Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

avehydra t1_itxcyqp wrote

Quebec being difficult again.

15

jezra t1_itxdl3t wrote

Not every canadian wants to fellate the king of england

40

fetishfeature5000 t1_itxhltm wrote

As an American, if it wasn’t for the random Canadian quarter I get once in awhile, I’d not know that England held the deed.

60

Kilvayne t1_itxl27m wrote

Separatist wants to separate; news at 10.

11

Cypher1492 t1_itxp5of wrote

Replying to iMogwai (#249,951)

That is technically correct, which is the best kind of correct. It's still not the official title of the Canadian monarch, though.

I would be in favour of changing his title from "King of Canada" to "King of Kensington", but only if he changes his name to Larry and opens up a convenience store. ;)

4

krba201076 t1_itxpu8w wrote

good. the monarchy is outdated. no one is better than anyone else.

26

NPVT t1_itxrodw wrote

Yay for the Queen of Canada, Queen Romana Dildo!

−7

SchrodingerCattz t1_itxue1n wrote

The Bloc is pretty irrelevant in Canadian Federal politics and fairly insignificant in Quebec politics currently.

5

AnarchyinGroland t1_ity002q wrote

Replying to Thanato26 (#251,324)

He dont live in Canada so he can be King of Narnia nobody give a crap.

Never forget Brexit, UK have issues and want to be left alone. Country is a joke and the fact some long ancestors killed the local is not a fond memory.

−8

crankery t1_ityb6gs wrote

Ontarian here, sure, where do I vote?

18

Monza1964 t1_itydwzb wrote

The separatist party wants to separate….got it

12

Thirdborne t1_itykn28 wrote

Replying to crankery (#252,712)

British Columbia here. Hand me the ballot. Ready to become Canadian Columbia, as dumb as that name sounds, it's as lot less dumb than Having a King just because his mum was the Queen.

11

Thirdborne t1_ityky1t wrote

Replying to Thanato26 (#251,369)

We suddenly have a new head of state, and we're all looking around like "Did you vote for this guy? Isn't it 2022?" It probably turns out that we all care too little to change it, but this monarchy system is bad and we could do better if we cared.

4

nojan t1_itynu7g wrote

In other new, sky is blue. Is this surprising at all? ..... on a more serious note, Quebec & Monarchy are both the reasons Canada is not part of the United States.

−4

dinoroo t1_ityrxwf wrote

Replying to Thirdborne (#253,731)

Is he really head of state though? He barely has control over England, let alone Canada. It’s all symbolic and not really worth the fight. Plus the Commonwealth has it’s benefits for work and travel.

4

jackovthgreat t1_ityxxuk wrote

Replying to Thirdborne (#253,700)

And said queen, in turn, was only queen because her I think dad (?) was king. And so on through many incestuous generations until you get to like a guy with a sword who scared people or some shit like that. Idk I'm not a historian, I just know it's all bullshit

4

TheSurgeonMan t1_itz5w9y wrote

Suddenly king Charles sees a bunch of suspicious people in wheelchairs...

2

redmorph t1_itzyjt2 wrote

Where do I sign?

I hope there is a box to tick for returning all the wealth these leeches stole from the people over the generations.

5

nsdwight t1_itzzhb3 wrote

Replying to Thanato26 (#251,316)

Do they swear oaths to the King? Indeed. Therefore they're not completely independent. Neither is the UK for that matter. Slaves to the old world system.

7

nsdwight t1_iu00esl wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#259,625)

Great Britain is the island. Charles is king of England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland. The untied kingdom.

So yes, he's very much the King of England.

2

Badtrainwreck t1_iu062qb wrote

Replying to randomnighmare (#251,895)

It’s not a part of the UK it’s a part of the commonwealth which is run by the head of the commonwealth Charles. Idk people would couldn’t just say that rather than saying “no it isn’t”

It obviously is a part of the monarchy in that regard, which is reflected in their currency.

2

Badtrainwreck t1_iu06lhq wrote

Replying to nsdwight (#260,122)

Idk if the people arguing against this are pro monarchy and want to bury the connection in semantics as much as possible or are so anti monarchy, but pro status quo that they cannot fathom acknowledging the connection of the monarchy and Canada

1

randomnighmare t1_iu09wep wrote

Replying to Badtrainwreck (#260,974)

Your head of state (or ceremony head of state) is the same as the UK's monarchy. That implies it's part of the same country but you guys have home rule. Hell, you guys put the monarchy on your money and make people in Canada swear allegiance to the British Monarchy.

1

nrrp t1_iu0dzxf wrote

Replying to Thanato26 (#251,316)

They are basically in a personal union, a single monarch of a single dynasty holding multiple hereditary kingdom titles. So there's Crown of United Kingdom, Crown of Canada, Crown of Australia, Crown of New Zealand and all the others and a single person of a single house (Windsor, formerly Saxe-Coburg and Gotha) holds all of them in hereditary fashion.

13

7billionpeepsalready t1_iu0vho4 wrote

Replying to penelopiecruise (#251,479)

On some real levels, the divine right of kings originated in France.

Jacques Bossuet used Scripture to justify royal authority without checks and balances, claiming that God has placed kings on their throne and it is the responsibility of the people to obey divinely appointed authorities without question. Rebellion against the king is rebellion against God.

So... not too chill to say everything this king dude says is law because god likes him more. The French (mostly the rich French) then grew a culture of nuh uh against the monarchy.

Just a fyi.

1

Gadburn t1_iu19doc wrote

The man is the leader of the Bloq a federal party in Canada whose only interest is the province of Quebec.

He doesn't even want to be Prime Minister, all he wants to do is gain enough seats to ensure they get what they want.

If I were in Quebec I'd probably like him, but because I'm from the west coast I can't stand him.

The Bloq infuriates me. Quebec gets a federal party that only represents one area and can only be voted on there! It's ridiculous.

1

HockeyBalboa t1_iu1i9qh wrote

Replying to Thanato26 (#251,369)

What do you base the cost on? How much are we talking here?

Also, you know countries fight wars for sovereignty. This will way less expensive and complicated than that.

0

Thanato26 t1_iu1jlx4 wrote

Replying to HockeyBalboa (#267,939)

Canada is a sovereign Nation, we go our sovereignty by fighting a war, the Great War. Statute of Westminster 1931 essentially made Canada, Australia, etc independent of thr United Kingdom.

The cost would come with reorganizing our electoral system. Legal challenges. Countless conferences between the provinces and territories, etc etc.

For the not really any gain, it's not really worth it.

2

Thanato26 t1_iu1l9y7 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#268,283)

He is still a Prince and is line for the thrown. If his father and brother die before the next heir is 18, Harry rules until thier 18th birthday but not as king.

0

davidreiss666 t1_iu2pj5b wrote

Replying to Badtrainwreck (#260,974)

Just for the record, the Head of the Commonwealth is the Head of the Commonwealth. All capital letters. As the official title of the Head of the Commonwealth is literally "Head of the Commonwealth". Not "Monarch of the United Kingdom" or any other country. The fact that the Head of the Commonwealth has always been the King or Queen of the UK is just an accident of titling now. The reason the title for the Head of the Commonwealth is such a weird thing is that several -- a majority of the Commonwealth nations even -- are not monarchies. Only 16 of the 56 Commonwealth realms are monarchies now a days. The majority of the Commonwealth realms are REPUBLICS.

1

SupaKhaines t1_iu50tti wrote

There are significant costs to cut ties with the Monarchy and it's absolutely not worth pursuing in the circumstances. It may feel good and ideal to cut ties but it is extremely difficult legally and expensive for what amounts to feel-good administrative change.

Spend money on substantive changes like healthcare, housing, infrastructure, education, and environment.

1

davidreiss666 t1_iu52va1 wrote

Replying to Badtrainwreck (#276,437)

There is some discussion in the Commonwealth on removing Charles at the next meeting of Commonwealth nations and instead appointing somebody else entirely. Somebody who has real live experience at diplomacy and who would make more sense as the Head of the Commonwealth. The majority of them, being Republics, literally don't give a shit about Bonnie Prince Charlie who accidentally became a King because mummy tripped and died.

1