The Padre
Posts: 4,558 
Location: Ontario
Location: Ontario
November 18th, 2006, 10:42 AM
Those advocating an end to Canada's constitutional monarchy (republicans) base their arguments on several weak arguments. These are the counter - arguments against these republican myths.
MYTH #1
Our head of state is a British foreigner, who does not reside in Canada.
This is the most common republican myth. While its true that Queen Elizabeth does not live in Canada, she cannot be labelled as a 'foreigner'. Historically, traditionally, and by law Elizabeth II is the Canadian Queen of Canada. She knows and takes great measures to know everything about her Canadian realm and citizens.
Citizenship in Canada flows from the Crown. If the Crown grants citizenship, than surely the person wearing the Crown is herself a citizen.
The Queen is not a foreigner, but rather a non-resident -- a professional, globe-trotting head of state for a society which enjoys its existence in a border-less world.
MYTH #2
The Queen represents only Canadians of British descent. Or the Canadian Head of State can never be an Irish, French, Arab etc....
This happens to be one of the weakest republican arguments, and also one of the most widely used. Elizabeth II is the Queen of countless different nations (i.e. Jamaica, the Bahamas, New Zealand etc....) and hundreds of different peoples and cultures.
Also due to the Queen's bloodlines, Elizabeth II is quite "multicultural". Among the strains that can be identified in the backgrounds of the Queen are: Arab, Armenian, Croatian, French, German, Greek, Italian, Persian etc... As such, the Queen is very capable of representing the great majority of Canadians.
MYTH #3
By having a monarch as head of state, democracy can never truly exist.
A weak argument! When was the last time the nations of the world identified Canada as non-democratic? Never! By having a non-partisan monarch, democracy flourishes. By representing the people, the Queen has the authority to dismiss a government that abuses its power or acts illegally. By using her emergency powers, she can act if there is a vacuum of political power. Republicans label all this as constitutional fiction. They are wrong! Just because these powers are rarely used, it does not render them useless. These powers provide a safety guard, or Constitutional Fire Extinguisher which safeguards democracy.
Other republicans argue that a president can be non-partisan, or won't have any allegiance/ties to a political party. However, how could an elected or appointed President not be partisan, when he/she got their job with the backing of a political party?
In any event, most republics that have abolished their monarchies, have created simulated constitutional monarchies. These republics have abolished their royal government, yet have given their new republican governments the exact powers of the previous royal government. This begs the question of why change something to something exactly the same?
MYTH #4
The appointment of both the Governor General, Lieutenant Governor is partisan.
Similar to the previous republican argument, this is the republican counter-argument to the monarchist's argument that presidents are partisan. Republicans point out that most of the Governors-General over the past 15 years have been veteran politicians. While this is true, the Governor-General is not the Head of State. This position is held by the Queen.
MYTH #5
History and tradition are just that, history! The monarchy is a part of Canada's history, not it's future.
Republicans use this argument to point out that history and tradition are not important as a nation's identity.
The Crown represents 500 years of tradition in Canada. Considering that tradition and history are the two factors making up a nation's identity, arguing with republicans in this issue is rather pointless!
MYTH #6
The monarchy promotes a lack of Canadian identity. Or, the monarchy promotes colonialism.
Not true! The monarchy is an important aspect of the Canadian identity. It is part of Canada's history and tradition. The monarchy also helps Canada distinguish itself from the United States of America. Republicans argue that this is nonsense. With careful consideration however, one realizes that Canada is already bombarded by American values, culture and media. The monarchy is one important difference between the two nations.
The monarchy does not promote British colonialism in any way. Canadians have shed their colonialist past by changing the national anthem, the flag, and by the Canadian way of doing business in a global community. Canada shares a Queen with the United Kingdom, New Zealand and many more nations. What better way to be global than by sharing a monarchy with the many countries?
Finally, as most Canadians can attest, when a Canadian travels to another nation, they are more likely to be thought of as an American rather than a British citizen.
MYTH #7
Abolishing the monarchy would appease Québéc.
The separatists in Québéc do not want independence because of the monarchy. Any lack of respect for the monarchy arises from the fact that the Queen represents 'the rest' of Canada, and thus does not represent 'them'. The citizens of Québéc have not always been so republican in their nature. Sir Wilfrid Laurier said it best on a trip to France:
MYTH #8
The monarchy costs Canadians millions of dollars a year. Or, "Why should my taxes line the pockets of the Queen?"
This is generally a fairly weak republican argument.
For the record: Canadians do not, and have NEVER paid the Queen for her services. We only pay a very small portion of taxes towards maintaining Royal residences(Rideau Hall) in this country.
While the Governor-General and the Lieutenant-Governor's expenses do rack-up a modest bill (less than one dollar/tax payer/year), having a President would cost even more! As a comparison, in the United Kingdom the cost of the Queen's expenses are much less than that of the presidents of Germany, the United States and France.
MYTH #9
Abolishing the monarchy is essential since Prince Charles is not an ideal future King.
A favourite myth amongst republicans, especially with the old scandals in the media. One must always seem to remind republicans that their beloved republics are not always immune from scandal. Let us not forget about John F. Kennedy's many romantic interludes (sans Jackie), Richard Nixon and Watergate, Francois Mitterand (his connections with Nazis, and his many mistresses), and Mao-Zedong and his lust for young girls, but to name a few.
Prince Charles has been born into duty, and has been raised to serve his people. He is an able father, and devoted to serve the people.
MYTH #10
Canadians no longer support the monarchy.
During the past several years, opinion polls have shifted in both directions. The last opinion poll shows that most Canadians favour the monarchy. For now, it's safe to say that a change to a republic is not on the minds of most Canadians.
MYTH #11
Other Commonwealth nations are dumping the Queen, why shouldn't Canada do the same?
Republicans point out that Australia is on its way to becoming a republic. Republicanism became fever-pitch in Australia recently as it was the pet-project of a previous prime-minister. After a divisive debate, the Australians voted against a republic in November 1999. The only other Commonwealth nations contemplating republics are Jamaica and Barbados. However, there is no real evidence that the majority of these nations' population favour such a move.
In any case, the old saying: "Would you jump off the building if your friends do the same?" really applies well to this myth.
Those advocating an end to Canada's constitutional monarchy (republicans) base their arguments on several weak arguments. These are the counter - arguments against these republican myths.
MYTH #1
Our head of state is a British foreigner, who does not reside in Canada.
This is the most common republican myth. While its true that Queen Elizabeth does not live in Canada, she cannot be labelled as a 'foreigner'. Historically, traditionally, and by law Elizabeth II is the Canadian Queen of Canada. She knows and takes great measures to know everything about her Canadian realm and citizens.
Citizenship in Canada flows from the Crown. If the Crown grants citizenship, than surely the person wearing the Crown is herself a citizen.
The Queen is not a foreigner, but rather a non-resident -- a professional, globe-trotting head of state for a society which enjoys its existence in a border-less world.
MYTH #2
The Queen represents only Canadians of British descent. Or the Canadian Head of State can never be an Irish, French, Arab etc....
This happens to be one of the weakest republican arguments, and also one of the most widely used. Elizabeth II is the Queen of countless different nations (i.e. Jamaica, the Bahamas, New Zealand etc....) and hundreds of different peoples and cultures.
Also due to the Queen's bloodlines, Elizabeth II is quite "multicultural". Among the strains that can be identified in the backgrounds of the Queen are: Arab, Armenian, Croatian, French, German, Greek, Italian, Persian etc... As such, the Queen is very capable of representing the great majority of Canadians.
MYTH #3
By having a monarch as head of state, democracy can never truly exist.
A weak argument! When was the last time the nations of the world identified Canada as non-democratic? Never! By having a non-partisan monarch, democracy flourishes. By representing the people, the Queen has the authority to dismiss a government that abuses its power or acts illegally. By using her emergency powers, she can act if there is a vacuum of political power. Republicans label all this as constitutional fiction. They are wrong! Just because these powers are rarely used, it does not render them useless. These powers provide a safety guard, or Constitutional Fire Extinguisher which safeguards democracy.
Other republicans argue that a president can be non-partisan, or won't have any allegiance/ties to a political party. However, how could an elected or appointed President not be partisan, when he/she got their job with the backing of a political party?
In any event, most republics that have abolished their monarchies, have created simulated constitutional monarchies. These republics have abolished their royal government, yet have given their new republican governments the exact powers of the previous royal government. This begs the question of why change something to something exactly the same?
MYTH #4
The appointment of both the Governor General, Lieutenant Governor is partisan.
Similar to the previous republican argument, this is the republican counter-argument to the monarchist's argument that presidents are partisan. Republicans point out that most of the Governors-General over the past 15 years have been veteran politicians. While this is true, the Governor-General is not the Head of State. This position is held by the Queen.
MYTH #5
History and tradition are just that, history! The monarchy is a part of Canada's history, not it's future.
Republicans use this argument to point out that history and tradition are not important as a nation's identity.
The Crown represents 500 years of tradition in Canada. Considering that tradition and history are the two factors making up a nation's identity, arguing with republicans in this issue is rather pointless!
MYTH #6
The monarchy promotes a lack of Canadian identity. Or, the monarchy promotes colonialism.
Not true! The monarchy is an important aspect of the Canadian identity. It is part of Canada's history and tradition. The monarchy also helps Canada distinguish itself from the United States of America. Republicans argue that this is nonsense. With careful consideration however, one realizes that Canada is already bombarded by American values, culture and media. The monarchy is one important difference between the two nations.
The monarchy does not promote British colonialism in any way. Canadians have shed their colonialist past by changing the national anthem, the flag, and by the Canadian way of doing business in a global community. Canada shares a Queen with the United Kingdom, New Zealand and many more nations. What better way to be global than by sharing a monarchy with the many countries?
Finally, as most Canadians can attest, when a Canadian travels to another nation, they are more likely to be thought of as an American rather than a British citizen.
MYTH #7
Abolishing the monarchy would appease Québéc.
The separatists in Québéc do not want independence because of the monarchy. Any lack of respect for the monarchy arises from the fact that the Queen represents 'the rest' of Canada, and thus does not represent 'them'. The citizens of Québéc have not always been so republican in their nature. Sir Wilfrid Laurier said it best on a trip to France:
"French-Canadians have not forgotten France [and their culture]... Here in France, people are surprised at the attachment French Canadians feel for the Queen [of Canada], and we are faithful to the great nation which has given us liberty."Even former Québéc premier Jacques Parizeau has mused publicly on whether an independent Québéc would retain the Queen, or at the very least remain in the Commonwealth.
MYTH #8
The monarchy costs Canadians millions of dollars a year. Or, "Why should my taxes line the pockets of the Queen?"
This is generally a fairly weak republican argument.
For the record: Canadians do not, and have NEVER paid the Queen for her services. We only pay a very small portion of taxes towards maintaining Royal residences(Rideau Hall) in this country.
While the Governor-General and the Lieutenant-Governor's expenses do rack-up a modest bill (less than one dollar/tax payer/year), having a President would cost even more! As a comparison, in the United Kingdom the cost of the Queen's expenses are much less than that of the presidents of Germany, the United States and France.
MYTH #9
Abolishing the monarchy is essential since Prince Charles is not an ideal future King.
A favourite myth amongst republicans, especially with the old scandals in the media. One must always seem to remind republicans that their beloved republics are not always immune from scandal. Let us not forget about John F. Kennedy's many romantic interludes (sans Jackie), Richard Nixon and Watergate, Francois Mitterand (his connections with Nazis, and his many mistresses), and Mao-Zedong and his lust for young girls, but to name a few.
Prince Charles has been born into duty, and has been raised to serve his people. He is an able father, and devoted to serve the people.
MYTH #10
Canadians no longer support the monarchy.
During the past several years, opinion polls have shifted in both directions. The last opinion poll shows that most Canadians favour the monarchy. For now, it's safe to say that a change to a republic is not on the minds of most Canadians.
MYTH #11
Other Commonwealth nations are dumping the Queen, why shouldn't Canada do the same?
Republicans point out that Australia is on its way to becoming a republic. Republicanism became fever-pitch in Australia recently as it was the pet-project of a previous prime-minister. After a divisive debate, the Australians voted against a republic in November 1999. The only other Commonwealth nations contemplating republics are Jamaica and Barbados. However, there is no real evidence that the majority of these nations' population favour such a move.
In any case, the old saying: "Would you jump off the building if your friends do the same?" really applies well to this myth.
Council Member
Posts: 1,161
Location: Montreal
Location: Montreal
November 18th, 2006, 11:06 AM
There are many reasonable arguments here.
My main problem is that I would like a BETTER system than monarchy to appoint a head of state. With all respect to the Queen, being born in a "royal" family does not give you the rights and qualities to take on a role of head of state.
I'm all for respecting traditions, but not all traditions are good to keep. I believe monarchy is best kept in the past.
There are many reasonable arguments here.
My main problem is that I would like a BETTER system than monarchy to appoint a head of state. With all respect to the Queen, being born in a "royal" family does not give you the rights and qualities to take on a role of head of state.
I'm all for respecting traditions, but not all traditions are good to keep. I believe monarchy is best kept in the past.
