Time to get rid of the Monarchy?
- Thread starter Samson
- Start date
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
It's amazing the number of Americans and French who think they should have a say in what forms of government countries that aren't America or France are allowed to have.
Valka - ammending the constitution for specific purpose that everyone concerned agree upon is entirely doable (and has been done many times since 1982, including by Quebec). And when it comes to abolishing the monarchy, Quebec is unlikely to get in the way of *that* one - Quebec nationalists want to see the monarchy gone pretty much as much as they want to see the words "distinct society" in the constitution. It would be political suicide for any of the nationalists party to veto the end of the monarchy because they didn't get concessions.
The main obstacle to ammending the constitution to get rid of the monarchy is Ontario and from what I understand (you would know better than I) the prairies, who tend to feel more ties to monarchic symbolism. Though if Charles push environmentalist thinking, that may not last all that long.
As for the rest, I believe firmly that symbolic leadership is an unavoidable necessity of a human nature that is (bluntly) crap at abstract thinking. Larger-than-life figures that are seen as representative of the nation will exist, and in existing and representing us, will be elevated above us to some measure. Whether they're elevated for winning a reality show or the genetic lottery...not frankly my biggest concern.
If anything, I would say my biggest concern is keeping the symbolic power away from the executive, legislative or judiciary (because symbolic power is a form of great power as much as any of the other), and in that particular task, the British monarchies have had rather more success than the various Imperial Presidencies.
Valka - ammending the constitution for specific purpose that everyone concerned agree upon is entirely doable (and has been done many times since 1982, including by Quebec). And when it comes to abolishing the monarchy, Quebec is unlikely to get in the way of *that* one - Quebec nationalists want to see the monarchy gone pretty much as much as they want to see the words "distinct society" in the constitution. It would be political suicide for any of the nationalists party to veto the end of the monarchy because they didn't get concessions.
The main obstacle to ammending the constitution to get rid of the monarchy is Ontario and from what I understand (you would know better than I) the prairies, who tend to feel more ties to monarchic symbolism. Though if Charles push environmentalist thinking, that may not last all that long.
As for the rest, I believe firmly that symbolic leadership is an unavoidable necessity of a human nature that is (bluntly) crap at abstract thinking. Larger-than-life figures that are seen as representative of the nation will exist, and in existing and representing us, will be elevated above us to some measure. Whether they're elevated for winning a reality show or the genetic lottery...not frankly my biggest concern.
If anything, I would say my biggest concern is keeping the symbolic power away from the executive, legislative or judiciary (because symbolic power is a form of great power as much as any of the other), and in that particular task, the British monarchies have had rather more success than the various Imperial Presidencies.
Absolution
King
This is a philosophical approach, and nothing here describes how the monarchy makes any objective bad to its citizens.
Just as it seems morally troublesome to you, it may seem wonderful to others - who are not bothered to much by giving a few people some crazy heritable rights.
Many pepole enjoy the festivities and traditoins associated with the monarchy. It gives them joy and national pride.
Why be so much against it?
Why is it worse than independence celebrations in many countries, or traditional quasi-religious festivals in China or Mexico?
sophie
Break My Heart
Because it restricts freedom and is consequently life-denying. I oppose it on the same grounds and for the same reason that I oppose slavery, racism and patriarchy. But that is not something I would expect a proud and unrepentant colonizer to understand, so it is little surprise that you are confused.
They're essentially being cultural figureheads for the government at these venues, like a high-ranking diplomat, but with extra clout.
Edmund Ironside
White Rabbit Object
Apparently one of the professors at Carnegie Mellon University was not a fan of the Queen. This was tweeted around an hour before the Queen died.
She then got into some twitter beef with Jeff Bezos who replied "This is someone supposedly working to make the world better? I don’t think so. Wow."
Interestingly if you search regarding the exchange it seems like around half the articles say 'Jeff Bezos slammed for twitter post' and the other half say 'Uji Anya slammed for twitter post!'
Uji Anya's issue appears to be related to the British Empire's actions in Nigeria. Though as the actions she is objecting to predate Elizabeth being Queen I believe (plus the Queen also being primarily a symbolic figure with limited actual power), the criticism seems perhaps a little callous; unless that is we still live in society that believes in ancestral sin (Exodus 20:5 "the iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the sons and daughters — unto the third and fourth generation). Uji Anya is therefore to be applauded, she is only the second individual to ever make me consider taking Jeff Bezos' side in anything (the other being Donald J Trump)!
www.geekwire.com
She then got into some twitter beef with Jeff Bezos who replied "This is someone supposedly working to make the world better? I don’t think so. Wow."
Interestingly if you search regarding the exchange it seems like around half the articles say 'Jeff Bezos slammed for twitter post' and the other half say 'Uji Anya slammed for twitter post!'
Uji Anya's issue appears to be related to the British Empire's actions in Nigeria. Though as the actions she is objecting to predate Elizabeth being Queen I believe (plus the Queen also being primarily a symbolic figure with limited actual power), the criticism seems perhaps a little callous; unless that is we still live in society that believes in ancestral sin (Exodus 20:5 "the iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the sons and daughters — unto the third and fourth generation). Uji Anya is therefore to be applauded, she is only the second individual to ever make me consider taking Jeff Bezos' side in anything (the other being Donald J Trump)!
University rebukes professor whose tweet about dying queen drew response from Jeff Bezos
Professor Uju Anya, left, and Jeff Bezos. (Photos via Twitter, Amazon) A professor whose tweet about Queen Elizabeth II was called out by Amazon founder
www.geekwire.com
How come there's no referenda involved in changing the Canadastitution and it's just the governments of the provinces doing it? Just in the interests of keeping Quebec under heel?
Also, the monarchy isn't just symbolic power. It sacked an elected government in Australia in 1975. Directly intervened in politics, conspired with the opposition even.
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
Being a chief in the accredited class does not on its own a decent person make. It's a baseline strike against, in a vacuum.Apparently one of the professors at Carnegie Mellon University was not a fan of the Queen. This was tweeted around an hour before the Queen died.
View attachment 639010
She then got into some twitter beef with Jeff Bezos who replied "This is someone supposedly working to make the world better? I don’t think so. Wow."
Interestingly if you search regarding the exchange it seems like around half the articles say 'Jeff Bezos slammed for twitter post' and the other half say 'Uji Anya slammed for twitter post!'
Uji Anya's issue appears to be related to the British Empire's actions in Nigeria. Though as the actions she is objecting to predate Elizabeth being Queen I believe (plus the Queen also being primarily a symbolic figure with limited actual power), the criticism seems perhaps a little callous; unless that is we still live in society that believes in ancestral sin (Exodus 20:5 "the iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the sons and daughters — unto the third and fourth generation). Uji Anya is therefore to be applauded, she is only the second individual to ever make me consider taking Jeff Bezos' side in anything (the other being Donald J Trump)!
University rebukes professor whose tweet about dying queen drew response from Jeff Bezos
Professor Uju Anya, left, and Jeff Bezos. (Photos via Twitter, Amazon) A professor whose tweet about Queen Elizabeth II was called out by Amazon founder
Zardnaar
Deity
Who cares about the french? Even inbred German royal deviants might be a better option.
From what I understand, the Queen wasn't involved at all. It was the Governor-General taking actions on his own initiative, which seems to me to be little different to what an Australian president might need to do.
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,482
Keep Chuck along with a pair and an heir, and sod the rest of the leeches.
Gives the UK someone to shake hands when they need someone to open leisure centers in the Midlands or do a grip and grimace with some dreary diplomat.
Plus I always enjoyed the segments of Mock the Week where Hugh Dennis imitated Betty Windsor, and Russell Howard's queen voice was also funny.
Gives the UK someone to shake hands when they need someone to open leisure centers in the Midlands or do a grip and grimace with some dreary diplomat.
Plus I always enjoyed the segments of Mock the Week where Hugh Dennis imitated Betty Windsor, and Russell Howard's queen voice was also funny.
Last edited:
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
You don’t like it either?
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
I didn't say they were powerless. I said the monarchy was doing a better job of keeping the symbolic figure away from executive power than strong presidency republics where the symbolic figure is also in control of the executive. It's a form of separation of power : the more separate symbolic and executive powers are, the better. And that's a far more important question to me than whether we select the symbolic figure by reality show or hereditary lottery.
(As far as selection, I would prefer a supermajority vote from the legislative on nomination from the executive).
As for a referendum: the constitution does not require it. It can (and has) been done, but it's not necessary. The provincial legislative represent the provinces, and can act in their name.
(As far as selection, I would prefer a supermajority vote from the legislative on nomination from the executive).
As for a referendum: the constitution does not require it. It can (and has) been done, but it's not necessary. The provincial legislative represent the provinces, and can act in their name.
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
I don’t have a cookie-cutter policy for monarchs. Some I like, some I don’t care. England? Keep. Belgium? Indifferent. Oman? Go Sultan! Morocco? Myeh.
And Malaysia is just weird. I think they have a hula hoop contest and the runner-up gets to be king if they can beat the first place finisher in a game of Trivial Pursuit, but underwater.
And Malaysia is just weird. I think they have a hula hoop contest and the runner-up gets to be king if they can beat the first place finisher in a game of Trivial Pursuit, but underwater.
caketastydelish
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2008
- Messages
- 9,718
I think the royalty/monarchy/emperor is a beautiful traditional and culture for any group of people to have, as long as they don't wield formal political power.
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
I can tell you this much, if I ever get a dukedom I’m changing my name to Newcomb.
Apparently one of the professors at Carnegie Mellon University was not a fan of the Queen. This was tweeted around an hour before the Queen died.
View attachment 639010
She then got into some twitter beef with Jeff Bezos who replied "This is someone supposedly working to make the world better? I don’t think so. Wow."
Interestingly if you search regarding the exchange it seems like around half the articles say 'Jeff Bezos slammed for twitter post' and the other half say 'Uji Anya slammed for twitter post!'
Uji Anya's issue appears to be related to the British Empire's actions in Nigeria. Though as the actions she is objecting to predate Elizabeth being Queen I believe (plus the Queen also being primarily a symbolic figure with limited actual power), the criticism seems perhaps a little callous; unless that is we still live in society that believes in ancestral sin (Exodus 20:5 "the iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the sons and daughters — unto the third and fourth generation). Uji Anya is therefore to be applauded, she is only the second individual to ever make me consider taking Jeff Bezos' side in anything (the other being Donald J Trump)!
University rebukes professor whose tweet about dying queen drew response from Jeff Bezos
Professor Uju Anya, left, and Jeff Bezos. (Photos via Twitter, Amazon) A professor whose tweet about Queen Elizabeth II was called out by Amazon founder
She has also outraged Piers Morgan, who seems to have forgotten what a staunch defender of free speech he usually claims to be.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/piers-morgan-blasts-vile-disgusting-27946904
I think wishing a painful death on anyone is wrong but the hypocrisy of some of her attackers is disgusting.
I think you are right, but when we are talking about someone who was in charge of the military who have been engaged in causing painful deaths on many many people to complain about words seems a bit hypocritical.
Similar threads
- Poll
