Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, -1=e^ipi said:

Because the queen is unelected, just like Xi Jinping. I support democracy.

Sure.  On the other hand, she doesn't really have any power.  She's just a head of state who does ceremony stuff from time to time and the little power she does has is vested in the GG.  Xi Jinping is a dictator with tight control over any citizen if he so chooses.

I could take her or leave her, but until then I am loyal because the Crown is a symbol of the state itself.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I agree that the monarchy is a bit of a clown-show, but the biggest threat to democracy from a Canadian POV is our state-controlled media.  The extent to which our media protects Trudeau and demo

More to the point... public political discussion has been debased to the level of celebrity chatter. "I don't LIKE the royals" says the teenager as he sucks on a vape... and when he votes that wi

Anyone who: a. was born in Canada b. passes the criteria for citizenship according to law, and swears to bear true allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen of Canada and her Heirs and successors.

1 hour ago, -1=e^ipi said:

Meanwhile, the military swears allegiance to a foreign Queen and her successors instead of to Canada or to Canadians...

When I was sworn in, I swore to pay true alliegiance to the Queen and her heirs and successors. She is a Canadian Citizen. She is the second longest reigning Monarch in our history. What is really neat is that it doesn't matter if you like her or not. Her position as Queen of Canada is double-baked into the Constitution, as the succession of the Prince of Wales and there is not a blessed thing you can do to change that.

Anyone who doesn't want to be lucky enough to live in Canada is free to move to the US.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Argus said:

Understandable, given you're a guy who worships Trump. I mean, intelligent, educated, sophisticated people probably give you the willies.

Lol. This from a Biden supporter. You want a guy who can't even speak english anymore as a world leader. Please grace us with your opinions wise one :lol:

Are you calling William and Kate, and Harry & Meghan "intelligent, sophisticated people"? Prince Andrew? Prince Charles? In all seriousness, are you? 

Those people have all the character and wit of a pair of Barbie and Ken dolls. Pull their strings and they'll belch out platitudes all day. yaaaay. You must just love Greta Thunberg.

Can you tell me the last thing you saw any one of the young royals say or do that was notable in the past 30 years Argus?

Have Harry & Meghan's harrowing tales of racial bias touched you deeply? Are they to be considered worldly and wise now that they've lived in Canada and America...? Has the awkward romance of Charles and Camilla tugged at your heart strings for all these years Argus? 

:projectilevomitsmiley:

They are not people of worth, or merit, and most importantly they'll never say anything insightful, profound or even honest in all their years on this planet. They're just light-skinned Kardashians with a 'royal pedigree' (aka inbreds). I couldn't care less where they go or what they do any more than I care about Miley Cyrus or Peewee Herman and I definitely don't consider them 'leaders' of any sort.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

On the other hand, she doesn't really have any power.

Or she doesn't use the power that she has. Do you think it would be a good idea to wait until we have a monarch that abuses power before trying to change things? It would be far better to get rid of the monarchy before problems arise, especially under the queen's children or grandchildren. Prince Harry is a dangerous authoritarian who even wants video games such as Fortnite banned. He also thinks that COVID-19 is punishment from nature for climate change.

  

2 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

She's just a head of state who does ceremony stuff from time to time

So instead of getting a real job like everyone else, we need her to be a ceremonial figure? Wouldn't it be better to have another citizen producing goods, services, and tax revenue like the rest of us?

  

2 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Xi Jinping is a dictator with tight control over any citizen if he so chooses.

By choosing to continue undemocratic institutions such as the monarchy, we weaken our ability and effectiveness at criticizing undemocratic institutions in other countries. Currently, there is a Thai movement/protest for freedom and democracy, which the Thai monarchy is trying to crush.

Embattled Thai PM recalls parliament as thousands protest | Thailand | Al  Jazeera

2 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

I could take her or leave her, but until then I am loyal because the Crown is a symbol of the state itself.

Stalin and Hitler were also symbols of the state.

 

Other problems with the monarchy include:

1. It violates the principle of equality under the law.

2. It violates separation of religion and state as the British monarch is inherently the head of the Anglican Church.

3. It helps the narratives of the woke people to paint society as a white-supremacist patriarchal dystopia. This furthers their ability to push cancel culture and take over institutions.

Edited by -1=e^ipi
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

What is really neat is that it doesn't matter if you like her or not. Her position as Queen of Canada is double-baked into the Constitution

Then how do you explain the fact that many other countries have gotten rid of their monarchies, including France, the United States, and India? Australia has even had referendums on abolishing the monarchy.

 

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Anyone who doesn't want to be lucky enough to live in Canada is free to move to the US.

Not with COVID-19.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those other countries do not have a constitution with an amending formula like ours. If you will recall, the one attempt at a major amendment was Meech and all it tok to abort that was the quiet single voice of Elijah Harper. With a single word, he killed the Meech Lake Accord. 

That was just a simple amendment. The abolition of the Monarchy is a lot more complcated than that, but the real obstacle is no politician in their right mind would dare open up that can of cobras. Aside from the problem of what you would replace the monarchy with, you will once again have every loony fringe nut case pushing their own amendments. Remember the Spicer Commission?

The Queen does not have much power but she has enormous authority, more authority than the President of the United States. 

I think it was Michael Valpe who pointed out that the Prime Minister doesn't own the power, he just rents it for a while.

Queen Elizabeth has the authority to declare war on, say, Belgium, but only Parliament can vote to spend the money to wage it. That is the authority of Parliament.

Authority is the right to make a decision. Power is the ability to carry it out.

The Queen does have the authority to appoint and dismiss the Prime Minister. The latter case, unless it was a matter of a loss of confidence in Parliament, would have to be over an issue so grave with the public demanding his removal that she would do that. 

I would prattle on longer but Coronation Street is coming on

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

 If you will recall, the one attempt at a major amendment was Meech and all it tok to abort that was the quiet single voice of Elijah Harper. With a single word, he killed the Meech Lake Accord. 

That was just a simple amendment. The abolition of the Monarchy is a lot more complcated than that, but the real obstacle is no politician in their right mind would dare open up that can of cobras. Aside from the problem of what you would replace the monarchy with, you will once again have every loony fringe nut case pushing their own amendments. Remember the Spicer Commission?

I don't remember any of this. I'm not that old.

 

None of the politicians have ever tried to abolish the monarchy, so references to the past seem of little value here. Have a national referendum on abolishing the monarchy. With a majority vote of yes, most of these barriers to abolition would crumble.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You must also obtain unanomous agreement from all of the provinces, territories and the feds which requires opening up the constitution. PETA will be the first in a long, long line of special interests to stick their oar in. Then, in the referendum, you have to provide an alternative form of government. 

We don't do referendums in Canada as a rule. Conscription and Meech were exceptions and both failed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

You must also obtain unanomous agreement from all of the provinces, territories and the feds which requires opening up the constitution.

Have a national referendum. After the referendum passes, which territorial or provincial government would dare go against the will of the people to support an unelected monarchy?

 

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

PETA will be the first in a long, long line of special interests to stick their oar in.

We should open up the constitution, our constitution is terrible. We don't even have proper constitutional protections for freedom of speech. This COVID-19 pandemic has further highlighted how little rights the Canadian people actually have.

 

1 hour ago, Queenmandy85 said:

We don't do referendums in Canada as a rule.

Because the political establishment is against them. Replace the political establishment with governments or parties that better support freedom and democracy. Vote them out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahh, I can see where we differ. (I was going to say I can see where you are wrong, but that would not be politically correct.)

I would bet that if you put your idea of freedom and democracy. to a referendum, you would lose. There is a small segment of society that would put their own contrarian ideas ahead of the survival and safety of others. Some of them are climate change deniers, some are anti vaxxers and anti- maskers, but there is a point where wilful ignorance needs to be restrained.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original topic, adminstrating citizenship has a strong political element.

Preventing citizens from taking employment opportunities abroad would be unpopular. Would you have penalized Canadians such as Michael J. Fox, Alex Trebeck, Joni Mitchell, Senator Ted Cruz, Shania Twain, Peter Jennings, Eric MacCormack, David Frum, Michael Kovrig, Prime Minister MacKenzie King, Wayne Gretzky, Sidney Crosby, Fay Wray, Steve Nash, William (Buffalo Bill) Cody (born in Iowa to Canadian parents and grew up in Ontario), William Shatner (watch his "I am Canadian" rant on you tube), James Doohan, Russell Martin,  Norman Jewison, and, of course, Queen Elizabeth II, for taking employment opportunities outside Canada?

Edited by Queenmandy85
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2020 at 5:15 AM, OftenWrong said:

I agree. But I also wonder sometimes, as an outsider of course, if those chiefs care as little about you as they care about her. What is your opinion?

My opinion mirrors yours.  But in all fairness it is not the hereditary chiefs who are running an immigration scam in the country.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Authority is the right to make a decision. Power is the ability to carry it out.

May be true but it sounds very funny.   

I have the authority to wage war on any country too.  Just like the Queen, I may not have the power to carry it out.:P

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Now, why do you think this is? Think carefully.  😉

May I volunteer an answer?  Because after this is done, we may become part of India or China and English will be a language of the minorities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said:

an unelected monarchy?

Elections may be over rated. Lets see. Trump, Trudeau, Clark, Obama, Clinton, Harding, (I tried to be non-partisan.) Everybody complains about how bad politicians are, so what makes elections so great.

Edited by Queenmandy85
after thought
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, -1=e^ipi said:

By choosing to continue undemocratic institutions such as the monarchy, we weaken our ability and effectiveness at criticizing undemocratic institutions in other countries. 

I agree that the monarchy is a bit of a clown-show, but the biggest threat to democracy from a Canadian POV is our state-controlled media. 

The extent to which our media protects Trudeau and demonizes the conservatives and their supporters is no joke now. The relationship between our media and the Libs is the same as the relationship between Xinhua and Xi, NoKo News and KJU, etc. They're in lock step, and there is no real opposition in a country where the gov't has complete control over the media. 

 

A perfect example of "weakening our ability and effectiveness at criticizing undemocratic institutions in other countries" was when Trudeau tried to pontificate to the the Chinese Gov't about how "the Canadian gov't doesn't interfere in judicial processes so we can't intervene on behalf of Meng Wanzhou" and then Xinhua busted him for intervening on behalf of SNC.

Our own media wouldn't even call Trudeau out for that, so now we have communist news agencies talking down to us about our failed democracy. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

A perfect example of "weakening our ability and effectiveness at criticizing undemocratic institutions in other countries" was when Trudeau tried to pontificate to the the Chinese Gov't about how "the Canadian gov't doesn't interfere in judicial processes so we can't intervene on behalf of Meng Wanzhou" and then Xinhua busted him for intervening on behalf of SNC.

Our own media wouldn't even call Trudeau out for that, so now we have communist news agencies talking down to us about our failed democracy. 

My recollection was the CBC blasted him hard enough to swear I would never vote for him after that. The CBC coverage with the testimony of Jodi Wilson Raybold, had my brother wishing he could move over 2 blocks so he could vote for her. Then, when SNC started to wear off, it was the balckface scandal, and then the We fiasco. I don't know what CBC you watch but it sure isn't the same one as mine. My only problem is where does O'Toole stand. He seems to weave back and forth.

Thanks to the CBC, if I can't vote for O'Toole, I won't vote.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

My recollection was the CBC blasted him hard enough to swear I would never vote for him after that. The CBC coverage with the testimony of Jodi Wilson Raybold, had my brother wishing he could move over 2 blocks so he could vote for her. Then, when SNC started to wear off, it was the balckface scandal, and then the We fiasco. I don't know what CBC you watch but it sure isn't the same one as mine. My only problem is where does O'Toole stand. He seems to weave back and forth.

Thanks to the CBC, if I can't vote for O'Toole, I won't vote.

The Duffygate 'scandal' began in 2012 and it was still a regular item in the news right through 2015. CBC was calling it 'an election issue'. 

The SNC scandal broke in Feb 2019. Just last year. When was the last time you saw an SNC story on the news? Do you hear much about the obstruction of justice there? CBC loved the topic of Trump theoretically obstructing justice when Trump didn't even commit a crime, but Justin's actual obstruction of justice is somehow no big D to the CBC????? Where have you ever heard that SNC Lavalin was caught bribing a politician with $2.3M for a bridge contract, aside from when I post it here? Shouldn't Canadians be aware of the fact that the company that Trudeau subverted our democracy for has a recent court-documented history of bribing politicians?

The We scandal is larger than the SNC scandal, and it's orders of magnitude larger than the Duffygate scandal. It is almost exactly 10,000 times as much money. Even the amount that Trudeau's mom got directly from We is almost 4x as much as the whole Duffygate scandal. The We scandal just came out in July. Do you still hear about the We scandal on TV? The obstruction of justice in the We scandal was brazen and atrocious. Documents were heavily redacted to the point of being useless, then destroyed altogether. Do you hear much about that now, just 5 months later, or do we hear crickets? 

CBC and CTV allowed Trudeau to act as is the whole We scandal amounted to a matter of "I should have recused myself from the obvious decision of choosing We", and then they stopped covering the story altogether. It's gone. 

So Duffygate (who paid back the $90K?) was a 3 year, front-page scandal. SNC was less than a year, We was less than half a year.

Duffygate was more than twice the story of both of those scandals put together, and yet the other scandals were both far more serious. 

CBC and CTV are utterly worthless, aside from their value to the Libs as propagandists. They're 100% as bad as Xinhua and NoKo news. Period.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The coverage was almost enough to cost the Grits the election. If the CPC had put forward a leader better qualified, they would have won. Even so, Mr. Sheer garnered more of the popular vote and Jodi Wilson Raybold beat all comers even though she ran as an independent, essentially against the PM and the Liberal Party as a whole.

The Duffy affair was a case against Nigel Wright's attempt to bribe a Senator. It was an even more serious allegation leading to the trial which garnered so much coverage. Fortunately justice was done and Senator Duffy was acquitted, no thanks to Harper.

Journalists tend to hold politicians feet to the fire regardless of party. The problem is we haven't had a capable PM since Chretien. He and Martin were the last government to run surpluses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CBC is more than Federal Politics. If Conservatives call it left wing and Rabble calls it right wing, and the Grits say they hate Trudeau, it must be doing something right. It also gives us Quirks and Quarks, the Nature of Things and Coronation Street.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...