Monarchy or Republic?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**KamikazeCanuck**

Not really. If your referring to the war of 1812 most of the Canadian victories were pulled off by locals and the defeats were inflicted upon the British from Britain who came over in support. The advantage of fighting on your own turf and what not.

**Ratbarf**

But they did supply the naval aspect and they burned down the Whitehouse which is something we still like to claim as our own.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also it was really only the threat of major British intervention that stopped the Americans from simply annexing us anyways.

**KamikazeCanuck**

Surprisingly, the Royal Navy didn't do that well. It was the failed incursions into BNA by land that discouraged the Americans. It was supposed to be a cakewalk. "They'll welcome us as liberators" and "we'll be home for Christmas" cliches applied. When it turned out to be difficult it just brought up the question of why defensive milita were being sent to invade Canada.

Anyway, we all get along fine now so it all worked out in the end.

Meanwhile back on the topic the original topic seems ill defined. Like there's a big difference between a Constitutional Monarcy and a Monarcy and I think some people are arguing for or against one without realizing it. It's pretty reasonable to be for or at least ok with a constitutional Monarcy but still against an absolute Monarcy.

**Orlanth**

azazel the cat wrote:

In any case, we are not even talking about the security costs (which I don't have a problem with, as this is a requirement for every head of state) This cost is over and above the security costs. It is literally their vacation bill. source.

EDIT: And I'm not always a fan of republics; I prefer federalism, though those two are not necessarily mutually exclusive due to the varying structure of some modern republics.

Just over a million, for a cultural event. Which is what a royal visit actually is.

What price do you put on a nations culture? What price should you put on a nations culture? I don't know what Canadians spend, but in the Uk cultural expenditures can be very large, even when catering only for small subcultures. Hell my hometown paid £200K for an Afro-Carribean writers forum, which seldom meets, and that is one English town. $1M for a royal visit is a bargain frankly, and it will help local businesses. Even if it didn't its unfair to have to list the profit/loss of such arrangements, some things are worth more than money.

I am sure the Canadian government can save plenty of money by giving mounted police 'practical uniforms' instead of red ones. Why not save a little money with a good idea? Because while saving pennies Canada itself will lose so much more.

If you want to argue against royal visits or the monarchy do so for other reasons, while the cost effectiveness of having a monarchy in the UK and elsewhere can be justified its distasteful to have to do so.

However I will end it with this: During a royal visit to the US in IIRC 1984 by Prince Charles and Diana the UK Expo trade fair which they visited had a publicity boost estimated at a billion dollars in advertising value through the depth of TV coverage of the event.. Now admittedly Diana is not Camilla, but a billion dollars. From any honest point of view in the UK the Windsors paid for themselves for live on that one event. I would very surprised if the royal visit did not generate wealth far in excess if the cost to the Canadian taxpayer. I am sure the Prince was taken to showcase events of features of value to Canadian economy, and the benefits thereof while not easily calculable, would be substantial. After all royal visits to non commonwealth countries showcase British interests, royal visits to Commonwealth countries showcase the host country.

Now in Canada admittedly some will whine anyway because the Prince is not French, so what.

**KamikazeCanuck**

The RCMP do have practical uniforms. The red ones are dress uniforms.

**azazel the cat**

Orlanth wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:

In any case, we are not even talking about the security costs (which I don't have a problem with, as this is a requirement for every head of state) This cost is over and above the security costs. It is literally their vacation bill. source.

EDIT: And I'm not always a fan of republics; I prefer federalism, though those two are not necessarily mutually exclusive due to the varying structure of some modern republics.

Just over a million, for a cultural event. Which is what a royal visit actually is.

What price do you put on a nations culture? What price should you put on a nations culture? I don't know what Canadians spend, but in the Uk cultural expenditures can be very large, even when catering only for small subcultures. Hell my hometown paid £200K for an Afro-Carribean writers forum, which seldom meets, and that is one English town. $1M for a royal visit is a bargain frankly, and it will help local businesses. Even if it didn't its unfair to have to list the profit/loss of such arrangements, some things are worth more than money.

I am sure the Canadian government can save plenty of money by giving mounted police 'practical uniforms' instead of red ones. Why not save a little money with a good idea? Because while saving pennies Canada itself will lose so much more.

If you want to argue against royal visits or the monarchy do so for other reasons, while the cost effectiveness of having a monarchy in the UK and elsewhere can be justified its distasteful to have to do so.

However I will end it with this: During a royal visit to the US in IIRC 1984 by Prince Charles and Diana the UK Expo trade fair which they visited had a publicity boost estimated at a billion dollars in advertising value through the depth of TV coverage of the event.. Now admittedly Diana is not Camilla, but a billion dollars. From any honest point of view in the UK the Windsors paid for themselves for live on that one event. I would very surprised if the royal visit did not generate wealth far in excess if the cost to the Canadian taxpayer. I am sure the Prince was taken to showcase events of features of value to Canadian economy, and the benefits thereof while not easily calculable, would be substantial. After all royal visits to non commonwealth countries showcase British interests, royal visits to Commonwealth countries showcase the host country.

Now in Canada admittedly some will whine anyway because the Prince is not French, so what.

And what cultural event is that, exactly? There is NOTHING for Canadians to do during these events; no value to gain. There is no parade, no faire, nothing. Just a couple donkey-caves in a fancy car, dining at a four-star hotel. Any possible advertising revenues are the sole benefit of the individual businesses; hardly worthy of taking money away from taxpayers for.

But please, tell me about how having a group of useless mascots strut around is worth more than money. Go on. I'll wait.

**Orlanth**

azazel the cat wrote:

And what cultural event is that, exactly? There is NOTHING for Canadians to do during these events; no value to gain. There is no parade, no faire, nothing. Just a couple donkey-caves in a fancy car, dining at a four-star hotel. Any possible advertising revenues are the sole benefit of the individual businesses; hardly worthy of taking money away from taxpayers for.

But please, tell me about how having a group of useless mascots strut around is worth more than money. Go on. I'll wait.

So your argument is that you don't like royals, so they are all "useless", irregardless of any evidence to the contrary, and there is plenty to be found. And of course you assume there are never any events, just four star hotel visits that somehow come to over a million dollars for two. I think its fairly pointless wasting time trying to explain further, at least to you, clearly you can't rise above rabid bigotry.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:
The RCMP do have practical uniforms. The red ones are dress uniforms.

Exactly these cost money that can be spent elsewhere if savings were all that mattered. However like with the Brigade of Guards, a lot would be lost if one did.

**notprop**

azazel the cat wrote:
.............? There is NOTHING for Canadians to do during these events; no value to gain. There is no parade, no faire, nothing. Just a couple donkey-caves in a fancy car, dining at a four-star hotel. Any possible advertising revenues are the sole benefit of the individual businesses; hardly worthy of taking money away from taxpayers for.

But please, tell me about how having a group of useless mascots strut around is worth more than money. Go on. I'll wait.

If you took the Queen to just a 4 star restaurant we would invade and kill you all, just saying.

To the topic at hand if you don't want the Queen as head of state then all you have to do is say so and she will no longer perform that role. All you have to do is convince the thousands that come out to wave flags at her to stop. Simples.

If you do not want the Queen to come over and visit, then stop asking her over and giving her black beavers and Jebus knows what else for her and your special occasions. Simples. She luuurves the bling you see.

**Kovnik Obama**

notprop wrote:

If you took the Queen to just a 4 star restaurant we would invade and kill you all, just saying.

Screw your rules ;

**azazel the cat**

Orlanth wrote:
azazel the cat wrote:

And what cultural event is that, exactly? There is NOTHING for Canadians to do during these events; no value to gain. There is no parade, no faire, nothing. Just a couple donkey-caves in a fancy car, dining at a four-star hotel. Any possible advertising revenues are the sole benefit of the individual businesses; hardly worthy of taking money away from taxpayers for.

But please, tell me about how having a group of useless mascots strut around is worth more than money. Go on. I'll wait.

So your argument is that you don't like royals, so they are all "useless", irregardless of any evidence to the contrary, and there is plenty to be found. And of course you assume there are never any events, just four star hotel visits that somehow come to over a million dollars for two. I think its fairly pointless wasting time trying to explain further, at least to you, clearly you can't rise above rabid bigotry.

No, my argument is that I don't like royals, and they are useless to Canada. I dislike royals because they are living avatars of undeserved entitlement and oppression (even as mostly impotent figureheads, the mere concept that someone can be born into a life-long position of authority is offensive to me).

But let me see if I understand your "argument", or lack thereof: you think that there's no point in holding a debate on the subject with me because I don't already agree with you? That's weak, man. But maybe I can help you out. Why don't you tell me about all of the magical events that the royals create during their visits which benefit Canadians. Because so far, I haven't heard of any.

Also: "Irregardless" isn't a word. Don't use it anymore. And by trying to calling a hatred of royalty bigotry, you are diluting the struggles of everyone who has had to deal with actual bigotry.

notprop wrote:To the topic at hand if you don't want the Queen as head of state then all you have to do is say so and she will no longer perform that role. All you have to do is convince the thousands that come out to wave flags at her to stop. Simples.

If you do not want the Queen to come over and visit, then stop asking her over and giving her black beavers and Jebus knows what else for her and your special occasions. Simples. She luuurves the bling you see.

I agree; I would love to see a national referrendum on the subject of removing the queen as the head of state. According to the last poll (which was quite small, admittedly)

In May 2012, a poll by Canadian Press Harris-Decima found that 51% of Canadians support the country remaining a monarchy

I think that's definitely close enough to hold a vote on it. Also of note is the fact that due ot the small sample size, the results of this annual poll varies widely, although typically the endorsement of the monarchy is somewhere around the 35% mark in most years.

**KamikazeCanuck**

The Monarchy is more popular in Canada right now than it ever has been just like in the UK. There isn't much appetite to get rid of it I think.

I didn't really care but some comments on this thread vain of you don't realize how important the Royals are to your lives and Prince Harry is Culture! have ironically made me reconsider getting rid of them immediately.

**Cheesecat**

Yeah, I still think Canada should keep the monarchy but we spend too much money when she visits so just lower that a bit (or a lot) and things should be fine, also someone said the queen is a symbol of repression I'm not sure that's entirely true I think for most modern Canadians they sort

of have this romanticized view towards royalty.

**Orlanth**

azazel the cat wrote:

No, my argument is that I don't like royals, and they are useless to Canada. I dislike royals because they are living avatars of undeserved entitlement and oppression (even as mostly impotent figureheads, the mere concept that someone can be born into a life-long position of authority is offensive to me).

ZOMG Azazel is being oppressed by the Royal family, call the human rights lawyers, claim compo!

azazel the cat wrote:

But let me see if I understand your "argument", or lack thereof: you think that there's no point in holding a debate on the subject with me because I don't already agree with you? That's weak, man. But maybe I can help you out. Why don't you tell me about all of the magical events that the royals create during their visits which benefit Canadians. Because so far, I haven't heard of any.

Check the website, I did earlier. It showed what sort of things the Prince gets up to while in Canada: http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/focus/canada
Lot of plug for charities included, and for all his faults the Prince of Wales is genuinely deeply committed to his charities and does a lot for them.

Here is an itinerary of a three-day tour of Canada (2012) by Prince Charles and his wife Camilla as part of events that mark the Queen's Diamond Jubilee.

Sunday:

7:45 p.m. AT — Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall arrive in New Brunswick at Saint John Airport.

Monday:

10:30 a.m. — Arrive at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in New Brunswick to participate in an official arrival ceremony that includes a royal salute, an inspection of the guard of honour, a 21-gun salute and a speech by Prince Charles.
11:05 a.m. — Visit the Prince's Operation Entrepreneur program at CFB Gagetown where the royal couple meet with military personnel enrolled in the project, which helps them start and grow their own businesses.
11:25 a.m. — Meeting with families of soldiers who have died.
11:45 a.m. — Government of Canada reception at CFB Gagetown.
1:10 p.m. — Arrive in Saint John, N.B., for heritage tour of Prince William Street.
1:25 p.m. — Arrive at Old Post Office Building for Canadian citizenship ceremony.
2:10 p.m. — Arrive at Marco Polo Cruise Terminal for Victoria Day celebration, including displays of local crafts, farm produce and choral presentations.
3:10 p.m.— Arrive at Hazen White-St. Francis School for a tour and to join in the school's fun day activities in the playground.
4:30 p.m. — Depart Saint John Airport for Toronto Pearson International Airport.
5:10 p.m. ET — Administrative arrival at Toronto Pearson International Airport.
9:10 p.m. — Arrive at Ashbridges Bay in Toronto for Victoria Day fireworks display and to meet with members of Ontario's emergency services and their families.

Tuesday:

10:10 a.m. — Arrive at Queen's Park in Toronto for Lieutenant Governor's Diamond Jubilee Medal ceremony and reception.
11:05 a.m. — Prince Charles arrives at Ryerson University for Digital Media Zone event where he meets students and young entrepreneurs who have benefited from the project.
11:05 a.m. — The Duchess of Cornwall arrives at Moss Park Armoury for her inaugural visit as colonel-in-chief of The Queen's Own Rifles.
12:05 p.m. — Prince Charles arrives at Pan/Parapan American Games Athletes' Village and meeting with Olympic and Paralympic medal winners and athletes.
12:45 p.m. — Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall arrive at a Government of Ontario reception at the historic Distillery District.
1:50 p.m. — Prince Charles arrives at Yonge Street Mission for the Prince's Charities Canada event.
3:30 p.m. — Prince Charles meets with representatives of the Assembly of First Nations at the Royal York Hotel.
6 p.m. — The royal couple arrive at Fort York Armoury for an event that commemorates the War of 1812.
8:15 p.m. — Depart Toronto Pearson International Airport for Regina International Airport.
9 p.m. CT — Administrative arrival at Regina International Airport.

Wednesday:

11 a.m. — Arrive at the Saskatchewan legislature in Regina for official arrival ceremony, presentation of six Diamond Jubilee medals to recognize outstanding service to the province and unveiling of a plaque to commemorate The Queen's Diamond Jubilee.
12:15 p.m. — Arrive at Government House to visit a Diamond Jubilee exhibit and attend the lieutenant governor's reception.
1:30 p.m. — Arrive at First Nations University to watch aboriginal performances and meet with aboriginal youths, entrepreneurs and graduates.
2:45 p.m. — Prince Charles arrives at Ground Effects Environmental Services to view the water treatment and ground remediation facility.
3:55 p.m. — Prince Charles has a private audience with Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
4:30 p.m. — Prince Charles has a private audience with Gov.-Gen. David Johnston.
7:10 p.m. —The royal couple arrive at the RCMP Depot for a concert by the Regina Symphony Orchestra and a reception where the prime minister and Prince Charles are scheduled to make remarks.
8:50 p.m. — Arrive at Regina International Airport for official farewell ceremony.

Earlier in the thread you made hysterical comments that the Canadian taxpayer was paying for royals to come over for a million dollar holiday. Looks like a busy diplomatic work schedule to me, and any other fair minded person. I will all but guarantee you the 2013 itinery will be similar, if we cant see the full schedule now its because of security inplications.

azazel the cat wrote:

Also: "Irregardless" isn't a word. Don't use it anymore. And by trying to calling a hatred of royalty bigotry, you are diluting the struggles of everyone who has had to deal with actual bigotry.

It is actual bigotry. You dont hate the royals for any intelligible reason. So far on the thread you have referred to them as "oppressors", spongers coming to Canada for free "holidays". You deny them any form of merit as beneficiaries of "undeserved entitlement" when vast numbers of people in the UK and Canada alike prefer them to their own politicians and choose to honour them for what they are and do. Any fair critic of the monarchy should at least acknowledge the genuine work they do and the level at which they throw themselves into the job or working for the peoples the Crown is Head of State over, yet claims that the royals lounge around in self absorbed privilege is often the hallmark of hysterical anti-monarchists.
You hate them for who they are in your own words, the very essence of bigotry.
Be a republican if you like, its your rights and choice, but do so for honest reasons.

**Albatross**

Orlanth, you're talking as if he were motivated by reason, as opposed to blind hatred and bitterness. You're not going to get anywhere, mate. I've already given up, because... Well, life's too short. I'd rather just leave him to it.

**KamikazeCanuck**

Blind hatred? I think Azazel just doesn't like Monarcy. That's like, his opinion and its a perfectly valid one.

**Ratbarf**

While it's certainly his opinion most of his reasons for it are not logically valid as most of his given reasons have been debunked as false.

**notprop**

Orlanth wrote:

...............11:05 a.m. — The Duchess of Cornwall arrives at Moss Park Armoury for her inaugural visit as colonel-in-chief of The Queen's Own Rifles............

Talk about a demoralising engagement, in the past they might have gotten Diana and they were probably hoping for Catherine instead the poor fethers get Camilla!

We have literally crippled Canada's ability to defend itself, for this I will concede Azazel's has a point.

I hope those pesky Yanks don't find out about this.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
There was a three day period where Churchill almost wasn't prime minister, and English will was looking pretty flimsy and weak. Halifax was the prime contender (possibly for the PM job... or he was just the big organizer for the opposition to Churchhill, can't remember the details right now) for the other spots and his primary idea was to hide behind the Royal Navy and hope the Germans got bored and left as opposed to taking the fight to them else where like in North Africa.

Churchill was the number one choice for PM in 1940, but after the Dunkirk evacuation, a small cabal (led by Halifax) did try and force Churchill to sue for peace with Hitler, but Churchill vowed to fight the Germans even if they were marching up Whitehall (London location of the main British government offices,)

Back OT.

Canadians moaning about the Queen make me laugh

It's your own fault for stopping the American invasions in the war of 1812. That's what you get for being victorious