was still alive.

[Massive Attack]

There's nothing wrong with placing a value on history, but the British monarchy is dead, and has no place in Canada's future. We are our own soveriegn state now, and we don't need archaic figure heads from a land away who are nothing like us. I would like to see us become a republic one day. Get the Queen's ugly face off my money.

[BC supporter]

This is a discussion with no end. Personally, I detest the British monarchy and the inherited privilege for which it stands. Can an institution be more anachronistic? That 21st century Canada retains this outdated foreign symbol on everything from our coinage to our political bodies indicates an immature democracy, IMHO. I acknowledge there are supporters of royalty, but I also have no doubt a good minority of Canadians share my view.

On the other hand, the Canadian mentality includes a signficant component summed up by "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." We like to avoid questions that could prove too challenging and divisive (abolish the Canadian senate? Good thought, but maybe later). One can't deny the relatively tolerant, prosperous country that's been built here on the northern half of North America, and I don't expect Canada to consign the monarchy to the dustbin of history, where it belongs, in my lifetime -- although it's my fervant belief that we'd be better off for doing so.

[Guest Ed]

Small 'r' republican here. The queen is as relevant to me as 'noblesse oblige'. Off with her head (so to speak).

Daniel, please educate me on the 'advantages of being in the Commonwealth'. You lost me there.

[CanadianSoccerFan]

well, since this is a soccer forum its worthwhile to point out that being in the commonwealth gives our players advantages in getting visas to play in the UK

[Daniel]

And working visas all over, I believe. It ain't much, but it's better than nothing.

[Richard]

Those of you who so dislike the monarchy, whom would you like to see as Canadian head of state - a George W. Bush lookalike?

[Massive Attack]

The monarchy has no place in a modern democracy. Plain and simple. The only people (mostly WASPs) who want to keep the monarchy are the type of people who look back at the past with rose-coloured glasses. The same kind of people that lament the fact that our flag doesn't have a union jack on it. We need to push things forward. Not harp back on the past. Canada is its own unique country. With its own unique past. We have the ability to carve our own future, a future in which old, archaic, useless symbols have no place.

[Richard]

Yes, Canada is its own unique country with its own unique past of which the monarchy is an inseparable and undeniable fact. One cannot deny one's history or eliminate it, it will always be there and be part of what makes Canada the country it is today. If you're going to campaign to cut away what you regard as useless symbols don't stop at the monarchy - think this one through a bit.

[ted]

quote:Originally posted by BC supporter

We like to avoid questions that could prove too challenging and divisive....

Well, here's a challenging and divisive thought: if we abolish the monarchy for some sort of republic then we are changing the nature of what we as a nation are. If we are willing to abandon/move past (depending on your leanings) this connection to our history then why are we not talking about splitting the country which is no more than a construct of historical happenstance?

I am a Trudeau-era son of a Naval officer who has lived and enjoyed living in Halifax, Ottawa, Toronto and Victoria. All nice places, but I see no point in continuing to pretend that we are any some sort of natural nation. If we abolish the monarchy I see no reason not to abolish the country and start over. Here in BC we have more in common with Washington, Oregon and Northern California than Ontario or Quebec if we take away constitutional monarchy.

Nova Scotia and New Brunswick share 150 years of history with New England (1600 - 1750) that has little or nothing to do with the other provinces other than that their ancestors decided not to rebel against lawful authority for the sake of wealthy landowners and business interests. Here in BC we joined confederation on the promise of a naval facility with a dry dock and a permanent rail link to the rest of Canada. Without the historical connections represented by the crown we are not a unified nation.

I also think the monarchy is an important historical and ceremonial check on the power of corporate interests. Heck, I even oppose current proposals for an elected senate on similar grounds. (Both offices could use some reforms I will admit.) Corporations and wealthy individuals now own the presidency of the United States. They cannot buy a king or even a senator as easily as they have bought "W" and his administration. We at least have the idea that there is a check on the manipulation of democracy by the expedient of a small undemocratic watchdog.

Alll of this, IMNSHO, is much like the debate about learning English or French in School or wearing burkhas to go shopping or supporting Toronto Lynx instead of Dundee United. In my view if you come to this country you should participate in this culture as a Canadian first and as a "INSERT CULTURAL HERITAGE HERE" second. If you did not want to live in a country where English or French is the common language, girls are free to bare their midriffs and Canadians play soccer then frankly, STAY WHERE YOU ARE! (Refugees are of course the exception but they are theoretically going to go home when the situation improves in thier homeland.)

Now, in favour of abolishing the monarchy everything I have ever heard boils down to an inferiority complex and an undercurrent of hostility to Prince Charles. Can anyone give a practical reason to abolish the monarchy that is NOT a) one of the two emotional arguments above, and possible by other types of reforms?

[Richard]

Well said Ted, you see, we have more in common than you thought

[Paddy]

The Royal Family are 'bread and circus' for the drooling masses. Other than that, they serve no purpose. They are parasites.

[ray]

quote:Originally posted by Paddy

The Royal Family are 'bread and circus' for the drooling masses. Other than that, they serve no purpose. They are parasites.

Yeah, I agree. I don't see them as our Royal family but rather a British institution.

The support isn't there for abolishing the monarchy and its not worth creating a big argument amoung Canadians right now. I just resent having to swear allegiance to the Queen and her heirs. I know she is technically Canada's Queen but really she is British. I would rather pledge allegiance to Canada.

In the end the monarchy will slowly die out as they become less relevant.

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by ted

All nice places, but I see no point in continuing to pretend that we are any some sort of natural nation. If we abolish the monarchy I see no reason not to abolish the country and start over.

Ted, some very useful points, though I question the reasoning above. Who cares if we are a "natural nation"? I mean, what the hell does that even mean? How is a nation "natural"? Unless of course your are thinking of the traditional--and rather archaic--concept of the nation state, which is outmoded and an just as arbitrary (in its own Imperial manner) as our strange Canadian experiment. And, I don't see how it logically follows that if we were to nix the monarchy that we'd have just as much reason to reinvent the country. This isn't to say the idea of reinvention should be tossed out entirely, but it IS entirely possible to ditch the royals AND continue with our country. Sure, it would mean constitutional reform (and likely electoral reform) among other things, but it would not signify open season on rebooting the country. I mean, a couple million Albertans and a whole whack of Quebecois (among many others) would take notice of our abolishing the monarchy. Oddly enough, it could be the sort of thing that would unite us. Of course, for the most part, abolishing the monarch in Canada would be mostly cosmetic. We are not oppressed by the royals. We barely benefit from our association (yippee, we get to go to the commonwealth games and get our asses whipped by the Aussies [who also consider leaving the commonwealth])

I suspect we have larger fish to fry than the monarchy. Getting ready to feed the hungry economic monsters growing in China and India should be one of our first global priorities. Imagine a Canada that is less dependent on the US for its export markets? Imagine retaining the US market (we are still its largest trading partner, with China clawing its way up fast) AND adding China and India? Getting out from under the monarchy is, like I said, mostly a cosmetic detail, a faint jab to gain further Canadian identity (pride? sovereignty? ??), but getting out from under the very real pressures of US political and economic forces will do far more for us over the short and long term.

For the record, if it came down to a referendum, I'd say: Axe the Monarchy. Don Cherry can cry me a frickin' river.

[BC supporter]

quote:For the record, if it came down to a referendum, I'd say: Axe the Monarchy. Don Cherry can cry me a frickin' river.

quote:The Royal Family are 'bread and circus' for the drooling masses. Other than that, they serve no purpose. They are parasites.

I love yoush guys (cries into his beer)...

[Richard]

Still nobody has answered the question whom would we have as head of state if not the reigning monarch? I sure as hell wouldn't want Stephen Harper or Paul Martin or worse still, a George W. Bush clone.

As for the monarchy being parasites, that they are not. Queen Elizabeth II (and her family) is one of the wealthiest people in the world with a mighty portfolio of holdings. An entrepeneur par excellence who pays substantial income and property taxes. Canadian taxpayers pay nothing towards the maintenance of the Royal Family, they are a self-financing institution.

I would agree however that there are far more important issues than whether or not Canada remains a monarchy with which we ought to be coming to terms out of self interest if nothing else.

[Paddy]

quote:As for the monarchy being parasites, that they are not.

1999 figure: It costs the British taxpayers a staggering 100,000,000(pounds) annually to keep their royal parasites

housed, fed and entertained in the manner they think they have a right to expect.

quote:

Queen Elizabeth II (and her family) is one of the wealthiest people in the world with a mighty portfolio of holdings.

No wonder when the British Empire raped and pillaged the world. I'd be pretty wealthy too.

quote:

An entrepeneur par excellence who pays substantial income and property taxes. Canadian taxpayers pay nothing towards the maintenance of the Royal Family, they are a self-financing institution.

Rubish:

The Queen's finances other than the 'expenses' of the civil list are strictly out of bounds, as is the exact detail of who owns much of the property that the Queen treats as her own. What, and why, are they hiding?

Also, the Crown in England can seize any land that is not willed to a legitimate heir. How very noble of them and a great way to diversify their assets. Good luck to the legitimate heirs even getting it back, too.

quote:

Still nobody has answered the question whom would we have as head of state if not the reigning monarch? I sure as hell wouldn't want Stephen Harper or Paul Martin or worse still, a George W. Bush clone.

The Governor-General performs all the functions of Canada's head of state. Get rid of the Queen and get rid of people like Clarkson. Elect someone who doesn't think they are above politics. Why on earth do we need the Royals for this? Not even worth debating.

Any argument for the Royal Family is purely based on misguided sentimentality.

[Massive Attack]

Thanks for that Paddy.

[Richard]

The Governor General is the Queen's Viceroy in Canada - clearly you are not as well informed as you make yourself out to be but there is no doubt you are very bigotted.

[Massive Attack]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

The Governor General is the Queen's Viceroy in Canada - clearly you are not as well informed as you make yourself out to be but there is no doubt you are very bigotted.

Someone's a bigot because he used actual facts to prove why we shouldn't have the British monarchy in Canada. I don't understand?

[Paddy]

quote:Originally posted by Richard

The Governor General is the Queen's Viceroy in Canada

..and, as I stated, performs all the ->***functions***<- of Canada's head of state.

quote:but there is no doubt you are very bigotted

What has that got to do with the royal family? Stick to the topic.

[Cheeta]

Wow. Is it slow or what? I'll wade in a "little". Better get a coffee.

I guess the question is about who cares about the monarchy in Canada. What is really or really not spent by the ratepayers in the UK over supporting the structure of the British monarchy is very subjective and depends on who you ask and what numbers they conjure up for there own purposes. What gets spent for what in the UK is none of my business. And would it continue to be spent were the monarchy to die with Queen Elizabeth? A lot of it I think pretty bloody likely.

I'm firmly in the if-it-ain't-broke-don't-fix-it camp.

What we have for a monarchy here in Canada dosen't really amount to much dose it? How many people on this board know who the lt. govenor of there province is? Or know someone who knows? Not many I'll wager.

What's spent maintaining the residences and ceramonys of their offices? Blah, blah, blah.

If maintaining the monarchy in Canada through the office of the Govenor General, senate and so on gives Canadians some generation to generation continuity, whether they want it or not, than that isn't such a bad thing and it's something we could use more of.

But then I'm from a city were we're in constant debate about holding onto older things which while functionaly are out-dated, are astheticaly pleasing and a shared part of our fathers, fathers fathers and fathers grandfathers world. (I'm talking about heritage buildings).

Kinda like supporting Dad's team, eh? They sucked when he was a kid. They suck now, and I'll die of shock if they don't suck when my lads having kids of his own. But their mine.

Sort of. You get what I'm going at here? It's a kind of shared experience thing.

Anyway, Canada's monarchy is a bit different from that in the UK although technicaly the two are different sames (dose that make scence?) and I'm all for keeping our version.

Constitutional reform around this isn't coming any time in the next 30 years. The Senate will remain as it is, and I fear that the way it is now is probably the best way (believe it or not I think the available alternatives are just an accident waiting to happen).

Couple of disclaimers...

1). Cheeta is no WASP but he is a nationalist. So take the flighty comments above for what they're worth with that in mind.

2). I've got a Red Ensign hanging next to the Maple Leaf in my basement. It hangs there out of respect for all the Canadians who followed it into battle overseas. And there it will hang until the last Korean vet leaves us. The Union Jack dosen't earn the same respect although maybe it should. We completely ignore what The Great War did to Canada and that's allmost criminal but I don't feel quite comfortable with it. Dose that make scence? I don't know. But it's how I feel.

3). For good of bad, we are Canadians today every one of us because there existed for a time a British Empire. So like it or not, all generations of Canadians owe that Empire something for our opportunities. Even if our only opportunity is to be smug about NOT being American. So if we spend 1/10th of 1% of our govermental budgets supporting our inherited, mutated version of the monarchist system I don't think that's so bad.

4). Wouldn't waste a second of Parliment's time on this. When the time comes everyone will know and the goverment of the day will just starve the office of Govenor General out of real existance even more.

[Richard]

It is a mistake to judge those who built the mighty British Empire by 21st century standards. The people at the time were doing what they sincerely believed was honourable and for the best and there were many many very positive achievements during that period. We would have behaved much the same way ourselves had we been British and lived in Britain or the colonies at the time. Everything must be judged in context.

Those who think Canadians would save money by turning Canada into a republic are deluding themselves, it won't happen, indeed it would very likely cost us more. The direct cost to the taxpayer of maintaining ourselves as a monarchy is trivial and wouldn't buy you a Starbucks latte.