Results 1 to 75 of 75

Thread: Time to become a republic?

  1. #1

    Default Time to become a republic?

    Reading about Prince Andrews activities, isn't Canada mature enough now to have its own head of state instead of this family of aristocratic twits? If something had happened to Charles before he had kids, this guy could have been King of Canada:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ice-probe.html

  2. #2
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,743

    Default

    I am what you could call a "default monarchist". I have no great emotional attachment to the monarchy, but I just think that abolishing it would be a HELLUVA lotta work, for very little payback in terms of actual improvements.

    If we go to a "weak presidential" system(eg. Israel and Ireland) where the president basically serves as an elected figurehead, we're not really changing the way things work at all. Except we're gonna be spending god-knows-how-much-money to change all the wording and symbolism on legal and parliamentary documents, coat-of-arms, etc etc.

    And if we go to a "strong presidential" system(eg. the USA and France), that's even more of a headache. We'd be tossing out the whole Westminister system, hook line and sinker, and having to come up with something new. I really don't think Canadians are gonna be interested in a long, protracted debate about what sort of system to invent. Not when the only issue supposedly bedevilling the monarchy is bad behaviour of some of the Royals.

  3. #3

    Default

    ^just make the Governor General the head of state and name them president with equivalent powers as now. While I'd prefer an elected head of state, this would be better than what we have now, in that everything would be the same, but no link to the Windsors and their pedophile friends. I have this weird feeling the UK will ditch this family before we do, which is crazy. As to the cost, what about the harm of being linked to this family? Time to grow up as a nation and move on I think.
    Last edited by moahunter; 04-01-2015 at 09:25 AM.

  4. #4
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^just make the Governor General the head of state. While I'd prefer an elected head of state, this would be better than what we have now, in that everything would be the same, but no link to the Windsors and their pedophile friends. I have this weird feeling the UK will ditch this family before we do, which is crazy.
    But if you make the Governor General the head-of-state, he's not a Governor General. He's a president.

    And even if you throw the dictionary out the window and keep calling him Governor General, that's still not gonna make that person royalty. So names like "Royal Canadian Mounted Police" "Court Of Queen's Bench", "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition" etc are gonna be rendered absurd. Not to mention all the crowns, sceptres, and maces in the Coats Of Arms.

    (Well, maybe maces and sceptres could fit in with a republic. Crowns would be ridiculous in a presidential system.)
    Last edited by overoceans; 04-01-2015 at 09:28 AM.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    But if you make the Governor General the head-of-state, he's not a Governor General. He's a president. .
    Which is fine. I'm sure can afford some Canadian symbols for coats of arms and similar. Removing the "royal" is not a big deal, or we can even call our president, the "royal president", and define Royal to be what we want it to be (ie not linked to pedophiles / English aristocracy). Someone from a better behaved family, like Beiber, could then go on our currency
    Last edited by moahunter; 04-01-2015 at 09:32 AM.

  6. #6
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,743

    Default

    we can even call our president, the "royal president"

    Yeah, if you want Canada to be a laughingstock.

    And, sure, authentically republican alternatives to all the names, images, and rituals could be found if we hired enough creative-minds and shelled out enough money. It would be a huge gold-rush for underemployed PoliSci and Fine Arts grads. But, in terms of realpolitik, I don't think you have a hope in hell of convincing Canadians to endure the attendant costs and headaches.

    And, your main issue doesn't even seem to be the monarchy itself, just a few of the bad characters in the Windsor family. My own suggestion would be to find another branch of the extended family willing to take their place in Canada. Maybe some distant cousins in Scandinavia who are falling into hard times would be willing to relocate to Canada to serve as our heads-of-state. The only thing we'd have to change then is the money(which is gonna happen within the next couple of decades anyway.)

  7. #7

    Default

    ^i nominate the Trudeau family, they have better hair, and it would keep them out of power

  8. #8
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^i nominate the Trudeau family, they have better hair, and it would keep them out of power
    On a serious note, given all the sentimental wartime connections between Canada and the Netherlands, you'd think there would be some well-behaved Dutch aristocrats willing to serve as our sovereigns.

    This solution would also work for the British themselves, it seems to me, if they ever get fed up with the Windsors.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^i nominate the Trudeau family, they have better hair, and it would keep them out of power
    Talk about revealing nervousness.

    On the topic: I used to be a monarchist, but if the monarch or its leutenants are powerless or unwilling to do anything to protect us from types like Harper and his abuses, I couldn't care less whether it's a monarchy or a republic.

    It is all ordure.

  10. #10
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,430

    Default

    So wait a minute. Moa wants to abolish the monarchy here in Canada because of an unproven sex assault accusation at a guy who's not going to be King anyway? Am I reading that correctly?

    Aside from the immense, costly and time-consuming constitutional overhauling, not to mention the renaming of many institutions from the RCMP to the military to our RAM, it should be pointed out that the Royal Family has achieved a renewed level of popularity. I think many people are looking forward to having Will and Kate as our future rulers.

    As the Queen (played by Scott Thompson) said on Kids In The Hall - without the monarchy we're just Americans!

    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  11. #11
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,743

    Default

    Aside from the immense, costly and time-consuming constitutional overhauling, not to mention the renaming of many institutions from the RCMP to the military to our RAM

    Australia has a much stronger republican movement than Canada, and some of you may recall that they had a referenduom on abolition a little over a decade ago. The republicans lost. My understanding is that one of the main reasons for the monarchist victory was that the republicans didn't present a coherent alternative to the public.

    So, in the event of a Canadian referendum, anyone arguing for a republic should be prepared to have an exact alternative to the current system on offer. Don't expect the public to just go Yeah, get rid of the Queen!! Who-hoo!", with the details to follow later.

  12. #12
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Crawford Plains, Millwoods since 1985
    Posts
    2,737

    Default

    Republik of Alberta.

    Has a nice ring to it!

  13. #13
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,527

    Default

    there is lots of monarchists in Canada aren't willing to give up aligenace to the Queen of England, so there is no hope for Canada to become republic.
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  14. #14
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,214
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Egad! People are fallible! Let's abolish all those who are fallible! Politicians, royals, police, fire, EMS personnel, army recruits, basically anyone who could represent us in any capacity to anyone else in any capacity. Even the altruistic moahunter is fallible, for your OP makes the ludicrous assumption that the monarchy is the only thing that could have embarrassing twits potentially gain power, influence, or notoriety and represent (or misrepresent) us! For sure there couldn't be a legally elected political head of a city...who definitely could not gain worldwide notoriety for his antics (including things like smoking crack, saying how he gets enough to eat at home, drunken tirades caught on tape, etc) who could somehow make our largest city, economic centre, and worldwide representative of Canada look...um...foolish?

    The main reason why the monarchy doesn't ever get abolished is precisely the rationale that overoceans details...it is simply a huge effort for little to no payback, and may actually contain more drawbacks than once first realizes. It is the same for an entire impeachment process over a married guy getting a cigar-accompanied fellatio session and then lying to his wife...OH THE HUMANITY AND UNIQUENESS OF THIS EVENT...married guy has a fling and lies...OMG...let's spend billions for the sake of our republic!!!!


    Bah.
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    So wait a minute. Moa wants to abolish the monarchy here in Canada because of an unproven sex assault accusation at a guy who's not going to be King anyway? Am I reading that correctly?
    Well, you might think its great having this English family be the producers of our head of state, but I don't, this is just a continuation of a long line line of scandals. And I don't buy the "its too expensive", "it works fine the way it is" arguments, we are Canadian not English, we can do better than these aristocrats technically enabling all of our laws, the sooner we split and become independent re our head of state, the better. If countries like Kenya can afford to ditch these bozos, I don't see why we can't.
    Last edited by moahunter; 04-01-2015 at 11:57 AM.

  16. #16
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,214
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    ...yeah...we could elect the Rhino Party... Repeal the law of gravity I say!!!!


    ...long line of scandals....like Robocalls, AdScam...Airbus...military helicopters...residential schools...NEP...senators and their expenses...shoot, shovel, and shut up....premiers getting drunk in Hawaii....MLA's buying hookers in Minnesota...penthouses on buildings...

    While the monarchy means bollocks to me...it also isn't the main purveyor of scandals and embarrassing items...we do just fine on our own making foolish things come to light...
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  17. #17

    Default

    ^or we can just appoint someone like we do the Governor General, and if they let us down, appoint someone else, as opposed to having this English family do it for us.

    Interesting to see there is a wikipedia page on this issue. Seems there might be an opportunity when the Queen dies, to not appoint Charles the plant talker, as the King of Canada:

    Ted McWhinney has argued that Canada can become a republic upon the demise of the current Queen by not proclaiming a successor; according to McWhinney, this would be a way for the constitution to evolve "more subtly and by indirection, through creating new glosses on the Law of the Constitution as written, without formally amending it."[66] However, Ian Holloway, Dean of Law at the University of Western Ontario, criticised this proposal for its ignorance of provincial input, and opined that its implementation "would be contrary to the plain purpose of those who framed our system of government."[67]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republicanism_in_Canada

  18. #18
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,430

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    Australia has a much stronger republican movement than Canada, and some of you may recall that they had a referenduom on abolition a little over a decade ago. The republicans lost. My understanding is that one of the main reasons for the monarchist victory was that the republicans didn't present a coherent alternative to the public.
    Is it not surprising to you that this thread was started a by republican wingnut Aussie?
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Reading about Prince Andrews activities, isn't Canada mature enough now to have its own head of state instead of this family of aristocratic twits? If something had happened to Charles before he had kids, this guy could have been King of Canada:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ice-probe.html
    Usually people are considered innocent until proven guilty.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  20. #20
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edmonton (belevedre)
    Posts
    6,527

    Default

    what will Canada be if they become republic ?? I just wondering ??
    Last edited by jagators63; 04-01-2015 at 03:26 PM.
    Edmonton Rocks Rocks Rocks

  21. #21
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,214
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Reading about Prince Andrews activities, isn't Canada mature enough now to have its own head of state instead of this family of aristocratic twits? If something had happened to Charles before he had kids, this guy could have been King of Canada:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ice-probe.html
    Usually people are considered innocent until proven guilty.

    usually...but I would only have to say 2 words to show someone else completely destroyed...a "fatherly figure" per se, over allegations and accusations of a truly concerning sexual nature....yet no trial will happen as far as I know...

    The first word is Bill. Second is not Clinton...but the C is the right starting consonant.

    Unfortunately (and I've seen this far too often), guilty until proven innocent is the norm...especially when people have an axe to grind (aka abolish the royals)...
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  22. #22
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,214
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jagators63 View Post
    what will Canada will be if they become republic ?? I just wondering ??
    I'm willing to bet...

    abso...freaking...loutely no different than it is now with respect to scandals and the scoundrels that will cause them...

    ...which is the theme of the OP.

    look south...that republic is working ever so efficiently...and as for Oz...yeah...
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Reading about Prince Andrews activities, isn't Canada mature enough now to have its own head of state instead of this family of aristocratic twits? If something had happened to Charles before he had kids, this guy could have been King of Canada:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ice-probe.html
    Usually people are considered innocent until proven guilty.
    His friend who he partied with is a convicted pedophile which matches what I wrote. I think there will be more to this story (likely some videos or similar will leak out), we already have one photo with hand around waist, there are some suggestions that the current plea deal included immunity for Primce Andrew. Regardless, I still think Canada can do better than this family.
    Last edited by moahunter; 04-01-2015 at 02:39 PM.

  24. #24

    Default

    ^Of course there will be 'more to this story'. It sells newspapers. They'll run the story until they over step the line and a newspaper will get charged (or threatened to be charged). As for the friend he partied with. Well, I'm sure Martha Stewart still has friends that stood by her and she went to jail and I'm sure some of those friends think she was perfectly innocent.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  25. #25

    Default

    "The King is dead, long live the King." Putin and many other usurpers of democratic office have played that game. So it's a dangerous move. Right now we currently have a very valuable union across the ocean that we could risk losing.

    Still, a reading of the judgement of the "Person's case" might be very enlightening. I've provided excerpts below.

    On this, maybe just as in the Person's case, Britain's "living tree doctrine" approach maybe should now be deemed superior to a fixed, tribal fundamentalist doctrine, maybe the time will soon come to make changes. However choosing "republic" status may be conventional practice in the world but in my mind it seems like a very limiting, dangerous practice. To borrow or steal Sankey's words: personally I see republics as "a relic of days more barbarous than ours".

    The Person's case offers all kinds of insights and lessons. Simplifying it, it was our own Supreme Court in Canada that unanimously voted AGAINST deeming women as persons. It was only through an appeal to the British Privy Council that that decision was overturned and women were declared persons. So to think that Canada or any nation can make wise and proper decisions for "good government" is hubris.


    Edwards v. A.G. of Canada
    [1930] A.C. 124
    The judgment of their Lordships was delivered by Lord Sankey, L.C.:

    "The exclusion of women from all public offices is a relic of days more barbarous than ours, but it must be remembered that the necessity of the times often forced on man customs which in later years were not necessary. "

    "Over and above that, their Lordships do not think it right to apply rigidly to Canada of to-day the decisions and the reasonings therefor which commended themselves, probably rightly, to those who had to apply the law in different circumstances, in different centuries to countries in different stages of development."
    ...

    "His Majesty the King in Council is the final Court of Appeal from all these communities and this Board must take great care therefore not to interpret legislation meant to apply to one community by a rigid adherence to the customs and traditions of another. Canada had its difficulties both at home and with the mother country, but soon discovered that union was strength. "
    ...

    "Their Lordships do not conceive it to be the duty of this Board -- it is certainly not their desire -- to cut down the provisions of the Act by a narrow and technical construction, but rather to give it a large and liberal interpretation so that the Dominion to a great extent, but within certain fixed limits, may be mistress in her own house, as the provinces to a great extent, but within certain fixed limits, are mistresses in theirs. "The Privy Council, indeed, has laid down that Courts of law must treat the provisions of the British North America Act by the same methods of construction and exposition which they apply to other statutes. But there are statutes and statutes; and the strict construction deemed proper in the case, for example, of a penal or taxing statute or one passed to regulate the affairs of an English parish, would be often subversive of Parliament's real intent if applied to an Act passed to ensure the peace, order and good government of a British Colony." See Clement's Canadian Constitution, ed. 3, p. 347.


    http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/en/browseSubjects/edwardspc.asp

  26. #26

    Default

    ^appeal to the Privy Council is long gone. The monarchy family do nothing for Canada but bring us shame through association with them.

  27. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^appeal to the Privy Council is long gone. The monarchy family do nothing for Canada but bring us shame through association with them.
    Well, if that's all you got out it, I think you missed the point. Now here, Ive listed them out nicely:

    One, our own Supreme Court refused to give women a critical right that another court in another country saw fit to grant them. (Think about that - and not just in this case but try to generalize the concept.)

    Two, nearly a century ago, Britain's own Lordships stated that they "do not think it right to apply rigidly to Canada of to-day the decisions and the reasonings therefor which commended themselves, probably rightly, to those who had to apply the law in different circumstances, in different centuries to countries in different stages of development." "

    Three, Britain's own Lordships sought to give Canada "a large and liberal interpretation so that the Dominion to a great extent, but within certain fixed limits, may be mistress in her own house, as the provinces to a great extent, but within certain fixed limits, are mistresses in theirs."

    Four, there are situations in governing that can be a "relic of days more barbarous than ours" - and again, that was their thinking back in the 1920s.

    Five, "great care therefore not to interpret legislation meant to apply to one community by a rigid adherence to the customs and traditions of another."

    Six, "Canada had its difficulties both at home and with the mother country, but soon discovered that union was strength. " (I'd say that is even more strongly the case today.)

  28. #28

    Default

    ^ so because once years ago before WWII the UK courts over ruled canada ( something they can't do now) to fix an injustice, we have to accept an undemocratically selected foreign royal family who hang out with pedophiles as producing our head of state? Great I hope one day we are mature enough as a nation to have a Canadian as our head of state.
    Last edited by moahunter; 04-01-2015 at 05:38 PM.

  29. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^ ... I hope one day we are mature enough as a nation to have a Canadian as our head of state.
    Ugh - that's almost exactly where there words were pointing. Try reading it more slowly.

    There are other issues though. Historic connections, institutional linkages, alliances and defence, Royal interests and rights in and over Canada from the outset (longer than many if not most Canadians via latter immigration.) Issues like manifest destiny, etc.

    ~
    Last edited by KC; 04-01-2015 at 06:58 PM. Reason: removed a personal question - added comment

  30. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^ so because once years ago before WWII the UK courts over ruled canada ( something they can't do now) to fix an injustice, we have to accept an undemocratically selected foreign royal family who hang out with pedophiles as producing our head of state? Great I hope one day we are mature enough as a nation to have a Canadian as our head of state.
    moa, it cost each Canadian about $1.53 a year for our form of governance. If you cannot afford it I am sure we can organize a whip round to cover your cost. If you are so inclined maybe you should move to a republic somewhere in the world. Preferably a banana one where you will maybe appreciate Canada more.

    http://www.monarchist.ca/myths
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  31. #31

    Default

    ^many Canadians want a Canadian head of state Gemini, should they all leave Canada? The exact same system could be kept, the Governor General just official becomes the president.

    http://www.canadian-republic.ca/goals.html

  32. #32

    Default

    ^and we will all live happily ever after
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  33. #33
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    Australia has a much stronger republican movement than Canada, and some of you may recall that they had a referenduom on abolition a little over a decade ago. The republicans lost. My understanding is that one of the main reasons for the monarchist victory was that the republicans didn't present a coherent alternative to the public.
    Is it not surprising to you that this thread was started a by republican wingnut Aussie?
    Hmm, don't think I knew moa was from Australia.

    Fine by me, it's good to have a variety of cultural perspectives. But if moa hails from Down Under, I would hope he has had some opportunity to reflect upon the failure of republicanism in his home-country.

  34. #34

    Default

    Well, a lot of people with First Nations, French and even the few with Portuguese heritage have some cause to question british rule, british tradition, and corresponding legacies. Moreover we're a country of immigrants from all over the world so the country's views are changing. Still, citizenship requires an oath be taken - anyone's family arrive in the 1940s or more recently?



    "I swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King George the Sixth, His Heirs and Successors, according to law, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen"

    "I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen."





    Here's an interesting article I've just skimmed. (That is, I don't know if it is objective or subjective, or racist or discriminatory or republican or loyalist, or whatever. I'll leave that to others to spin or counterspin.) The bottom line though is that change is unstoppable and some large proportion of Canadians could care less if the monarchy stays or goes.



    “Multiculturalism” and the West
    Dwight D. Murphey[1]
    Wichita State University, retired

    "Existential Threat to the West and to Others.
    What is at issue, of course, is the continued existence of the peoples, as peoples, who are being demographically invaded. If they don’t care about their continuing, no one will; certainly it is not something that bothers the millions who are arriving, or the intellectual culture that for ideological reasons welcomes the undercutting of the existing societies. This is not a matter of science, but of the heart. It relates to values, loyalty, heritage.

    Former Colorado governor Lamm gives a speech on “How to Destroy America.” In it, he says that “history shows that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two or more competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; however, it is a curse for a society to be bilingual.” He points to “Canada, Belgium, Malaysia and Lebanon” as among those who “all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans.”[34]"

    http://dwightmurphey-collectedwritin...-Multicult.htm


    ~
    Last edited by KC; 04-01-2015 at 10:55 PM.

  35. #35
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,743

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Well, a lot of people with First Nations, French and even the few with Portuguese heritage have some cause to question british rule, british tradition, and corresponding legacies.
    ~
    Well, sure, and by the same token, a lot of indiiginous people in the USA have some cause to question republican legacies. Trail Of Tears and all that. I guess it would be better for them if the US reverted to monarchism, in order to erase the legacy of Andrew Jackson et al?

    Fact of the matter is, you can find examples of republican imperialism(eg. the USA and post-Revolutionary France) just as easily as you can find examples of monarchial imperialism.
    Last edited by overoceans; 05-01-2015 at 12:04 AM.

  36. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    Hmm, don't think I knew moa was from Australia.
    Not from Australia lol, I assumed it was an intentional dig, like calling you American I don't have any problem with British heritage, or commonwealth, but I'd like to see a Canadian head of state, I don't like what this British family represents, basically, a class system that has no place in Canada. To me, that's the last type of family / person who should be our head of state, I'd rather we took a random homeless person, at least they would be Canadian.
    Last edited by moahunter; 05-01-2015 at 08:31 AM.

  37. #37

    Default

    I am OK with the monarchy, but I swear if we ever see Charles' face on our money, I will petition hard and fight tooth and nail for Canada gain independence from the Royal family.

  38. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    Hmm, don't think I knew moa was from Australia.
    Not from Australia lol, I assumed it was an intentional dig, like calling you American I don't have any problem with British heritage, or commonwealth, but I'd like to see a Canadian head of state, I don't like what this British family represents, basically, a class system that has no place in Canada. To me, that's the last type of family / person who should be our head of state, I'd rather we took a random homeless person, at least they would be Canadian.
    The idea of a Canadian head of state seems to be desirable in terms of fully reflecting our vested interests. Same thinking, even more so, should apply to religious leaders like the Pope since they have a stronger influence than the Queen in affecting Canadian lives and possibly even Canadian politics. A "Made in Canada Pope" would seem more appropriate than one, even if elected (by a bunch of insiders) in a far off land. However, maybe the role of these figureheads does and should transcend the arbitrariness of "the state" - and so should Canada's Kings and Queens.

    On the random person thought. Leaders are generally power seekers. That's what makes them dangerous and a threat to democracy. Inherited positions are possibly closer to the ideal of the random person off the street than one who deliberately seeks out the power of a Presidential position.

    On the threat to democracy which I see in most republics, I think it is very interesting that with the millions upon millions of intelligent capable citizens available, the odds of family lineages reappearing in politics would be exceedingly remote, yet it happens all the time in deomcracies. eg. Kennedy, Bush, Trudeau. That's indicative of something but I'm not sure what though - but it sure seems ominous to me. Is King seeking in the family DNA?

  39. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    Is it not surprising to you that this thread was started a by republican wingnut Aussie?
    He's a Kiwi Koch-sucking pseudolibertarian. If you're gonna dig, dig right.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  40. #40
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,501

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    I am what you could call a "default monarchist". I have no great emotional attachment to the monarchy, but I just think that abolishing it would be a HELLUVA lotta work, for very little payback in terms of actual improvements.

    If we go to a "weak presidential" system(eg. Israel and Ireland) where the president basically serves as an elected figurehead, we're not really changing the way things work at all. Except we're gonna be spending god-knows-how-much-money to change all the wording and symbolism on legal and parliamentary documents, coat-of-arms, etc etc.

    And if we go to a "strong presidential" system(eg. the USA and France), that's even more of a headache. We'd be tossing out the whole Westminister system, hook line and sinker, and having to come up with something new. I really don't think Canadians are gonna be interested in a long, protracted debate about what sort of system to invent. Not when the only issue supposedly bedevilling the monarchy is bad behaviour of some of the Royals.
    I'd call myself a weak anti-monarchist. I have zero attachment to the British monarchy and on some level I'd like to see Canada rid itself of its foreign, hereditary head of state. However, I'm not sure it is worth the hassle or the risk that a head of state with more legitimacy would impair the functioning of our government.

    I really don't care about the latest royal scandal (or any that came before it), and I don't think petty scandals involving minor members of the family are a good reason to ditch the monarchy.

    I would like to see some Canadian heads on our coins when the queen dies though. Put the new king on the dime only.

  41. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    Is it not surprising to you that this thread was started a by republican wingnut Aussie?
    He's a Kiwi Koch-sucking pseudolibertarian. If you're gonna dig, dig right.
    A look at the map will show you that New Zealand is the testicles of Australia.

  42. #42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    Is it not surprising to you that this thread was started a by republican wingnut Aussie?
    He's a Kiwi Koch-sucking pseudolibertarian. If you're gonna dig, dig right.
    A look at the map will show you that New Zealand is the testicles of Australia.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic..._Koch_brothers

    These guys are right up your alley. That's what the reference was to.
    Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

  43. #43

    Default

    Some quotes:



    Parliamentary monarchy fulfils a role which an elected president never can. It formally limits the politicians’ thirst for power because with it the supreme office of the state is occupied once and for all.
    Max Weber, German economist.



    We should all bear carefully in mind the constitutional safeguards inherent in the monarchy:

    While the Queen occupies the highest office of state, no one can take over the government. While she is head of the law, no politician can take over the courts. While she is ultimately in command of the Armed Forces, no would-be dictator can take over the Army.

    The Queen’s only power, in short, is to deny power to anyone else. Any attempt to tamper with the royal prerogative must be firmly resisted.
    D G O Hughes, letter to The Daily Telegraph, 1st September 1998.




    Monarchy is first proved to be the true and rightful form of government. Men’s objects are best attained during universal peace: this is possible only under a monarch. And as he is the image of the divine unity, so man is through him made one, and brought most near to God. There must, in every system of forces, be a ‘primum mobile’; to be perfect, every organisation must have a centre, into which all is gathered, by which all is controlled. Justice is best secured by a supreme arbiter of disputes, himself untempted by ambition, since his dominion is already bounded only by ocean. Man is best and happiest when he is most free; to be free is to exist for one’s own sake. To this noblest end does the monarch and he alone guide us; other forms of government are perverted, and exist for the benefit of some class; he seeks the good of all alike, being to that very end appointed.
    James Bryce’s summary of Dante’s De Monarchia.



    Russia under Nicholas II, with all the survivals of feudalism, had opposition political parties, independent trade unions and newspapers, a rather radical parliament and a modern legal system. Its agriculture was on the level of the USA, with industry rapidly approaching the West European level.

    In the USSR there was total tyranny, no political liberties and practically no human rights. Its economy was not viable; agriculture was destroyed. The terror against the population reached a scope unprecedented in history.

    No wonder many Russians look back at Tsarist Russia as a paradise lost.
    Oleg Gordievsky, letter to The Independent, 21st July 1998.

  44. #44

    Wink

    All good points. There's only one foolproof way to make the change ... new king. Dibs. I promise my behavior will not BE WORSE than the existing monarchy and I only want half the castles. I may make a few changes once anointed. You won't mind, I'm sure.
    "all we are say-ing ... is give beer a chaaaance"

  45. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by overoceans View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    ^i nominate the Trudeau family, they have better hair, and it would keep them out of power
    On a serious note, given all the sentimental wartime connections between Canada and the Netherlands, you'd think there would be some well-behaved Dutch aristocrats willing to serve as our sovereigns.

    This solution would also work for the British themselves, it seems to me, if they ever get fed up with the Windsors.
    NO DUTCH MONARCH ... EVER!!! (see below)
    "all we are say-ing ... is give beer a chaaaance"

  46. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by noodle View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonic Death Monkey View Post
    Is it not surprising to you that this thread was started a by republican wingnut Aussie?
    He's a Kiwi Koch-sucking pseudolibertarian. If you're gonna dig, dig right.
    A look at the map will show you that New Zealand is the testicles of Australia.
    And the accent from N Z and Australia sounds just awful. I would hate it if we got planted with an Expat Oz for a Governor General. The channel would be switched the minute they opened their trap. G'day to ya mate. Would drive me nuts and some days that's not a long drive.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  47. #47
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,743

    Default

    Okay, you see this is where my fellow monarchists jump the shark. They always oversell their case.

    While the Queen occupies the highest office of state, no one can take over the government. While she is head of the law, no politician can take over the courts. While she is ultimately in command of the Armed Forces, no would-be dictator can take over the Army.


    That monarchies are impenetrable to takeover will garner a few laughs from Oliver Cromwell, Maximilien de Robespierre, Vladimir Lenin, and the Ayatollah Khomeini.

    Unless, the writer means that as long as the Queen reigns the government, by definition, cannot be overthrown, ie. because then the Queen is no longer reigning. But that's a useless tautalogy. It's like saying "As long as I am alive, I will not die."

  48. #48
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    asia
    Posts
    2,743

    Default

    And this...

    Monarchy is first proved to be the true and rightful form of government. Men’s objects are best attained during universal peace: this is possible only under a monarch. And as he is the image of the divine unity, so man is through him made one, and brought most near to God. There must, in every system of forces, be a ‘primum mobile’; to be perfect, every organisation must have a centre, into which all is gathered, by which all is controlled. Justice is best secured by a supreme arbiter of disputes, himself untempted by ambition, since his dominion is already bounded only by ocean. Man is best and happiest when he is most free; to be free is to exist for one’s own sake. To this noblest end does the monarch and he alone guide us; other forms of government are perverted, and exist for the benefit of some class; he seeks the good of all alike, being to that very end appointed.

    James Bryce’s summary of Dante’s De Monarchia.


    This is completely inapplicable to the current debate, because Dante is clearly talking a politically powerful monarch. Whereas Canadian monarchists 2014 are almost all defending the Crown as a ceremonial institution.

  49. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeerSlayer View Post
    NO DUTCH MONARCH ... EVER!!! (see below)
    My father is Dutch, so I don't disagree with you, he wouldn't make a great King of Canada. Not that think Charles will either.

  50. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by BeerSlayer View Post
    NO DUTCH MONARCH ... EVER!!! (see below)
    My father is Dutch, so I don't disagree with you, he wouldn't make a great King of Canada. Not that think Charles will either.
    Full disclosure ... so is my wife (thus the statement below). I guess technically she'd be queen if I became king. To avoid that I'll renounce my marriage to keep the line pure. I'll hold auditions for the new Queen after my ascension but I'll need A LOT more security than the current monarch gets. My wife (ex-wife) will be a major national threat. You know how angry the Dutch get.
    "all we are say-ing ... is give beer a chaaaance"

  51. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeerSlayer View Post
    All good points. There's only one foolproof way to make the change ... new king. Dibs. I promise my behavior will not BE WORSE than the existing monarchy and I only want half the castles. I may make a few changes once anointed. You won't mind, I'm sure.
    I can't wait to see those Brit faces when our Canadian king puts vinyl siding on half of their old castles.

  52. #52
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    And . . . Beige stucco.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  53. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    And . . . Beige stucco.
    Yes, some nice stucco would sure spiff the old places up a bit. Though grey is sure a popular colour now, if grey can be considered a colour.

  54. #54

    Default

    ^for the fashion forward on this board grey is the new black.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  55. #55
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    744

    Default

    It will happen some day, but probably not anytime soon. The political will just isn't there (sad but true).
    The best option after QE II would be keep the Canadian throne vacant (pretty easy if parliament refuses to accept King Charles II) and ask our GG to become the Regent of Canada (de facto or de jure). Should keep all but the die-hard republic supporters (can't say 'republican' in North America, can we? ) happy!
    There is also historical precedence within the western world (Hungary between the 2 world wars was technically a republic yet Admiral Horthy (he of a land-locked country no less!!) ruled as Regent (de facto President).
    I'm a centrist small-l liberal who doesn't care much about the monarchy but has a grudging respect/admiration for old Liz (can't say the same for her descendants though).

  56. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cal76 View Post
    It will happen some day, but probably not anytime soon. The political will just isn't there (sad but true).
    The best option after QE II would be keep the Canadian throne vacant (pretty easy if parliament refuses to accept King Charles II) and ask our GG to become the Regent of Canada (de facto or de jure). Should keep all but the die-hard republic supporters (can't say 'republican' in North America, can we? ) happy!
    There is also historical precedence within the western world (Hungary between the 2 world wars was technically a republic yet Admiral Horthy (he of a land-locked country no less!!) ruled as Regent (de facto President).
    I'm a centrist small-l liberal who doesn't care much about the monarchy but has a grudging respect/admiration for old Liz (can't say the same for her descendants though).
    Actually Charles has been well ahead of the world on the environmental front. Decades ahead in many ways. Still, what does it matter? Have we yet had any PM that has had significant, lasting respect?

    And his mom can change a tire and drive a stick shift... (she would be arrested for terrorism in Saudi Arabia)

    The Queen as a Mechanic (1945)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2grMaRttws




    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/...16_634x562.jpg


    https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4031/4...f17e76b8b6.jpg


    Though I wonder if she didn't get tailored uniforms.


    http://i.imgur.com/qtYXg2o.jpg


    She worked 10 till 5 as a mechanic...
    http://www.oldmagazinearticles.com/Q...During_WW2_pdf


    ~
    Last edited by KC; 07-01-2015 at 07:50 PM.

  57. #57

    Default

    As your new king ... I will call AMA to change a flat. Most of the time it takes less than 8 hours.
    "all we are say-ing ... is give beer a chaaaance"

  58. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeerSlayer View Post
    As your new king ... I will call AMA to change a flat. Most of the time it takes less than 8 hours.
    During a war - 8 months.

    As King, will you change the country name to BEERISTAN?

  59. #59
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Y'know, she wasn't a bad lookin' gal, in that forties kinda way.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  60. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    Y'know, she wasn't a bad lookin' gal, in that forties kinda way.
    You mean - before photoshop? (When celebrities still looked like real people.)



    As head of a christian church, she could be the subversive "Poster Girl" for women's rights in Saudi Arabia.




    Two Saudi Women Arrested for Defying Driving Ban to Be Sent to Terror Court
    BY STAV ZIV 12/29/14

    "There is no formal law forbidding women to drive in Saudi Arabia, but religious edicts are prohibitive, and women are not issued driver’s licenses in the country. For years the authorities have been arresting women who venture into the driver’s seat."

    http://www.newsweek.com/saudi-women-...r-court-295611



    Eleven things women in Saudi Arabia can't do

    http://www.theweek.co.uk/middle-east...arabia-cant-do







    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...unk-click.html


    http://www.testedich.de/quiz34/quiz/...heit-der-Queen



    International Women's Day 2012

    "Second Subaltern Elizabeth Windsor was trained as a truck driver and in heavy vehicle maintenance.
    She later attained the rank of Second Commander. She is, incidentally, the last surviving head of state to have served in uniform in World War II."

    "On VE day (the end of the war in Europe) celebratory crowds filled the streets of London. The two princesses mingled anonymously with that throng."


    http://long-may-she-rain.blogspot.ca...-day-2012.html




    ~
    Last edited by KC; 08-01-2015 at 11:09 AM.

  61. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by BeerSlayer View Post
    As your new king ... I will call AMA to change a flat. Most of the time it takes less than 8 hours.
    During a war - 8 months.

    As King, will you change the country name to BEERISTAN?
    I was thinking Beerlandia. Open to suggestions though. I might sell the naming rights to raise money for war. I intend to FINALLY annex the Turks and Caicos. Once completed, I will move my capital there and never have to freeze my ***** off again. We could also claim the Falklands but I think that's been tried. Cuba might be a good target too. Get it before the Americans do.
    "all we are say-ing ... is give beer a chaaaance"

  62. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    Y'know, she wasn't a bad lookin' gal, in that forties kinda way.
    Aw, howie has a crush on Her Majesty.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  63. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeerSlayer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by BeerSlayer View Post
    As your new king ... I will call AMA to change a flat. Most of the time it takes less than 8 hours.
    During a war - 8 months.

    As King, will you change the country name to BEERISTAN?
    I was thinking Beerlandia. Open to suggestions though. I might sell the naming rights to raise money for war. I intend to FINALLY annex the Turks and Caicos. Once completed, I will move my capital there and never have to freeze my ***** off again. We could also claim the Falklands but I think that's been tried. Cuba might be a good target too. Get it before the Americans do.
    Of course, the national drink will be heavily subsidized, right?

    And who would Beerlandia need to fight? Or is that for fighting off countries trying to merge with us? ( The Little Mouse that Roared, and all that.)
    Last edited by KC; 08-01-2015 at 10:20 PM.

  64. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Wow, I'd date her. What happened? We should put that on the bank notes.

  65. #65

    Default

    ^It would look to much like Canadain Tire money with that picture. She is/was a very pretty lady.
    Hey, there's an idea. If Charles becomes king maybe his picture could go on the Canadian Tire 5 cent note. Winning.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  66. #66

    Default

    ^ however, I always thought though that there was a lot more going on in the guy's mind than the hapless image the media loved. No mention of beer, though he is heavily into agriculture, so BeerSlayer might have a worthy opponent.

    LEADERS & VISIONARIES
    Prince Charles

    By CATHERINE MAYERWednesday, Oct. 17, 2007

    Excerpt:
    "Although he has gradually gained international recognition as one of the world's leading conservationists, many Brits still think of him as a crank who talks to plants. ..."

    http://content.time.com/time/special...669898,00.html

    Secret web of the Black Spider Prince

    By PAUL RICHARDS, 26 June 2010
    Excerpt:

    "Or it might be that Prince Charles exercises enormous, secretive and unaccountable power and influence over matters of state. The interference in the planning process for Chelsea Barracks might be just one example among scores. Is the Prince the invisible hand behind much Government policy?

    We just don’t know. These letters, hundreds of them, lie in secret files deep in Whitehall ...

    When one or two of Charles’s letters have been dragged out of Whitehall after leaks or under Freedom Of Information laws, we get a glimpse of his style and methods. But he goes to great lengths to prevent the public knowing what position he takes.

    When The Mail on Sunday revealed that he had circulated a journal describing the Chinese leadership as ‘appalling old waxworks’ he launched a £1 million legal action to prevent the public*ation of more observations from his other journals. ...

    It would be in Prince Charles’s own interests, before he becomes our King, to publish the letters.
    Once he is on the throne, all this campaigning has to stop. That’s the rules.

    The King cannot be a political lobbyist. ...

    I suspect he would come out of it rather well – as a man with vision, ideals and passion, in an era of apathy and cynicism. ..."



    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...er-Prince.html.
    This gets into the global conspiracy theory territory:

    The English Environmental Elite, Global Warming, and The Anglican Church

    Prince Philip's most recent contribution to environmentalism has been his effort to unite the world's dominant established religions behind the great green crusade. In this he has been quite successful...

    Prince Philip's first-born son, Prince Charles, wasted little time taking up the struggle. In 1968 he became chairman of ... In the same year, in his maiden speech at Cambridge Union, he argued passionately in favour of the motion: "This House believes that technological advance threatens the individuality of man and is becoming his master."

    ...

    Inner members of the cabal included the head of WWF Conservation, the director of Friends of the Earth, and key bureaucrats and academics. The result was an even more aggressive reproach of current government policies. In violation of custom, the Prince refused a ministerial request to remove critical sections from a speech he gave to the delegations attending the "Saving the Ozone Layer" World Conference in 1989.

    It was during this time that the Prince first began sounding warnings of "catastrophic climate changes". In 1989 he summoned the then Minister of Energy to the palace at Hargrove for a "frank exchange of views." The commentary on this meeting contains the following generalization:

    "Although the Prince's public manner is diffident and self-deprecating, he could be exceptionally forceful in private, surprising his guests with his vehemence, often banging the table with the palm of his hand to reinforce an argument."
    ...
    "Environmentalism is not the only concern of the Prince. He is involved in a dozen or so social and political initiatives, and he has amassed a considerable war chest with which to pursue his goals. ... a fund he launched in 1976. He also raised 40 million pounds in 1987 for his Prince's Youth Business Trust. The Prince's Trust, with Charles as president, now has an annual turnover of 32 million pounds, a staff of 400, and over 10,000 volunteers. The main activity for the Trust is promoting entrepreneurialism among the unemployed through micro-loans to poor but aspiring youth. ..."


    http://ecofascism.com/article3.html
    Last edited by KC; 08-01-2015 at 11:05 PM.

  67. #67

    Default

    Didn't there used to be a song where someone talked to the trees but they didn't listen to me?. Anyway, I think what most of us think of the royals is probably wrong. I once watched a show about the queen and it showed private footage of her and the royal kids when they were young. They just seemed like any other family except for the fact they were multi millionaires with the world at their feet (so it seems). I think Queen Elisabeth has served us all proud. There is no doubt she is dedicated to her calling and takes it very seriously.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  68. #68
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    Y'know, she wasn't a bad lookin' gal, in that forties kinda way.
    Aw, howie has a crush on Her Majesty.
    LOL! But I haven't seen a photo of you yet, Gem.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  69. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by howie View Post
    Y'know, she wasn't a bad lookin' gal, in that forties kinda way.
    Aw, howie has a crush on Her Majesty.
    LOL! But I haven't seen a photo of you yet, Gem.
    I think her real identity is a closely guarded secret but she might be among these here:

    Women of DC Universe As 1940s Bombshell Pin-Ups [Gallery]

    http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2014/04/...n-ups-gallery/

  70. #70

    Default

    ^When my pictures roll out of Costco's development machine the staff all go 'WOW'.
    Now I'm 99% certain the are saying that for the right reasons.
    We also should give out a special shout to this industrious gal Rosie the Riveter.

    https://www.google.ca/search?q=rosie...%3B2160%3B1508
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  71. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    ^When my pictures roll out of Costco's development machine the staff all go 'WOW'.
    Now I'm 99% certain the are saying that for the right reasons.
    We also should give out a special shout to this industrious gal Rosie the Riveter.

    Oh boy. Now Howie is going to have a crush on you too. You better watch out or he may be stocking (sorry stalking) your threads.

    Also, between the Queen and Rosie, a guy would never have to take his vehicle back to the repair or body shop.
    Last edited by KC; 09-01-2015 at 12:59 PM.

  72. #72

    Default

    ^Oh I aint worried about howie, he's always been a perfect gentleman to converse with.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  73. #73
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    edmonton
    Posts
    4,787

    Default

    Thank you, Gem.

    Now don't be silly, KC. We've had our little laugh on this. Move on, mate.
    Nisi Dominus Frustra

  74. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by BeerSlayer View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by BeerSlayer View Post
    As your new king ... I will call AMA to change a flat. Most of the time it takes less than 8 hours.
    During a war - 8 months.

    As King, will you change the country name to BEERISTAN?
    I was thinking Beerlandia. Open to suggestions though. I might sell the naming rights to raise money for war. I intend to FINALLY annex the Turks and Caicos. Once completed, I will move my capital there and never have to freeze my ***** off again. We could also claim the Falklands but I think that's been tried. Cuba might be a good target too. Get it before the Americans do.
    Of course, the national drink will be heavily subsidized, right?

    And who would Beerlandia need to fight? Or is that for fighting off countries trying to merge with us? ( The Little Mouse that Roared, and all that.)
    I'd have a third tap installed in every sink!

    I'm looking for Lebensraum - it's too crowded in the warm places in Canada. We need to annex some warm territories.
    "all we are say-ing ... is give beer a chaaaance"

  75. #75

    Default

    A not so interesting story below. England had people that were socialists and pro-Communists (i.e. pro-dictatorship) in the early pre-war parts of the last century too. Basically extremes on both the right and left until sides were chosen and enemies identified/labeled.

    Interesting though that a media outlet would deliberately publish controversial photos of a 7 year old.

    See increasingly today - "WHATEVER you EVER say or do, WILL be used AGAINST you."




    'The Sun has sunk to a new low': British public reacts with fury after tabloid publishes 80-year-old pictures of the seven-year-old Queen and the Queen Mother being taught a Nazi salute


    "Salute: The Nazi salute became a symbol of fear across Europe after the rise of Hitler. But at the time the footage was taken there was not 'a child in Britain in the 1930s or 40s' who had not 'performed a mock Nazi salute as a bit of a lark', according to historian James Holland"



    "The extent of former King of England Edward VIII's Nazi sympathies were laid bare in the Mail On Sunday in March - in addition to the efforts made by the Establishment to destroy vital documents they feared could bring down the House of Windsor.

    Edward began communicating with Hitler shortly after he was elected Chancellor in 1933 - the same year Queen Elizabeth II, then seven, was pictured making a Nazi salute.

    Hitler even tried to marry Edward, then Prince of Wales, to a young German princess as he increasingly became seen as a friend and ally of the Nazi regime.

    After his abdication in 1936, Edward became an outspoken critic of Churchill and was convinced that if he had stayed on the throne war would have been averted in Germany. "




    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-Balmoral.html

    Last edited by KC; 03-09-2015 at 08:51 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •