Posted by Damian
on 2/11/2009, 21:33:30, in reply to "I thought you ignored one very important point in your post down below"
195.93.21.99
--Previous Message--
: "If I were a Canadian,I too would be
: calling for the swift replacement of the
: monarchy with a Canadian head of
: state."
Actually,I think it was naive of me to say I would call for it to be done 'swiftly'.I realise it would be a lengthy process but,were I a Canadian,I would still be all for it.
: If you were a Canadian, you'd be in the
: minority! The majority of Canadians support
: the continuation of the monarchy.
But how much of a majority is it? Do you have recent evidence of this to back up your assertion?
: There is no groundswell of support in either
: New Zealand or Canada for a republic. People
: may grumble but very few people actually
: propose doing anything to change it and it
: isn't because the people in charge are not
: favourable to republicanism. In New Zealand
: for most of the decade, the Prime Minister
: was overtly republican and did NOTHING of
: substance to further the republican agenda
: in her country. I think there have been a
: few senior Canadian politicians who have
: also stated publicly their opposition to the
: monarchy.
I agree it is a process that needs to be carefully thought out.But Australia has already gone as far as holding a referendum and,although it failed,I think that was more to do with widespread disagreement about whether a future president should be appointed by the electorate or by Parliament rather than out of any sense of affection or loyalty to the monarchy.I think it is only a matter of time before the subject comes up again and where Australia leads,I feel sure others will follow.
But there may be a sense that this subject will not again be seriously raised until after the death of Elizabeth II.The end of her reign will prove the likely watershed for the future of the monarchy in the rest of the Commonwealth.
: I think sometimes its difficult for British
: people to understand the appeal of a shared
: monarchy but then the Canadians or New
: Zealanders or Australians have never had any
: different experience than a royal family who
: visits occasionally and on the whole it
: seems it is a situation which will carry on
: for at least a few more decades in at least
: the first two countries.
As I say,my view is that the British monarchy is just that...British.Canadians,Australians and New Zealanders no longer think of themselves as British in the way they used to do.Therefore continuing to have the British monarch as their head of state is an anachronism.It's no use arguing that HM The Queen and her family are just as Canadian or Australian as they are British because everyone knows that it is just not true.When England play against Australia at cricket or rugby,who do you think the likes of Princes William and Harry will be cheering for? In fact,didn't this actually occur at a recent sporting match between the two countries and wasn't it mentioned by Aussie journalists?
One more thing I will say however is that,to date,no monarchy has ever fallen in peacetime.They have only ever fallen as a result of war and revolution.It will be interesting to see if the other Commonwealth countries eventually buck this historical trend but I tend to think they will all do so eventually.
Message Thread:
« Back to thread