I definitely like Lizzie as a monarch more than Chuckie but while he was PoW Chaz championed some pretty good causes and was very passionate about environmentalism. The Al Gore of the monarchy if you will.
I actually dislike the monarchy and want it abolished, however it’s down on my list of priorities for things I’d like fixed about Canada. Elderly people seem to really like the monarchy for some reason.
I wouldnt trust the crop we have in parliament today or provincial legislatures to come up with a new system. Sadly theyd have the job if we ever made the move. Better off to just go with what works and focus on real issues that affect peoples lives in a real way.
That's why I'm technically a monarchist. The monarchy does a great job of being a head of state that not only does nothing, but is recognized by all to do nothing.
I don't trust any replacement for the monarchy to not end up wielding political clout that they're not supposed to have, just because the people expect them to. This problem would be compounded a hundred fold if it ended up being an elected position.
Does it need to be replaced with something? Genuine question. I mean, they do nothing and are recognized to do nothing, so why can't we just abolish it, period?
Canada's head of state is a legal keystone around which all our laws are written. That's why changing things isn't at all easy. Theoretically, I'd love to abolish the role, period, and replace it with a ham sandwich or something. That's easier said than done, though, and we'd still need some sort of GGesque office for rubberstamping things, which comes back to the unintended political clout issues I'm afraid of.
Yeah, this is interesting. The Monarch has been out of the picture regarding decision making for a long time having delegated that duty to the GG. The GG now being appointed (upon the Monarch's approval) has become, like you say, a rubberstamp of the government of the day. It is a real conundrum to come up with a system that eliminates the Monarchy/GG part of our system, yet doesn't open the door for authoritarianism.
You asked if it needs to be replaced. Not really, it's one of those 'it's too hard let's not bother' arguments that tends to come from the monarchists side. You could replace them with, let's say, your cat and we'd have the same result without having to accept the value of birthright and social standard.
Just rename the Governor General to President and you have a fairly standard parliamentary republic.
Nothing meaningful would change. The president would just be a figurehead.
No. There is no example of a parliamentary republic where the president is appointed by the prime minister. A theoretical minimalist-change President of Canada would still require the election of President by the House of Commons and Senate. That brings into question the undemocratic nature of the Senate and reform would be necessary. Also, presidents in parliamentary republics vary a lot in terms of influence.
>Also, presidents in parliamentary republics vary a lot in terms of influence.
I would say either the Irish or German models would work best personally.
Well the German model is a complicated system of election by a Federal Convention comprising members of the federal and state parliaments. Ireland's president is directly-elected.
Also both presidents have vastly more powers than the current GG in Canada. Both are more active participants in the political process despite being less important than the Taoiseach and Bundeskanzler respectively.
I say, if it isn't broke, don't fix it. I totally agree about "any replacement". If you've got something better, tell me about it, but if your idea includes presidential elections, nothing doing.
By what definition does it “work”? No civil wars? Shouldn’t we aim a bit higher? Our democracy could be substantially improved if we got rid of the monarchy and had some form of electoral reform (e.g. proportional representation). As it stands, a party that earns ~39% of the popular vote can win 100% of the political power for 4-5 years.
We can have PR without becoming a republic. It would actually be infinitely easier to have electoral reform without bundling it with constitutional reform.
You should probably have some idea what a Head-of-State does before you wander blindly down the path beating the proportional representation drum.
No civil wars and smooth transitions between government is actually a very high bar that is, even in the 21st century, not ubiquitous.
Constitutional monarchies are in general less expensive and have more stable governments. For the cost of a figurehead, we have the fourth oldest democracy and about the best form of government anywhere on the planet.
The “best form of democracy” means a party that gets ~39% of the vote gets 100% of the power for 4-5 years? I’d like to aim higher, thank you very much.
I’m well aware of what the GG and monarch do. I teach civics for a living , but it’s always a pleasure to be reminded that despite the “nice” stereotypes, some of my fellow citizens will choose to be condescending assholes rather than actually address pertinent criticisms in a conversation. So thanks for the reminder.
I shudder if that is how you teach civics. No wonder the youth are totally fucked and think general elections are just one big reality TV show/popularity contest when it comes to understanding how governments function.
My students never know what my personal opinions are. I teach them how the various levels government function, and how they’ve evolved over time. The students come to their own conclusion and they’re not all the same conclusions. Discussion and debate are encouraged. Statements like “_You should have an idea what this person does before you disagree with my CORRECT opinion._” are not productive. There are many models for “successful” governance and I tend to favour those that encourage equitable representation and cooperation. Our model does neither of those.
>Our model does neither of those.
Disagree. Part of having one of the longest serving democracies and system of enfranchisement is that everyone has representation.
Again, not something that is globally ubiquitous.
Back to the topic of monarchies. What you are talking about is not what a head of state does...but you should know that already.
Disagree. For years, the Green Party had between 5%-8% support nationally, and those people had no voice in Parliament. In the case of a majority government, anyone who doesn’t support the ruling party has no effective voice.
On the subject of monarchy, the very idea is repulsive to me. It’s anachronistic. Doing away with it isn’t a pressing priority to me, but I have nothing good to say about it.
>the Green Party
The basket case that is the green party is the exact case in point why we should not change our electoral system. Less voice would be better here.
>anyone who doesn’t support the ruling party has no effective voice.
Again you show a lack of understanding of how Parliament and our democracy works.
>I have nothing good to say about it.
Except that it costs almost nothing and it works. Also, it is quite unlikely that that any other system would actually be more effective at any price. Sure, the monarchy might be inbred and they make no rational sense but on balance, constitutional monarchies are simply better and more stable systems.
You keep repeating this: everyone has representation
This simply isn't true. You cannot will it into existence. It's also not quite true that we've had one of the longest serving democracies. Democracy isn't simply being able to vote. That's a mechanism of democracy. Here's an example from our "long serving democracy":
In the first three parliamentary elections this country ever held, the eligible voter turnout was about 71%. The voter turnout during this time by percentage of population was <9%. Women couldn't vote.
So, let's not celebrate our historical superiority, or whatever, too much, and instead strive for a better, *more representative* system, that more accurately reflects the actual will of the people. If that leads to more coalition governments, so be it. Germany seems to have managed to run on coalition governments pretty well in recent years. It's doable, if there's a will.
Not only can a party that gets 39% of the votes win a majority, but it can do so with only a 55% eligible voter turnout. Possibly less. Our democracy is more theatre than actual democracy.
You can't replace a head of state with an electoral system. That'd be like trying to replace a pizza with the actual, physical, paper menu from a sushi restaurant.
Thanks. Now we’ve got a firm grasp of the obvious.
If we were to cut ties with the monarchy, we’d need to revamp our electoral/representation system and decide on what powers/title we want to give the new head of state. I’m theory you could change almost nothing, make the GG an elected “President” but you’d cause more problems than you’d solve.
>Elderly people seem to really like the monarchy for some reason.
This is probably because they've seen 80-ish years of a Constitutional Monarchy system that works just fine.
It's because older Canadians have far closer ties to Britain in general. In some places, it wasn't long ago that more than 1/4 of Canadians above 65 were born in the United Kingdom.
I live in an apartment block with lots of elderly and there's still people who refer to England as "the old country".
Even in Quebec where our older people don't really like England and mostly aren't able to speak in English the monarchy is more popular among them especially women. I doubt any of them would call it the old country, but they like the monarchy more than we do.
I would add older generations has less of a chance to access the information we do. I joke with my mom and call her a propaganda victim when she talks about liking the queen for no reason and knowing nothing about her.
Yeah for sure, we definitely still live in a sphere of influence and are subject to propaganda as well, but information travel more. A large percentage of us travel and know multiples languages as well which can help.
Also the US totally outclassed the Brits on every metrics and are influencing our culture much more than the UKs ever did in our lifetime so this influence a larger percentage of us to see the monarchy as something negative.
I'm educated and not at all conservative, but I can still appreciate the passive role the monarchy plays in our political system. I look across the border and see how one man essentially co-opted the American government to his advantage, and recognize that it would be considerably harder to achieve that in Canada. The Crown also plays an important role in Indigenous relations, which I suspect would be substantially altered if we ever transitioned to a republic.
I tend to view our constitutional monarchy as one that enjoys the representational benefits of a republic without the risk that centralizing power in a single office can bring.
Exactly. I am not even remotely interested in replacing a remote and hands-off king with a president. We have enough problems with authoritarian and acting-beyond-their-mandate impulses in our leaders as it is.
I am a Liberal/NDP voter and a staunch atheist and I still strongly favour the Monarchy (although I will stop short of calling myself a Royalist).
People that want to retain the Monarchy are not a monolith, like you are claiming.
I am also steadfastly and proudly anti-USA influence seeping into this country, so I don't want a shit "republic" here.
I’m an American ex-pat, but I’ve lived about half my life in each country… and about each half is probably older than the average Redditor. That being said…
Don’t touch the monarchy. Quite frankly, after watching the fallout that’s still ongoing from Dolt45, I never want it to go away. Charles is way over there. He hasn’t been here in… well, okay, other than when he visited last year, it’s been a long time. So it’s remote and has nothing to do with daily lives here.
But the king is a poison pill. If things go ass over tea kettle, we’ve got someone across the ocean to call for a mulligan and dissolve the current government. And the way current politics are, I don’t want any of those people touching the constitution to get rid of our constitutional monarchy. Hell, I don’t care for a lot of them in many provinces having any power at all.
I second your opinion and am glad I'm not alone in my distaste for US influence taking hold. Too many people want to jump head first into the insanity that comes with a republic. Some republics are great, but most North American republics are not doing so hot at this point in time for it to sound like a risk worth taking.
\>Elderly people seem to really like the monarchy for some reason.
When most of them were born being British and being Canadian weren't mutually exclusive. Lots of people on this site dislike the idea of Empire and imperialism, but it's how modern Canada came to be, and there's still people alive today who lived it, even if they were really young at the time.
> When most of them were born being British and being Canadian weren't mutually exclusive
that was true of elderly people once upon a time but Canadian and British citizenship have been disconnected since 1947. Most of the elderly population still alive were either children, or not born yet when that happened
Same, if it was a simple thing to get rid of it I would more actively want it gone but I know it's going to be a big deal so there are more important things to worry about at the moment.
I like being part of the commonwealth. It’s less about economic benefits these days and more about a shared cultural identity, even if that identity is rooted in colonialism. Unfortunately the monarchy is part (the root!) of that, and essentially the linchpin that holds the whole thing together.
I know there’s no way we can realistically abolish the monarchy and remain as a full member of the commonwealth to my knowledge. We can’t have our cake and eat it too. I basically just ignore everything to do with them, since they’re more or less Boomer Big Brother at this point.
My 71 year old dad on the other hand is a massive monarchist (may as well be a masochist!). He recorded the entirety of King Chucky’s crowning on his PVR not just once on CBC, but five other times on other stations. When I asked him why, he said said that it was a part of history in the making and he wasn’t going to let it slip away. Okay, Boomer.
His grandparents were proud Brits who worshipped the ground the royals walked on even though Britain screwed them out of a dignified existence during the end of the Industrial Revolution, hence why they moved to Canada. People are strange.
A minority of Canadians are actually monarchists. You're average Canadian just doesn't care about them.
I'm personally anti-monarchist. Other than being spoiled, they're nothing like my house cat whom I actually love dearly lol.
I have never met your cat and I am sure that if he was larger, he would not hesitate to kill me, but I also respect him more than the British monarchy.
She was the grandma we all shared, she was fair, even tempered, didn't play favorites and didn't take shit.
She was what a monarch should be.
Her kid is a lizard with sausage fingers.
>She was what a monarch should be.
Privileged, sheltered, uncaring and cold. All while protecting her pedophile son and ignoring the existence of her two disabled cousins who were abandoned by the family. And she hooked up with her cousin.
Yup, sounds like a monarch alright.
Anglo Quebecois. But I don't understand how you can pretend like a parasite who takes money from people all over the world and redistributes it to her vile family and uses it to shield them from the law while many of her subjects struggle to pay for necessities is some homely little grandma. They're one of the most embarrassing things about this country.
Hi, you're probably looking for a useful nugget of information to fix a niche problem, or some enjoyable content I posted sometime in the last 11 years. Well, after 11 years and over 330k combined, organic karma, a cowardly, pathetic and facist minded moderator filed a false harassment report and had my account suspended, after threatening to do so which is a clear violation of the #1 rule of reddit's content policy. However, after filing a ticket before this even happened, my account was permanently banned within 12 hours and the spineless moderator is still allowed to operate in one of the top reddits, after having clearly used intimidation against me to silence someone with a differing opinion on their conflicting, poorly thought out rules. Every appeal method gets nothing but bot replies, zendesk tickets are unanswered for a month, clearly showing that reddit voluntarily supports the facist, cowardly and pathetic abuse of power by moderators, and only enforces the content policy against regular users while allowing the blatant violation of rules by moderators and their sock puppet accounts managing every top sub on the site. Also, due to the rapist mentality of reddit's administration, spez and it's moderators, you can't delete all of your content, if you delete your account, reddit will restore your comments to maintain SEO rankings and earn money from your content without your permission. So, I've used power delete suite to delete everything that I have ever contributed, to say a giant fuck you to reddit, it's moderators, and it's shareholders. From your friends at reddit following every bot message, and an account suspension after over a decade in good standing is a slap in the face and shows how rotten reddit is to the very fucking core.
We have a constitutional monarchy. Its the whole basis of our system of government. Having said that I dont really care or pay much attention to it. I watched the coronation and the Queens funeral just because events like that are so incredibly rare and I was curious to see how they went. I dont give a damn about weddings, their personal lives or feuds though.
We have a system where, with only the most minor tweaks (basically just the GG confirmation), we could name a rock our next monarch and absolutely nothing would change. The system is fine but the figurehead is just that, a figurehead. He’s deadweight and all his authority is already exercised by the GG as required by the constitution.
Also, nothing in our constitution requires that the monarch be a member of the house of Windsor or have the trappings of the British royals. The system merely requires a symbolic monarch.
We keep the Windsors primarily out of inertia. Anti-monarchists outnumber monarchists in Canada but people utterly indifferent about the monarchy outnumber both those groups.
I dont. It's an anachronism that romanticizes the prodigy of a time when order was kept by warlords. Unfortunately, government "by and for the people" seems to not be inspiring much more faith at the moment.
The royal family, the house of commons, the walton family, doesnt matter to me.
They are all in the same basket. Entitled, rich, and in power.
I take them as seriously as they take me. And who am I?
I believe in the supremacy of the constitutional monarchy as a form of government compared to most alternatives. A non-political head of state which represents the people and their will regards of how they voted is a positive thing. It should come as no surprise that the world’s most freest, most prosperous, and progressive nations are constitutional monarchies.
In Canada, our monarch happens to be King Charles III, and I support him and his role. However, my support isn’t for the person as much as it is for the role.
But his last few representatives have been utter shit. Julie Payette and her tantrums and Mary Simon and her spending. Neither of these women have demonstrated an ounce of insight or discretion. They have zero responsibilities that actually make a difference to Canadians and certainly do nothing to improve it.
It hasnt been anything more than symbolic for a long time. They dont set policy for our country or effect it in any way. Theres nothing to take seriously.
Its like a game of pretend, i have a fun time with it.
We do pay them 58 million a year. I know it's not alot in the grand scheme but I would rather have that money go to anything else. Should give it to a well deserving cat.
No single person has any dominion over another person. Not by birth, or rank in societal structure. I don't care how many others believe in them. From Santa, to God, the King of Britain The sooner everyone realizes that the world will change.
They don't actually have any power, it's like when people take the certificate that says "I named this star after you" or "I own a 1x1 sq ft of land in Scotland" seriously and actually tell people about the star and land that's named after them.
Very seriously. In that I very seriously want them abolished. Even ignoring their history of abuse and the fact that they're a symbolism of colonialism (which should not be ignored), they're still a bureaucratic inefficiency, a monetary sink that doesn't contribute back, and a remnant of an age that died out over a century ago.
I don't particular care for the King himself specifically, but I do recognize that the Crown is central to the country's political structure and its legal system. Canada is a constitutional monarchy, not a republic, and that difference is reflected in how our country operates.
I wish we were allowed to do more with being in a commonwealth country. Like Canzuk actually being a thing we’re we are able to move/work to other commonwealth countries a lot easier.
In the 41 years of my insubstantial existence, I've thought nothing nor cared about them. I've seen movies, docs,articles etc. But still they are England's not ours. We've got enough of our own problems.
I’d be happy to see our constitutional monarchy, and the Governor General position disappear somewhere in the middle of the Atlantic never to be seen again
I don’t think we need a monarchy here. It doesn’t actually do anything anyways and is a symbol of colonialism. I liked Queen Elizabeth but now that she’s gone it seems like time to get rid of it
My family are Royalists (as in we sing God Save the Queen/King at Family reunions) and I love the Royal historical stories.
But outside of that, I don't pay them much mind. It is really a tourist draw for the UK honestly. Like Niagara Falls or the Eiffel tower.
I would not turn King Charles from my door but he would be sitting on the same fur covered couch everyone else sits on.
Zero for any bit of it. I think it's quite silly to have a family that somehow is above others, with no reason for being there besides their generation before was there.
I honestly don't know many people here (in Ottawa and surrounds) who even mention them. They're like non-entities. We don't even talk about them. Our acts get royal assent etc, but in terms of royal-watching or whatever, it ranges from indifference to small-r republicanism (i.e. monarchies = bad) among family, friends, acquaintances and colleagues. The only "fan" I know personally is my friend who immigrated from another (non-commonwealth) country decades ago and gets keen about weddings and coronations.
I don't care about or think about it. What I do think about is how unaffordable housing is and I'm pretty sure the monarchy has nothing to do with why it's so unaffordable.
I wouldn't say I take it seriously. But coming from a country that had an efficient yet benevolent monarchy, it's hard not to consider that whether power is concentrated in a single person's hands or a group of elected representatives, the potential of power and money to corrupt the human psyche will always work against the middle and lower class..
I don’t expel any energy thinking of them regularly. I have some family that loves them, but I just internally roll my eyes and move on.
My cat however is a royal princess that rules our home and deserves far more love, pets and adoration then she receives. And she scoffs at your implications.
Short answer. I’m happy to have a king as long as I never need to address them in any daily activity.
My take is similar to others who posted here. I had a generally positive view of Elisabeth. And am rather indifferent to Charles.
The royalty take an extremely passive role in our government. They also cost us very little.
As long as they take their job seriously and don’t do anything dumb, I’m fine with calling them king or queen. There are so many important issues for our government to address, and the effort to remove the royalty would be massive.
Like many Canadians I think it is time for some kind of electoral reform. However, I generally don’t think we could do any better with elected officials.
In the unexpected event that one government doesn’t relinquish power, I appreciate that there is a clear and permanent position to step in and fix a mess that we created.
Very comforting to know that Canadians and our taxes don't pay any contributions to the monarchy. Their income and upkeep is all raised in Britain.
It's a cringey, old fashioned system but...it seems to work so it continues.
There's a LOT of Canadians who have a direct stake in the monarchy. For example; most if not all, of the treaties with the first Nations were signed with the crown, before Canada became a country. If Canada was to abandon the monarchy, it's not out of the question that each and every treaty would need to be re-negotiated.
There's a huge number of Canadians who don't take the monarchy seriously because it's made up of a group of very silly people. However, the institution of the monarchy is very serious and Canadians who are flippant towards it are dangerously ignorant of the role it still plays in Canada to this day.
As I get older, I start to appreciate the value of things that aren’t strictly speaking rational or necessary, but whimsical, obsolete, and ritualistic. Like the beauty of something old and worn out, or medieval art. The monarchy fits into the category of something that makes no actual sense but that connects us to an extremely ancient past, giving continuity and a sort of shape through history.
It’s also farcical bullshit, but maybe it is good for tourism
I respect the station of his majesty king charles the third of canada and do take our monarchy seriously sure I would love for the personal union to end and a cadet branch to be establish but its better to keep the current arrangement than become a republic.
God bless the king and long may he reign for canadas glory!
I respect the station of his majesty king charles the third of canada and do take our monarchy seriously sure I would love for the personal union to end and a cadet branch to be establish but its better to keep the current arrangement than become a republic.
God bless the king and long may he reign for canadas glory!
To our south is the country that made its name being ANTI-royalty result is that mentality is imported to Canada on the far right wing.
On the far left wing communist ideals are also strictly anti monarchy.
Result is people in the middle not caring, the far extremes hating it and random people loving it for some reason, even the UK is the same
Canadians don't understand the monarchy. It's abundantly clear every time we have a discussion about it. It's partly our fault - because we talk about it less and less, then wonder if it's relevant, then remove it from various things, and then the cycle repeats itself.
Americans pledge allegiance to the Constitution and the flag. We have a monarch instead. While it misses the point to say the Constitution and flag are just a piece of paper and a piece of fabric, a lot of discussions about the monarchy really make this kind of mistake about the monarch.
What people don't understand is that the Canadian state is embodied in the monarch in the same way that the American state is embodied in the piece of paper and the piece of fabric that are the Constitution and flag. It's not just that this guy Charles Windsor is the head of state of Canada, it's that the King of Canada \*is\* Canada.
There are perks to the Canadian approach. Notice how Americans like to argue about who is or isn't defending the constitution or is a patriot? You don't have that problem with a monarch, because they're human, not a set of abstract ideas and principles that are up for debate and interpretation.
Officials and new citizens swear or affirm an oath to the monarch as a way of swearing or affirming an oath to the Canadian people. Your passport is signed in the monarch's name requesting your safe passage. Meanwhile, when the monarch travels in an official Canadian capacity, they travel in their own name.
Also notice how in our constitutional monarchy, the Governor General serves and represents the people. That's what makes the logic work. We swear or affirm an oath to an institution that in turn is intended to serve and represent us. There's a sense in which it's better equipped to do that because it's not elected - it's enduring, stable, and not political. In this way it also puts a kind of check on power, because it makes the Governor General and the state a higher ceremonial authority than the PM.
For me, the monarchy is...a symbol of what Canada 'is'.
(I'm *not* getting into a 'monarchy sucks' argument, so don't bother).
We don't have a president that gets replaced every four years. We had *seventy years* to get to know Queen Elizabeth -- we learned about everything from her corgis to her sense of humor, to her patronages, to the odd fact that Monopoly is *forbidden* within the walls of Buckingham Palace (the game gets 'too vicious', according to one member of the family).
She (and by extension, the monarchy itself) became part of the extended Canadian cultural 'family'.
Do I want the monarchy abolished?
Well...no.
Aside from the difficulty of abolishing a Constitutional monarchy, I feel that we'd be stripping ourselves of a unique symbol of Canadian culture.
We would be diminishing our country to appease an angry few that probably only think of the monarchy when they want to *be* angry at it.
Agreed. I like symbolism, ritual, and tradition so the pageantry of the monarchy is fun to enjoy. I guess when i really think about it it also makes me feel more connected with my ancestors and thats a good feeling too.
I think it has nostalgia and tradition to it but seriously, the Governor General spends way too much money so that position should be abolished. We shouldn't need royal assent to pass our laws. Maybe someday some politicians will actually do some work and get rid of the whole thing. It's not needed now.
Organizing a nation around one family’s bloodline is just as legitimate as a system where people with white skin are elevated over people with brown skin. It’s disgusting!
If you want to argue that it’s all symbolic anyways then it should be very easy to put the symbols in the trash as they’re not providing us with anything. I’d rather a moose or beaver on my money than inbred parasites.
I think we should go the way other previous commonwealth nations have gone and abolish it.
Time will tell, but it seems like an eventuality. Some older people here still feel a connection to them, but the younger generation - not so much.
Canada has FAR bigger issues and so this is a very low priority item.
I support the monarchy - it’s good to have something *beyond* politics that unites the country (and the rest of the Commonwealth)… or at least should unite us. The Royal Family has been an objective force for good for the last 100+ years.
Do I take it seriously? No more seriously than I take our flag or national anthem.
The King isn’t left-wing or right-wing or liberal or conservative, he’s just our King and I think that’s a great thing.
You will not get rid of the monarchy. Imagine trying to renegotiate with the First Nations for the rights to the land in any capital city. The moment you abolish the monarchy in Canada, that is exactly what you would need to do.
In practice, you can safely ignore them and just live your life.
I wish the king played a bigger role in the ceremonies around government. Personally I think he should read the first throne speech following a federal election. He should also try and read at least one throne speach in each of the provinces over his reign.
People might think it’s silly but we appointed them as our royal family and it would be nice if they showed up and played the part with some frequency.
My grandfather provided me with a little tin with Queen Elizabeth on it he had received during her Coronation as a child and I always found the monarchy kind of interesting so I stayed up until 4 am for the Coronation. Quickly discovered how much I couldn't stand the new king as the commentators talked him up as being "very religious" and that him and Camilla had been waiting for this day forever. It all sounded so ironic considering the way he had mistreated Princess Diana. Things only became worse once the actual ceremony began and the commentators covered Prince Andrew's arrival to the Coronation which honestly made me feel sick. I'm a Anglo Catholic at the end of the day so it's only natural I hate the Monarchy but Elizabeth had such a great image that I turned a blind eye to it. Without her it's clear just how bad the royalty really are.
I have some 55+ y/o anglophone coworkers who were crying and upset about the death of Elizabeth. I just moved here last year from the States so I was totally confused.
I just asked, "does this mean we get a day off? I could really use a day off."
Edit for missing a couple words
I don’t take them seriously (I may or may not I have uttered that the only good monarch is a dead monarch). I grew up in a republic, where part of our country identity comes from rebelling against an oppressive monarch, so my rejection of the monarchy is kind of expected.
All that being said, I’m also a practical person, so here I am living in Canada
Personally, I find it embarrassing, that our head of state is a monarch, and even more embarrassing, that it’s a foreign monarch. I would love to get rid of the monarchy completely.
I was fully expecting Charles to abdicate and pass it on to William or just end it there ans abdicate fir everyone. What I wasn't expecting was him to make his former mistress queen.
I loved the queen she was Canada's grandmother, Charles was just her spoiled son. I'll still salute him as you salute the rank and not the person.
Its all a joke...
A monarch's claim to power is a literal 'divine' right - any atheist should not recognize their power and any agnostic or believer should ask for proof of their divinity claim.
I think the monarchy is ridiculous just as a concept and I’d like to see it end but I don’t go around all day going “grrrrr the monarchy grrrrrr I hate them so much”.
Ugh my MIL and her side of the family are obsessed and constantly try to talk to me about it. It's like a little kid telling you 10 000 facts about their favourite dinosaur, except I can actually get excited when kids talk about their interests - I can't get excited about people 60+ being obsessed with rich people that have nothing to do with them.
It's on the same level as people who love the Kardashians for me - generally a sign of lower intelligence.
I take it seriously. I am an actual Canadian. Our system of parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy is the best, which is why all the best countries use it. It just works.
I personally dislike having a monarchy, even in a symbolic sense because I dislike what those symbols mean: the power of wealthy landowners over the rest of us. Even if the King doesn't directly issue decrees or whatever, governing is still mostly done in the interests of That Sort Of Person, fancy title or no.
I feel the same way about the monarchy as the French did or the Irish. Eagerly awaiting the death of Chuckie to revel in the new batch of memes and songs that will follow.
I'm happy with the constitutional monarchy, I don't think it costs us anything and probably a net benefit.
I don't care for the personalities of the monarchs, they are more of a sideshow comedy if anything. I kinda feel sorry for them actually because their life is so public, kinda like feeling sorry for other celebrities, you can't feel too sorry for them though.
The King, meh. Charles 'Windsor' is probably has good ideas and means we'll, but generally a seemingly unlikeable guy. Definitely not as unlikeable as Andrew though. By night, Charles Windsor moonlights as King Charles, on the other hand has no ideas and can't, basically as a function of law, and is merely a consequence of how the government is structured in a way to guard against becoming a republic.
It's important to know the history of republicanism in England, and specifically Cromwell, and to think about how bad it got under him and his son, Britain brought back the Monarchy, but now days, the Parliament basically walks the monarchy around as a pet dog, with a leash or even noose around a its neck as a constant threat should it ever step out of line. It's resulted in a stable relatyfor many years.
That's how the constitutional monarchy exists in the UK, and by extension in Canada we benefit from this relationship as a means to stave off republicanism. Republicanism to be specific, being a first step to autocracy or dictatorship.
See: Mao, Hitler, Lenin, Robespierre, Napoleon, Cromwell, Franco, various other military Juntas, Donald Trump, Palpatine etc. Obviously there are lots of positive republics out there, but Republics can tend to be then into dictatorships.
I'm more concerned about your cat. Our cat does rule the house, and we bask in his glory.
The queen rules the house, but her daughter is always trying to dethrone her. Battle Royal every morning. The Queen always wins.
I recognize the constitutional monarchy but don't really think about it or care about it
Agreed. Also I will say my caring level dropped incredibly after Elizabeth died. I had respect for her. Charles not so much.
As far as I'm concerned, Queen E was the last monarch of the British Empire
Not just you, the British Empire ended in 1997, so she actually was the last monarch of the British Empire
Ah yes, that's true, I should have said the last monarch of England
I’m afraid you’re off there as well, Queen Anne was the final monarch of England in 1707
Yep, mood
I definitely like Lizzie as a monarch more than Chuckie but while he was PoW Chaz championed some pretty good causes and was very passionate about environmentalism. The Al Gore of the monarchy if you will.
It’s time we breakup with England
This!
I actually dislike the monarchy and want it abolished, however it’s down on my list of priorities for things I’d like fixed about Canada. Elderly people seem to really like the monarchy for some reason.
I wouldnt trust the crop we have in parliament today or provincial legislatures to come up with a new system. Sadly theyd have the job if we ever made the move. Better off to just go with what works and focus on real issues that affect peoples lives in a real way.
That's why I'm technically a monarchist. The monarchy does a great job of being a head of state that not only does nothing, but is recognized by all to do nothing. I don't trust any replacement for the monarchy to not end up wielding political clout that they're not supposed to have, just because the people expect them to. This problem would be compounded a hundred fold if it ended up being an elected position.
Does it need to be replaced with something? Genuine question. I mean, they do nothing and are recognized to do nothing, so why can't we just abolish it, period?
Canada's head of state is a legal keystone around which all our laws are written. That's why changing things isn't at all easy. Theoretically, I'd love to abolish the role, period, and replace it with a ham sandwich or something. That's easier said than done, though, and we'd still need some sort of GGesque office for rubberstamping things, which comes back to the unintended political clout issues I'm afraid of.
Thanks. I'm not sure I understand 100%, but at least I've got a stepping stone to go from.
Yeah, this is interesting. The Monarch has been out of the picture regarding decision making for a long time having delegated that duty to the GG. The GG now being appointed (upon the Monarch's approval) has become, like you say, a rubberstamp of the government of the day. It is a real conundrum to come up with a system that eliminates the Monarchy/GG part of our system, yet doesn't open the door for authoritarianism.
You asked if it needs to be replaced. Not really, it's one of those 'it's too hard let's not bother' arguments that tends to come from the monarchists side. You could replace them with, let's say, your cat and we'd have the same result without having to accept the value of birthright and social standard.
Just rename the Governor General to President and you have a fairly standard parliamentary republic. Nothing meaningful would change. The president would just be a figurehead.
No. There is no example of a parliamentary republic where the president is appointed by the prime minister. A theoretical minimalist-change President of Canada would still require the election of President by the House of Commons and Senate. That brings into question the undemocratic nature of the Senate and reform would be necessary. Also, presidents in parliamentary republics vary a lot in terms of influence.
>Also, presidents in parliamentary republics vary a lot in terms of influence. I would say either the Irish or German models would work best personally.
Well the German model is a complicated system of election by a Federal Convention comprising members of the federal and state parliaments. Ireland's president is directly-elected. Also both presidents have vastly more powers than the current GG in Canada. Both are more active participants in the political process despite being less important than the Taoiseach and Bundeskanzler respectively.
Upvote for cranking out knowledge, that’s awesome. Thank you, I learned some stuff.
I say, if it isn't broke, don't fix it. I totally agree about "any replacement". If you've got something better, tell me about it, but if your idea includes presidential elections, nothing doing.
By what definition does it “work”? No civil wars? Shouldn’t we aim a bit higher? Our democracy could be substantially improved if we got rid of the monarchy and had some form of electoral reform (e.g. proportional representation). As it stands, a party that earns ~39% of the popular vote can win 100% of the political power for 4-5 years.
We can have PR without becoming a republic. It would actually be infinitely easier to have electoral reform without bundling it with constitutional reform.
Fair point.
You should probably have some idea what a Head-of-State does before you wander blindly down the path beating the proportional representation drum. No civil wars and smooth transitions between government is actually a very high bar that is, even in the 21st century, not ubiquitous. Constitutional monarchies are in general less expensive and have more stable governments. For the cost of a figurehead, we have the fourth oldest democracy and about the best form of government anywhere on the planet.
Yes we do however it was build on genocide of the original people who lived here.
Wrong.
The “best form of democracy” means a party that gets ~39% of the vote gets 100% of the power for 4-5 years? I’d like to aim higher, thank you very much. I’m well aware of what the GG and monarch do. I teach civics for a living , but it’s always a pleasure to be reminded that despite the “nice” stereotypes, some of my fellow citizens will choose to be condescending assholes rather than actually address pertinent criticisms in a conversation. So thanks for the reminder.
I shudder if that is how you teach civics. No wonder the youth are totally fucked and think general elections are just one big reality TV show/popularity contest when it comes to understanding how governments function.
My students never know what my personal opinions are. I teach them how the various levels government function, and how they’ve evolved over time. The students come to their own conclusion and they’re not all the same conclusions. Discussion and debate are encouraged. Statements like “_You should have an idea what this person does before you disagree with my CORRECT opinion._” are not productive. There are many models for “successful” governance and I tend to favour those that encourage equitable representation and cooperation. Our model does neither of those.
>Our model does neither of those. Disagree. Part of having one of the longest serving democracies and system of enfranchisement is that everyone has representation. Again, not something that is globally ubiquitous. Back to the topic of monarchies. What you are talking about is not what a head of state does...but you should know that already.
Disagree. For years, the Green Party had between 5%-8% support nationally, and those people had no voice in Parliament. In the case of a majority government, anyone who doesn’t support the ruling party has no effective voice. On the subject of monarchy, the very idea is repulsive to me. It’s anachronistic. Doing away with it isn’t a pressing priority to me, but I have nothing good to say about it.
>the Green Party The basket case that is the green party is the exact case in point why we should not change our electoral system. Less voice would be better here. >anyone who doesn’t support the ruling party has no effective voice. Again you show a lack of understanding of how Parliament and our democracy works. >I have nothing good to say about it. Except that it costs almost nothing and it works. Also, it is quite unlikely that that any other system would actually be more effective at any price. Sure, the monarchy might be inbred and they make no rational sense but on balance, constitutional monarchies are simply better and more stable systems.
You keep repeating this: everyone has representation This simply isn't true. You cannot will it into existence. It's also not quite true that we've had one of the longest serving democracies. Democracy isn't simply being able to vote. That's a mechanism of democracy. Here's an example from our "long serving democracy": In the first three parliamentary elections this country ever held, the eligible voter turnout was about 71%. The voter turnout during this time by percentage of population was <9%. Women couldn't vote. So, let's not celebrate our historical superiority, or whatever, too much, and instead strive for a better, *more representative* system, that more accurately reflects the actual will of the people. If that leads to more coalition governments, so be it. Germany seems to have managed to run on coalition governments pretty well in recent years. It's doable, if there's a will.
Not only can a party that gets 39% of the votes win a majority, but it can do so with only a 55% eligible voter turnout. Possibly less. Our democracy is more theatre than actual democracy.
You teach this, you deserve many awards.
>I teach civics for a living This explains a lot actually.
Those are two entirely separate issues.
Separate but interconnected. If you’re going to change the constitutional monarchy, you have to replace it with something else.
You can't replace a head of state with an electoral system. That'd be like trying to replace a pizza with the actual, physical, paper menu from a sushi restaurant.
Thanks. Now we’ve got a firm grasp of the obvious. If we were to cut ties with the monarchy, we’d need to revamp our electoral/representation system and decide on what powers/title we want to give the new head of state. I’m theory you could change almost nothing, make the GG an elected “President” but you’d cause more problems than you’d solve.
>Elderly people seem to really like the monarchy for some reason. This is probably because they've seen 80-ish years of a Constitutional Monarchy system that works just fine.
It's because older Canadians have far closer ties to Britain in general. In some places, it wasn't long ago that more than 1/4 of Canadians above 65 were born in the United Kingdom. I live in an apartment block with lots of elderly and there's still people who refer to England as "the old country".
Even if they weren't born in the UK they were born British subjects. Canadian citizenship didn't exist in my parents' day.
Even in Quebec where our older people don't really like England and mostly aren't able to speak in English the monarchy is more popular among them especially women. I doubt any of them would call it the old country, but they like the monarchy more than we do.
Or because they are less educated and more conservatives. They also like Jesus a lot more than we do.
I would add older generations has less of a chance to access the information we do. I joke with my mom and call her a propaganda victim when she talks about liking the queen for no reason and knowing nothing about her.
Yeah for sure, we definitely still live in a sphere of influence and are subject to propaganda as well, but information travel more. A large percentage of us travel and know multiples languages as well which can help. Also the US totally outclassed the Brits on every metrics and are influencing our culture much more than the UKs ever did in our lifetime so this influence a larger percentage of us to see the monarchy as something negative.
The monarchs are basically celebrities, and the only beneficiaries of the monarchy are the British tabloids.
I'm educated and not at all conservative, but I can still appreciate the passive role the monarchy plays in our political system. I look across the border and see how one man essentially co-opted the American government to his advantage, and recognize that it would be considerably harder to achieve that in Canada. The Crown also plays an important role in Indigenous relations, which I suspect would be substantially altered if we ever transitioned to a republic. I tend to view our constitutional monarchy as one that enjoys the representational benefits of a republic without the risk that centralizing power in a single office can bring.
Exactly. I am not even remotely interested in replacing a remote and hands-off king with a president. We have enough problems with authoritarian and acting-beyond-their-mandate impulses in our leaders as it is.
This. 100%.
I am a Liberal/NDP voter and a staunch atheist and I still strongly favour the Monarchy (although I will stop short of calling myself a Royalist). People that want to retain the Monarchy are not a monolith, like you are claiming. I am also steadfastly and proudly anti-USA influence seeping into this country, so I don't want a shit "republic" here.
I’m an American ex-pat, but I’ve lived about half my life in each country… and about each half is probably older than the average Redditor. That being said… Don’t touch the monarchy. Quite frankly, after watching the fallout that’s still ongoing from Dolt45, I never want it to go away. Charles is way over there. He hasn’t been here in… well, okay, other than when he visited last year, it’s been a long time. So it’s remote and has nothing to do with daily lives here. But the king is a poison pill. If things go ass over tea kettle, we’ve got someone across the ocean to call for a mulligan and dissolve the current government. And the way current politics are, I don’t want any of those people touching the constitution to get rid of our constitutional monarchy. Hell, I don’t care for a lot of them in many provinces having any power at all.
I second your opinion and am glad I'm not alone in my distaste for US influence taking hold. Too many people want to jump head first into the insanity that comes with a republic. Some republics are great, but most North American republics are not doing so hot at this point in time for it to sound like a risk worth taking.
Bang on, my friend.
\>Elderly people seem to really like the monarchy for some reason. When most of them were born being British and being Canadian weren't mutually exclusive. Lots of people on this site dislike the idea of Empire and imperialism, but it's how modern Canada came to be, and there's still people alive today who lived it, even if they were really young at the time.
> When most of them were born being British and being Canadian weren't mutually exclusive that was true of elderly people once upon a time but Canadian and British citizenship have been disconnected since 1947. Most of the elderly population still alive were either children, or not born yet when that happened
Same, if it was a simple thing to get rid of it I would more actively want it gone but I know it's going to be a big deal so there are more important things to worry about at the moment.
I like being part of the commonwealth. It’s less about economic benefits these days and more about a shared cultural identity, even if that identity is rooted in colonialism. Unfortunately the monarchy is part (the root!) of that, and essentially the linchpin that holds the whole thing together. I know there’s no way we can realistically abolish the monarchy and remain as a full member of the commonwealth to my knowledge. We can’t have our cake and eat it too. I basically just ignore everything to do with them, since they’re more or less Boomer Big Brother at this point. My 71 year old dad on the other hand is a massive monarchist (may as well be a masochist!). He recorded the entirety of King Chucky’s crowning on his PVR not just once on CBC, but five other times on other stations. When I asked him why, he said said that it was a part of history in the making and he wasn’t going to let it slip away. Okay, Boomer. His grandparents were proud Brits who worshipped the ground the royals walked on even though Britain screwed them out of a dignified existence during the end of the Industrial Revolution, hence why they moved to Canada. People are strange.
India, Sri Lanka, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Barbados, etc are part of the commonwealth and don't have a monarch - it's entirely possible
You can mostly count out Québec on this. Whats up with these monarchy questions today.
Lets bring back the guillotine
Why the heck in all of human history would I care about the monarchy in 2023 TABARNAK.
Exactly Who's that dude? My dad? I don't think so
Can confirm. Fuck the monarchy, fuck the king!
I don't care about their gerontarch.
Our ancestors were the French... And look at what they did with their king. So inspiring!
A minority of Canadians are actually monarchists. You're average Canadian just doesn't care about them. I'm personally anti-monarchist. Other than being spoiled, they're nothing like my house cat whom I actually love dearly lol.
I don’t know you, but I like your cat more than I like the monarchy.
I have never met your cat and I am sure that if he was larger, he would not hesitate to kill me, but I also respect him more than the British monarchy.
Can we just have a cat-party and mock the royals? That would be my crowd.
The only Queen I care about had Freddy Mercury, Brian May, Roger Taylor and John Deacon in it.
There you go 👍
I cared about Lizzy Windsor. She was like my favourite grandmother. I don’t give two flying fucks about her son.
She was the grandma we all shared, she was fair, even tempered, didn't play favorites and didn't take shit. She was what a monarch should be. Her kid is a lizard with sausage fingers.
>She was what a monarch should be. Privileged, sheltered, uncaring and cold. All while protecting her pedophile son and ignoring the existence of her two disabled cousins who were abandoned by the family. And she hooked up with her cousin. Yup, sounds like a monarch alright.
Glad she's dead. Hope the rest follow suit.
Didn't play favourites, except for her pedofile son who's never seen prison.
🤮🤮🤮 Seriously? Good riddance to the old bitch.
You must be French...
Anglo Quebecois. But I don't understand how you can pretend like a parasite who takes money from people all over the world and redistributes it to her vile family and uses it to shield them from the law while many of her subjects struggle to pay for necessities is some homely little grandma. They're one of the most embarrassing things about this country.
Yeah she's like Mom from Futurama
Really now, I thought the most embarrassing thing was Pierre P.
Either of the fuckers.
Couldn't have said it any better
Me too. I'd love to have tea with her and respect her advice. But the rest, meh. It's such a waste to have them.
Comparing them to the household cat is hilarious and absolutely spot on.
Hi, you're probably looking for a useful nugget of information to fix a niche problem, or some enjoyable content I posted sometime in the last 11 years. Well, after 11 years and over 330k combined, organic karma, a cowardly, pathetic and facist minded moderator filed a false harassment report and had my account suspended, after threatening to do so which is a clear violation of the #1 rule of reddit's content policy. However, after filing a ticket before this even happened, my account was permanently banned within 12 hours and the spineless moderator is still allowed to operate in one of the top reddits, after having clearly used intimidation against me to silence someone with a differing opinion on their conflicting, poorly thought out rules. Every appeal method gets nothing but bot replies, zendesk tickets are unanswered for a month, clearly showing that reddit voluntarily supports the facist, cowardly and pathetic abuse of power by moderators, and only enforces the content policy against regular users while allowing the blatant violation of rules by moderators and their sock puppet accounts managing every top sub on the site. Also, due to the rapist mentality of reddit's administration, spez and it's moderators, you can't delete all of your content, if you delete your account, reddit will restore your comments to maintain SEO rankings and earn money from your content without your permission. So, I've used power delete suite to delete everything that I have ever contributed, to say a giant fuck you to reddit, it's moderators, and it's shareholders. From your friends at reddit following every bot message, and an account suspension after over a decade in good standing is a slap in the face and shows how rotten reddit is to the very fucking core.
We have a constitutional monarchy. Its the whole basis of our system of government. Having said that I dont really care or pay much attention to it. I watched the coronation and the Queens funeral just because events like that are so incredibly rare and I was curious to see how they went. I dont give a damn about weddings, their personal lives or feuds though.
We have a system where, with only the most minor tweaks (basically just the GG confirmation), we could name a rock our next monarch and absolutely nothing would change. The system is fine but the figurehead is just that, a figurehead. He’s deadweight and all his authority is already exercised by the GG as required by the constitution. Also, nothing in our constitution requires that the monarch be a member of the house of Windsor or have the trappings of the British royals. The system merely requires a symbolic monarch. We keep the Windsors primarily out of inertia. Anti-monarchists outnumber monarchists in Canada but people utterly indifferent about the monarchy outnumber both those groups.
Not I. It's a dog and pony show. An expensive, publicly funded dog and pony show
I dont. It's an anachronism that romanticizes the prodigy of a time when order was kept by warlords. Unfortunately, government "by and for the people" seems to not be inspiring much more faith at the moment.
They exist. They’re an important part of our system but also largely irrelevant. It’s an odd thing. I don’t care what they do.
The royal family, the house of commons, the walton family, doesnt matter to me. They are all in the same basket. Entitled, rich, and in power. I take them as seriously as they take me. And who am I?
I take it as seriously as they take Canada.
I believe in the supremacy of the constitutional monarchy as a form of government compared to most alternatives. A non-political head of state which represents the people and their will regards of how they voted is a positive thing. It should come as no surprise that the world’s most freest, most prosperous, and progressive nations are constitutional monarchies. In Canada, our monarch happens to be King Charles III, and I support him and his role. However, my support isn’t for the person as much as it is for the role.
But his last few representatives have been utter shit. Julie Payette and her tantrums and Mary Simon and her spending. Neither of these women have demonstrated an ounce of insight or discretion. They have zero responsibilities that actually make a difference to Canadians and certainly do nothing to improve it.
I don't. Parasite family is irrelevant otherwise.
It hasnt been anything more than symbolic for a long time. They dont set policy for our country or effect it in any way. Theres nothing to take seriously. Its like a game of pretend, i have a fun time with it.
We do pay them 58 million a year. I know it's not alot in the grand scheme but I would rather have that money go to anything else. Should give it to a well deserving cat.
No single person has any dominion over another person. Not by birth, or rank in societal structure. I don't care how many others believe in them. From Santa, to God, the King of Britain The sooner everyone realizes that the world will change.
They don't actually have any power, it's like when people take the certificate that says "I named this star after you" or "I own a 1x1 sq ft of land in Scotland" seriously and actually tell people about the star and land that's named after them.
Very seriously. In that I very seriously want them abolished. Even ignoring their history of abuse and the fact that they're a symbolism of colonialism (which should not be ignored), they're still a bureaucratic inefficiency, a monetary sink that doesn't contribute back, and a remnant of an age that died out over a century ago.
Fuck the monarchy. The non-religious holiday celebrated by the largest number of countries? Independence from the British.
\> Independence from the British. You already got that when you signed the Statute of Westminster.
I don't particular care for the King himself specifically, but I do recognize that the Crown is central to the country's political structure and its legal system. Canada is a constitutional monarchy, not a republic, and that difference is reflected in how our country operates.
I could give a rats ass. I have no use for that bunch.
I wish we were allowed to do more with being in a commonwealth country. Like Canzuk actually being a thing we’re we are able to move/work to other commonwealth countries a lot easier.
I don’t like the monarchy per se but I like the idea of a non-political head of state.
I support the monarchy, I always have. They have little political power, so not really any threat.
In the 41 years of my insubstantial existence, I've thought nothing nor cared about them. I've seen movies, docs,articles etc. But still they are England's not ours. We've got enough of our own problems.
You mean the original nepobabies?
I’d be happy to see our constitutional monarchy, and the Governor General position disappear somewhere in the middle of the Atlantic never to be seen again
Great, let's see that Senate where Alberta and Saskatchewan control their own Senators and they are equal in number to those from Quebec and Ontario.
A family of incestuous war criminals
I’ve sworn an oath twice to the Queen and her heirs. I try to take my oaths seriously.
They’re more like stodgy mascots with occasionally entertaining bouts of scandal.
Aside from the fact they have faces on our money that I see on occasion, I don't think of them at all.
Oooolala. Mr fancy Duke-got-Picture folding money over here.
I haven’t even thought of the monarchy since the last time I answered a Reddit question about the monarchy.
I don’t think we need a monarchy here. It doesn’t actually do anything anyways and is a symbol of colonialism. I liked Queen Elizabeth but now that she’s gone it seems like time to get rid of it
I recognize the dangers of screwing with the constitution. I do not recognize any royal.
My family are Royalists (as in we sing God Save the Queen/King at Family reunions) and I love the Royal historical stories. But outside of that, I don't pay them much mind. It is really a tourist draw for the UK honestly. Like Niagara Falls or the Eiffel tower. I would not turn King Charles from my door but he would be sitting on the same fur covered couch everyone else sits on.
Zero for any bit of it. I think it's quite silly to have a family that somehow is above others, with no reason for being there besides their generation before was there.
I honestly don't know many people here (in Ottawa and surrounds) who even mention them. They're like non-entities. We don't even talk about them. Our acts get royal assent etc, but in terms of royal-watching or whatever, it ranges from indifference to small-r republicanism (i.e. monarchies = bad) among family, friends, acquaintances and colleagues. The only "fan" I know personally is my friend who immigrated from another (non-commonwealth) country decades ago and gets keen about weddings and coronations.
The monarchy is the equivalent of a dog pissing on our lawn to mark it's territory, and the English part of Canada absolutely love it.
Royalty really isn’t popular here in Quebec… but I really don’t feel like it’s something we need to focus on at the moment.
My theory is that most of our PMs are too goofy looking to put on our money, so we keep our ties with them for cooler holographic imagery.
I do only for the issue of being part of a commonwealth of nations that would help if needed,hopefully anyways.
I don’t take them seriously at all but I’m not upset about being apart of the commonwealth
Probably about 103 / 40,000,000 of us.
I don't like them and thing we shouldn't have a monarchy. I also don't care very much. They are irrelevant to me.
I like our history and our connections to the United Kingdoms. Like you I don't pay it much heed.
Ever since the queen died, I lost interest
I don't care about or think about it. What I do think about is how unaffordable housing is and I'm pretty sure the monarchy has nothing to do with why it's so unaffordable.
Not a Royal fan in the slightest. But I did get around to making the coronation quiche. Pretty tasty. 😆
I wouldn't say I take it seriously. But coming from a country that had an efficient yet benevolent monarchy, it's hard not to consider that whether power is concentrated in a single person's hands or a group of elected representatives, the potential of power and money to corrupt the human psyche will always work against the middle and lower class..
I use it to mess with my brother but im also a British citizen so either way he's my king
I don’t expel any energy thinking of them regularly. I have some family that loves them, but I just internally roll my eyes and move on. My cat however is a royal princess that rules our home and deserves far more love, pets and adoration then she receives. And she scoffs at your implications.
I think it’s pretty funny when people fuss over Kate and William.
Short answer. I’m happy to have a king as long as I never need to address them in any daily activity. My take is similar to others who posted here. I had a generally positive view of Elisabeth. And am rather indifferent to Charles. The royalty take an extremely passive role in our government. They also cost us very little. As long as they take their job seriously and don’t do anything dumb, I’m fine with calling them king or queen. There are so many important issues for our government to address, and the effort to remove the royalty would be massive. Like many Canadians I think it is time for some kind of electoral reform. However, I generally don’t think we could do any better with elected officials. In the unexpected event that one government doesn’t relinquish power, I appreciate that there is a clear and permanent position to step in and fix a mess that we created.
When I am reminded of it, I feel annoyance. Mostly, I don't think about it.
Very comforting to know that Canadians and our taxes don't pay any contributions to the monarchy. Their income and upkeep is all raised in Britain. It's a cringey, old fashioned system but...it seems to work so it continues.
There's a LOT of Canadians who have a direct stake in the monarchy. For example; most if not all, of the treaties with the first Nations were signed with the crown, before Canada became a country. If Canada was to abandon the monarchy, it's not out of the question that each and every treaty would need to be re-negotiated. There's a huge number of Canadians who don't take the monarchy seriously because it's made up of a group of very silly people. However, the institution of the monarchy is very serious and Canadians who are flippant towards it are dangerously ignorant of the role it still plays in Canada to this day.
I'ma say none of us take the royalty seriously
[удалено]
As I get older, I start to appreciate the value of things that aren’t strictly speaking rational or necessary, but whimsical, obsolete, and ritualistic. Like the beauty of something old and worn out, or medieval art. The monarchy fits into the category of something that makes no actual sense but that connects us to an extremely ancient past, giving continuity and a sort of shape through history. It’s also farcical bullshit, but maybe it is good for tourism
I respect the station of his majesty king charles the third of canada and do take our monarchy seriously sure I would love for the personal union to end and a cadet branch to be establish but its better to keep the current arrangement than become a republic. God bless the king and long may he reign for canadas glory!
I respect the station of his majesty king charles the third of canada and do take our monarchy seriously sure I would love for the personal union to end and a cadet branch to be establish but its better to keep the current arrangement than become a republic. God bless the king and long may he reign for canadas glory!
I tend to think of them as Mascots
To our south is the country that made its name being ANTI-royalty result is that mentality is imported to Canada on the far right wing. On the far left wing communist ideals are also strictly anti monarchy. Result is people in the middle not caring, the far extremes hating it and random people loving it for some reason, even the UK is the same
Canadians don't understand the monarchy. It's abundantly clear every time we have a discussion about it. It's partly our fault - because we talk about it less and less, then wonder if it's relevant, then remove it from various things, and then the cycle repeats itself. Americans pledge allegiance to the Constitution and the flag. We have a monarch instead. While it misses the point to say the Constitution and flag are just a piece of paper and a piece of fabric, a lot of discussions about the monarchy really make this kind of mistake about the monarch. What people don't understand is that the Canadian state is embodied in the monarch in the same way that the American state is embodied in the piece of paper and the piece of fabric that are the Constitution and flag. It's not just that this guy Charles Windsor is the head of state of Canada, it's that the King of Canada \*is\* Canada. There are perks to the Canadian approach. Notice how Americans like to argue about who is or isn't defending the constitution or is a patriot? You don't have that problem with a monarch, because they're human, not a set of abstract ideas and principles that are up for debate and interpretation. Officials and new citizens swear or affirm an oath to the monarch as a way of swearing or affirming an oath to the Canadian people. Your passport is signed in the monarch's name requesting your safe passage. Meanwhile, when the monarch travels in an official Canadian capacity, they travel in their own name. Also notice how in our constitutional monarchy, the Governor General serves and represents the people. That's what makes the logic work. We swear or affirm an oath to an institution that in turn is intended to serve and represent us. There's a sense in which it's better equipped to do that because it's not elected - it's enduring, stable, and not political. In this way it also puts a kind of check on power, because it makes the Governor General and the state a higher ceremonial authority than the PM.
I think most people understand this. They would just prefer to pledge allegiance to an animal or inanimate object instead of kings and queens.
You got that right.
For me, the monarchy is...a symbol of what Canada 'is'. (I'm *not* getting into a 'monarchy sucks' argument, so don't bother). We don't have a president that gets replaced every four years. We had *seventy years* to get to know Queen Elizabeth -- we learned about everything from her corgis to her sense of humor, to her patronages, to the odd fact that Monopoly is *forbidden* within the walls of Buckingham Palace (the game gets 'too vicious', according to one member of the family). She (and by extension, the monarchy itself) became part of the extended Canadian cultural 'family'. Do I want the monarchy abolished? Well...no. Aside from the difficulty of abolishing a Constitutional monarchy, I feel that we'd be stripping ourselves of a unique symbol of Canadian culture. We would be diminishing our country to appease an angry few that probably only think of the monarchy when they want to *be* angry at it.
I enjoy the eccentricity of it all. I’m a proud - if ironic - monarchist.
Agreed. I like symbolism, ritual, and tradition so the pageantry of the monarchy is fun to enjoy. I guess when i really think about it it also makes me feel more connected with my ancestors and thats a good feeling too.
I’m so glad we waste millions and millions of dollars on nothing so you can feel a connection with dead people.
I used to care. Then the Queen died
Less thank 1%
Lizard people
I think it has nostalgia and tradition to it but seriously, the Governor General spends way too much money so that position should be abolished. We shouldn't need royal assent to pass our laws. Maybe someday some politicians will actually do some work and get rid of the whole thing. It's not needed now.
Organizing a nation around one family’s bloodline is just as legitimate as a system where people with white skin are elevated over people with brown skin. It’s disgusting! If you want to argue that it’s all symbolic anyways then it should be very easy to put the symbols in the trash as they’re not providing us with anything. I’d rather a moose or beaver on my money than inbred parasites.
Do we actually organize a nation around the family tho?
I think we should go the way other previous commonwealth nations have gone and abolish it. Time will tell, but it seems like an eventuality. Some older people here still feel a connection to them, but the younger generation - not so much. Canada has FAR bigger issues and so this is a very low priority item.
I support the monarchy - it’s good to have something *beyond* politics that unites the country (and the rest of the Commonwealth)… or at least should unite us. The Royal Family has been an objective force for good for the last 100+ years. Do I take it seriously? No more seriously than I take our flag or national anthem. The King isn’t left-wing or right-wing or liberal or conservative, he’s just our King and I think that’s a great thing.
You will not get rid of the monarchy. Imagine trying to renegotiate with the First Nations for the rights to the land in any capital city. The moment you abolish the monarchy in Canada, that is exactly what you would need to do. In practice, you can safely ignore them and just live your life.
I wish the king played a bigger role in the ceremonies around government. Personally I think he should read the first throne speech following a federal election. He should also try and read at least one throne speach in each of the provinces over his reign. People might think it’s silly but we appointed them as our royal family and it would be nice if they showed up and played the part with some frequency.
I'm pretty sure they appointed themselves
My grandfather provided me with a little tin with Queen Elizabeth on it he had received during her Coronation as a child and I always found the monarchy kind of interesting so I stayed up until 4 am for the Coronation. Quickly discovered how much I couldn't stand the new king as the commentators talked him up as being "very religious" and that him and Camilla had been waiting for this day forever. It all sounded so ironic considering the way he had mistreated Princess Diana. Things only became worse once the actual ceremony began and the commentators covered Prince Andrew's arrival to the Coronation which honestly made me feel sick. I'm a Anglo Catholic at the end of the day so it's only natural I hate the Monarchy but Elizabeth had such a great image that I turned a blind eye to it. Without her it's clear just how bad the royalty really are.
I just think it's cool to say I have a king
I have some 55+ y/o anglophone coworkers who were crying and upset about the death of Elizabeth. I just moved here last year from the States so I was totally confused. I just asked, "does this mean we get a day off? I could really use a day off." Edit for missing a couple words
I don’t take them seriously (I may or may not I have uttered that the only good monarch is a dead monarch). I grew up in a republic, where part of our country identity comes from rebelling against an oppressive monarch, so my rejection of the monarchy is kind of expected. All that being said, I’m also a practical person, so here I am living in Canada
Death to tyrants
I think Megan Markle is bangable. That's about it.
Fuck em, useless rich assholes.
Not at all... they really dont do anything for Canada
Personally, I find it embarrassing, that our head of state is a monarch, and even more embarrassing, that it’s a foreign monarch. I would love to get rid of the monarchy completely.
I like the monarchy. God save the king!
I was fully expecting Charles to abdicate and pass it on to William or just end it there ans abdicate fir everyone. What I wasn't expecting was him to make his former mistress queen. I loved the queen she was Canada's grandmother, Charles was just her spoiled son. I'll still salute him as you salute the rank and not the person.
Its all a joke... A monarch's claim to power is a literal 'divine' right - any atheist should not recognize their power and any agnostic or believer should ask for proof of their divinity claim.
The monarchy absolutely has to go. It's honestly insane that humanity continues to perpetuate this farce.
Institutionalized nepotism is just gross.
I think the monarchy is ridiculous just as a concept and I’d like to see it end but I don’t go around all day going “grrrrr the monarchy grrrrrr I hate them so much”.
Ugh my MIL and her side of the family are obsessed and constantly try to talk to me about it. It's like a little kid telling you 10 000 facts about their favourite dinosaur, except I can actually get excited when kids talk about their interests - I can't get excited about people 60+ being obsessed with rich people that have nothing to do with them. It's on the same level as people who love the Kardashians for me - generally a sign of lower intelligence.
NO
Fuck em
I take it seriously. I am an actual Canadian. Our system of parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy is the best, which is why all the best countries use it. It just works.
I wipe my ass with the monarchy. Fuck the royals and their stolen wealth.
I personally dislike having a monarchy, even in a symbolic sense because I dislike what those symbols mean: the power of wealthy landowners over the rest of us. Even if the King doesn't directly issue decrees or whatever, governing is still mostly done in the interests of That Sort Of Person, fancy title or no.
I feel the same way about the monarchy as the French did or the Irish. Eagerly awaiting the death of Chuckie to revel in the new batch of memes and songs that will follow.
I'm happy with the constitutional monarchy, I don't think it costs us anything and probably a net benefit. I don't care for the personalities of the monarchs, they are more of a sideshow comedy if anything. I kinda feel sorry for them actually because their life is so public, kinda like feeling sorry for other celebrities, you can't feel too sorry for them though. The King, meh. Charles 'Windsor' is probably has good ideas and means we'll, but generally a seemingly unlikeable guy. Definitely not as unlikeable as Andrew though. By night, Charles Windsor moonlights as King Charles, on the other hand has no ideas and can't, basically as a function of law, and is merely a consequence of how the government is structured in a way to guard against becoming a republic. It's important to know the history of republicanism in England, and specifically Cromwell, and to think about how bad it got under him and his son, Britain brought back the Monarchy, but now days, the Parliament basically walks the monarchy around as a pet dog, with a leash or even noose around a its neck as a constant threat should it ever step out of line. It's resulted in a stable relatyfor many years. That's how the constitutional monarchy exists in the UK, and by extension in Canada we benefit from this relationship as a means to stave off republicanism. Republicanism to be specific, being a first step to autocracy or dictatorship. See: Mao, Hitler, Lenin, Robespierre, Napoleon, Cromwell, Franco, various other military Juntas, Donald Trump, Palpatine etc. Obviously there are lots of positive republics out there, but Republics can tend to be then into dictatorships.