Republican, monarchist or what?

[Finder]

Re: RE: Republican, monarchist or what?

I see we agree on something again, Finder.

I'm perfectly happy "compromising" between the monarchy and a republic. For example, continuing to deem the Governor General to be a representative of the Queen, even if she were required to be ratified prior to appointment, would still be good enough for me as a monarchist.

I don't really "oppose" republicanism in Canada; rather, I oppose absolute republicanism. I don't want to see ourselves stuck with a republican Government, mainly because that would likely involve a branching away, at some point, from the responsible Westminster style Parliamentary system that has served us so well. Granted, it has issues and glitches that should be addressed, but for the most part, it works.

Note Edited to remedy a formatting problem.

In general the Republican system has been adopted by Constituional monarchies, even Canada has already. The only problem is it doesn't work right here.

In declaring Canada into a Republic, I think it would be nice but it's not really needed, plus since tradition is apart of culture we should keep some, for lack of a better word, trappings of our British and French heritages and if thats keeping some semblance of the old monarchy. Who are even Canadian Republicans to disagree. Remember in the First French revoltion the orginal plan was actually to keep the monarchy. I think if the king had not gottien involved in some conspiracies and if the Jacobins had not been so loonie or if the Gabobins (spellings) had sway over power that the first constitutional monarchy would have stood with a republican government funtioning.

 

[the caracal kid]

Heritage is fine, but the monarchy represents too many stomach turning things to be considered something to cling to. If you want a monarchy head of state, then create a king of canada. make it something canadian. Ditch the house of windsor, for it does not represent canada (whatever that is).

 

[FiveParadox]

Well, the monarchy does represent Canada. In our Constitution, the Queen is not recognized as the Queen of Britain; she is recognized exclusively as the Queen of Canada. If she happens to be the monarch of some other country as well, then so be it.

 

[the caracal kid]

the house of windsor is a representation of inequality.

sorry, but the queen is not representation, but misrepresentation.

 

[FiveParadox]

lol, I'm a monarchist, apparently you're not. lol, we may have to agree to disagree on this one!

 

[the caracal kid]

i think so! i find the queen's face on our money offensive to say the least!

 

[FiveParadox]

>_< *tries to hold in anger* lol

Well, this might be more appropriate for another thread, if you'd like to start a debate on something along those lines.

In the meantime ...

<insert sophisticated transition back to the topic here>

 

[the caracal kid]

:lol: i guess we could have a lively debate. how about which is less effectual: JWB or QE?; or which is the greatest war criminal: House of Windsor or OBL (just to pick a random contemporary).

 

[bhoour]

Re: RE: Republican, monarchist or what?

the house of windsor is a representation of inequality.

sorry, but the queen is not representation, but misrepresentation.

:wink:

 

[Semperfi_dani]

RE: Republican, monarchis

First off, before i go on...you do not lose your rights if you don't vote. What you do lose is your chance to make an impact in deciding what goverment forms the country. Not voting does not give you any more or less rights than Jo Voter.

Ok..back to topic. LOL. I did not vote because I am some where in the middle. On the one hand, I don't see why Canada cannot become fully independant from the monarchy...there really is no need to have one beyond nostalgic ramblings and what once was back in the day.

On the other hand, thats not to say that if the monarchy is abolished, that you would have a better system of government. There is some solace that our elected officials do not have the final say should push come to shove...we could go to the queen. Sure her role is cermonial, but in theory she could still act.

Quite frankly, what we have is fine. If i had any complaint, i would like to the see the senate more effective....preferably elected, but thats neither here nor there.

 

[Andygal]

RE: Republican, monarchis

I am a monarchist. My grandmother on my dad's side was born and raised in Epsom, England and she is always telling me I should be proud of my British hertiage and I am proud and Isee the monarchy as a link to this nation's past. Like it or not we were once a colony of the British Empire and I think it's important that we remember where we came from.

Plus the monarchy is one more thing that seperates us from the Americans, and given the current state of the American government I think that anything helps us keep ourselves from being swallowed up by them is a good thing.I'm sorry to any Americans that haappen to read this but your government makes me thankful everyday that I don't live in the US. At this point in time I'd rather live almost anywhere else besides the US.

And as for voting (not to derail this thread). I feel that if you don't exercise your right to vote you have no MORAL right to complain about the government. You had the chance to make the government what you wanted and you threw it away

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: RE: Republican, monarchis

I am a monarchist. My grandmother on my dad's side was born and raised in Epsom, England and she is always telling me I should be proud of my British hertiage and I am proud and Isee the monarchy as a link to this nation's past. Like it or not we were once a colony of the British Empire and I think it's important that we remember where we came from.

Plus the monarchy is one more thing that seperates us from the Americans, and given the current state of the American government I think that anything helps us keep ourselves from being swallowed up by them is a good thing.I'm sorry to any Americans that haappen to read this but your government makes me thankful everyday that I don't live in the US. At this point in time I'd rather live almost anywhere else besides the US.

And as for voting (not to derail this thread). I feel that if you don't exercise your right to vote you have no MORAL right to complain about the government. You had the chance to make the government what you wanted and you threw it away

good post andygal. !! Much the way I feel too. Our connection to England is part of our history and it also contributes to our own IDENTITY. .........and we should respect it. In fact our connections to Europe are incredibly important .....as these are the people who made the beginnings of Canada. ......and have been the backbone of the country.

but I would prefer not to categorize myself one way or another....... just that the connection with Britain/ Royalty etc is part of Ca's fabric. How can we appreciate the present if we cannot appreciate and respect our past???

 

[Semperfi_dani]

RE: Republican, monarchis

Oh..agreed about the moral part of voting..but you don't lose your rights. You just sound crass when you complain about the government. Hahaha.

Yah, see the thing is, i like the monarchy...i just don't care enough. Like i said..the way Canada is set up is just fine. I don't care if she's on our dollar or not. LOL.It is important to stay connected to your past...but its just as important to look towards your future.

The trick is to figure out what is needed to maintain the balance. I think in Canada, if we had a more effective system.....

The US system is horrible. Constant gridlock..and if the bill does not get passed, the government shuts down. And if the congress passes a bill..or the senate...the president or the other body can veto. Thats a huge waste.

I wish that if we were to maintain a monarchy, that our gov't general were given more of a political role to justify the extra cost and role.

 

[FiveParadox]

I completely agree. Perhaps if the Governor General's appointment were required to be ratified by the House of Commons, or the Senate, then perhaps he or she would be more democratically "authorized" to actually exercise the reserved powers of the Crown. I have no doubt in my mind that the King-Byng Affair shall not be the last time that the Governor General is called upon to act.

 

[Semperfi_dani]

RE: Republican, monarchis

I completely agree. Perhaps if the Governor General's appointment were required to be ratified by the House of Commons, or the Senate, then perhaps he or she would be more democratically "authorized" to actually exercise the reserved powers of the Crown. I have no doubt in my mind that the King-Byng Affair shall not be the last time that the Governor General is called upon to act.

I concur...but again, I would feel more secure about this if our Senate was elected too.

 

[the caracal kid]

"I think in Canada, if we had a more effective system.....
"

yes, an effective, inclusive, equal system.

 

[Andygal]

Oh..agreed about the moral part of voting..but you don't lose your rights. You just sound crass when you complain about the government. Hahaha.

I never said that people who don't vote shouldn't be allowed to complain about the government, I only meant that I find it highly iritating and stupid when people who didn't vote whine about the government after they had the oppurtunity to shape it and didn't take said oppurtunity.

 

[FiveParadox]

I would recommend, Semperfi_dani, that you visit the topic in the Conservative Lounge regarding Senate reform. There have been quite a few suggestions put forth regarding Senate reform, and reform regarding the Governor General. If you're interested.

Back to the topic at hand, as many have stated in this topic, the monarchy may not be a particularly active institution in Canada, but it is an important symbol of our heritage, traditions, and it entirely dictates the conventions within which we are governed.

The monarchy may be somewhat "inactive," but I have no doubt in my mind that there shall again be a time when the Houses of Parliament are at odds, or when the Government and the Opposition are hopelessly deadlocked, or, God forbid, when a Government chooses to abuse our responsible Parliamentary institution. In these cases, I say, thank God for the monarchy, and that it can act through the Governor General, by Instrument under the Great Seal of Canada (see Constitution Act, 1982), to resolve the problems that our elected representatives find themselves unable to solve.

I bring an example from Australia to the forefront:

In Australia, several scandals had plagued the majority Government; however, the Opposition controlled the Senate. In a protest of non-confidence, the Senate began blocking supply to the Government. The two Houses of Parliament were in political deadlock, and the situation worstened as the Government of Australia was unable to appropriate funds to pay for the costs of running a nation.

The Governor General of Australia, after much thought, consultation with Government Ministers, the Leader of the Opposition, the Chief Justice, and receive notice from the Queen that she would not personally interfere in the affairs of Australia, the Governor General concluded that he had no choice but to dismiss the Prime Minister, instead appointing the Leader of the Opposition as a "caretaker" Prime Minister — the Opposition Leader proceeded to successfully receive the granting of supply, and subsequently dissolved both the House of Commons and the Senate to bring the former Government to the judgement of the people.

This is a perfect example of the responsible use of a Governor General's power, and we should have comfort in knowing that even if our elected representatives grind our system of governance to a hault, our Governor General has the same reserve power as did the Governor General of Australia. When "push comes to shove," as someone above said, we still have someone, the representative of the Queen of Canada, to act on our behalf to remedy the situation.

The Monarchy should not be abolished; we should hang on to our history, our heritage, our traditions, our conventions, and remember that although quiet in public life, the Governor General serves a vital purpose in our system of responsible Parliamentary Democracy.

 

[the caracal kid]

and i say let the head of state be a representative of all canadians, a representative of democracy, a representative of meritocracy, a representative of equality....

 

[Finder]

I would be completely fine with a Senate elected by the ppl by FPTP (the commons by PR or mixed) or with the Senate appointed or elected by the Provincial governments. This is totally inline with how a Senate should be chosen and a norm around the world for an upper house to be chosen in the modern age.

I think FiveParadox, moderate constitutional monarchist approuch would be best for Canada. But again I wouldn't have a problem with a full blown republic either. =-D