Trudeau Popularity - or not. Nanos research

[GR66]

Maybe it should be appointment made by the King or Queen from the royal family then ?

Are we an independent country or not? The role of "The Crown" as represented by the GG plays an important role in our parliamentary system but personally I think we should go all the way in severing our system from any foreign influence.

@Edward Campbell suggested a possible solution that solves the problem in another thread: The Monarchy and CF

 

[Kirkhill]

I realize that some people who get into politics do so solely for self-serving reasons and that some give in to “the system” and become corrupt. I never said that Mulroney was perfect…there were many aspects of his actions that I found deplorable. And the same is true of just about every politician I can think of.

I guess perhaps I’m not as jaded as many people I know. As a country we are more divided than ever. I’ve said this before but I think that most of the politicians have something valid to offer. Frankly I can’t stand Doug Ford or, for that matter, Stephen Harper on the conservative side…but to deny everything they’ve done, rather than on balance, is to do them an injustice. And the same applies to both Justin and Singh. I simply feel that the country needs a fresh perspective on things.

I went to university in the U.S. during the turbulent 60s and early 70s and I remember so many wanting to basically destroy “the system”. And, yes, those in the radical left were jaded probably far more than those in the extreme right in Canada. I particularly remember Nixon’s re-election campaign and how divisive it was. Many of those opposed to him carried placards saying “Vote for Nixon in ‘72…why change Dicks in the middle of a screw”. I had friends both right and left of centre. I also remember campus demonstrations in which the ROTC building was severely damaged and the computer centre had a bomb go off injuring a guy I knew. I also knew the sister of one of the four students killed by the National Guard at Kent State…her brother was in fact in the ROTC and was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time (simply trying to get to his next class) when he was shot by accident. And there were many other incidents that convinced me that revolution is seldom the answer to a society’s problems and that extremism seldom improves a society, even one with built-in social injustice.

Over the years in my working career I’ve met and worked alongside various well-known politicians and political advisers…Liberal, Conservative and NDP. Most of them (but not all) were, in my opinion, decent people.

Sorry for my rambling, Kirkhill, but I actually think that getting into politics can, should be and is one of the loftiest of ambitions, even if many of those don’t live up to their own ideals. Am I delusional? Perhaps. If so, I just wish more people could be as delusional as I am.

I'm the last person to criticize anyone for rambling.

....

Frances Hutcheson, an Irish Presbyterian minister and philosopher is often associated with the line "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" in the US Declaration of Independence. He was a mentor of Adam Smith among others.

Hutcheson found no inherent contradiction between self-interest and benevolence. He suggested that people acted in their own self-interest and that the ultimate self-interest was happiness. One way that people are made happy is through the approbation of others therefore being benevolent to others makes the benefactor happy.

It is possible to be both self-interested and benevolent.

...

Back to the Butcher et al. The way they stay happy is to keep their customers happy. The way for politicians to stay happy is to keep their people happy. When customers and voters are lost butchers and politicians become unhappy.

...

Self interest does not have to mean acting against others. Equally benevolence does not require wearing a hair-shirt. Both can exist in the same person and the same institution.

Edit: Hutcheson on Liberty and Happiness | Online Library of Liberty

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Are we an independent country or not? The role of "The Crown" as represented by the GG plays an important role in our parliamentary system but personally I think we should go all the way in severing our system from any foreign influence.

So we can be ursurped by further foreign influence, as has been the MO of this current government since it took office?

His Majesty The King is King of Canada and thus has a vested interest in the prosperity and protection of his Canadian subjects. He also has zero desire in 2024 to pillage or suck dry our country for resources, clout, or interfere in our affairs; say the same about the U.S., China, Russia, or any other foreign power we would become subjugated to.

The Monarchy has served Canada well and continues to serve the constitutional monarchies within the Comonwealth well. I look to Africa and see how quickly and easily the multitude of nations that broke "free" from the "yoke" of "British tyranny" were soon fitted with a newer one fashioned by the Russians, Chinese, or Americans.

We like to toot our own horn about being an independent nation, but if we were to become a republic, we would become someone else's vassal state overnight.

The BNA, Statue of Westminster, and Constitution Act of 1982 essentially made us independent, while in theory having the Crown to keep the riff-raft out of our cupboard.

Ask Hong Kong, Sri Lanka, or South Africa how sweet it is being free from the British only to find the new "partners" far less cordial.

@Edward Campbell suggested a possible solution that solves the problem in another thread: The Monarchy and CF

I respect Mr. Campbell's thoughts on the matter and he points out a potential CoA. That said, I do not see it viable nor desirable.

Every time we take a step towards establishing ourselves as a "more independent Canada" we end up spending the next 30 years trying to clean the mess off our shoes.

Constitutional monarchies have maintained status quo in Europe for centuries, surviving both Fascism and Communism. I think we are best where we are and should not try to find problems for a solution we don't need.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Are we an independent country or not? The role of "The Crown" as represented by the GG plays an important role in our parliamentary system but personally I think we should go all the way in severing our system from any foreign influence.

@Edward Campbell suggested a possible solution that solves the problem in another thread: The Monarchy and CF

I support us abolishing the monarchy, but I don't see it happening.

So we can be ursurped by further foreign influence, as has been the MO of this current government since it took office?

His Majesty The King is King of Canada and thus has a vested interest in the prosperity and protection of his Canadian subjects. He also has zero desire in 2024 to pillage or suck dry our country for resources, clout, or interfere in our affairs; say the same about the U.S., China, Russia, or any other foreign power we would become subjugated to.

The Monarchy has served Canada well and continues to serve the constitutional monarchies within the Comonwealth well. I look to Africa and see how quickly and easily the multitude of nations that broke "free" from the "yoke" of "British tyranny" were soon fitted with a newer one fashioned by the Russians, Chinese, or Americans.

We like to toot our own horn about being an independent nation, but if we were to become a republic, we would become someone else's vassal state overnight.

The BNA, Statue of Westminster, and Constitution Act of 1982 essentially made us independent, while in theory having the Crown to keep the riff-raft out of our cupboard.

Ask Hong Kong, Sri Lanka, or South Africa how sweet it is being free from the British only to find the new "partners" far less cordial.


I respect Mr. Campbell's thoughts on the matter and he points out a potential CoA. That said, I do not see it viable nor desirable.

Every time we take a step towards establishing ourselves as a "more independent Canada" we end up spending the next 30 years trying to clean the mess off our shoes.

Constitutional monarchies have maintained status quo in Europe for centuries, surviving both Fascism and Communism. I think we are best where we are and should not try to find problems for a solution we don't need.

I think there are more variables to the collapse of some former British colonies than the singular act of the removal of the crown. And I'm not sure those variables, necessarily, exist in Canada.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I think there are more variables to the collapse of some former British colonies than the singular act of the removal of the crown. And I'm not sure those variables, necessarily, exist in Canada.

I would argue the fact we haven't seen Canada implode into multiple factions is because of the Crown, not in spite of it.

Canada would be 7 separatw countries by now, and I guarantee you a Republic of Canada would last mere years before regional, cultural, and federal/provincial clashes unwound what we currently have.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I would argue the fact we haven't seen Canada implode into multiple factions is because of the Crown, not in spite of it.

Canada would be 7 separatw countries by now, and I guarantee you a Republic of Canada would last mere years before regional, cultural, and federal/provincial clashes unwound what we currently have.

Really ? You think the glue that is binding the population together is the presence of the Crown ?

Everything I find online shows less than half the Canadian population in support the monarchy. I'm not sure it's as much the tie that binds that people think it is. Perhaps people are more patriotic about Canada and being Canadian than we recognize.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Really ? You think the glue that is binding the population together is the presence of the Crown ?

Everything I find online shows less than half the Canadian population in support the monarchy. I'm not sure it's as much the tie that binds that people think it is. Perhaps people are more patriotic about Canada and being Canadian than we recognize.

Oh believe me I don't think the population of Canada is as Monarchistic as I have shown in this thread .

That said, our institutions and federation on the other hand....

 

[Halifax Tar]

Oh believe me I don't think the population is of Canada is as Monarchistic as I have shown in this thread .

That said, our institutions and federation on the other hand....

I dunno out institutions aren't beings themselves. They are made up of Canadians.

I would argue it's cultural laziness that's kept it from happening so far. And we have bigger fish to fry at the moment.

 

[Brad Sallows]

This will all be driven by my generation. The ones who lived through 9/11, the 2008 Financial Crisis, The GWOT, COVID-19.

"I won't be coming home tonight
My generation will put it right
We're not just making promises
That we know we'll never keep"

(Genesis)

 

[Brad Sallows]

Self interest does not have to mean acting against others.

That's the beauty of capitalism. In order to satisfy one's self-interests, one must first serve someone else's.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The Monarchy has served Canada well and continues to serve the constitutional monarchies within the Comonwealth well. I look to Africa and see how quickly and easily the multitude of nations that broke "free" from the "yoke" of "British tyranny" were soon fitted with a newer one fashioned by the Russians, Chinese, or Americans.

The "residual powers" aren't what's keeping us from falling under some yoke. Sure, we've been dragged into some of Britain's fights to save them from the yoke of tyranny, but I don't see the UK as a decisive (or even trivial) factor in keeping us where we are. We have what we have because that was about as far as the winners of the Glorious Revolution were willing to go, with some incremental improvements over time. We could improve just by having elections every four years on a rigid schedule like our neighbours, and that would shrink the use of the GG to...what, exactly?

 

[Brad Sallows]

I would argue the fact we haven't seen Canada implode into multiple factions is because of the Crown, not in spite of it.

Canada would be 7 separatw countries by now, and I guarantee you a Republic of Canada would last mere years before regional, cultural, and federal/provincial clashes unwound what we currently have.

Sounds like an opportunity, to me. The federal government in Canada still has too much power, given the lack of homogeneity of the country.

 

[GR66]

So we can be ursurped by further foreign influence, as has been the MO of this current government since it took office?

His Majesty The King is King of Canada and thus has a vested interest in the prosperity and protection of his Canadian subjects. He also has zero desire in 2024 to pillage or suck dry our country for resources, clout, or interfere in our affairs; say the same about the U.S., China, Russia, or any other foreign power we would become subjugated to.

You lost me right here in your 2nd sentence. The Monarch (whomever he or she is) has absolutely no "vested interest" in protecting his/her "Canadian subjects". They are a figurehead. No more. No less. Yes, the concept of "The Crown" has in important role in the function of our constitutional monarchy but the individuals themselves don't have a role. The people of Canada through their elected representatives express the collective will of Canada's population. The person of the Monarch has ZERO role in influencing our prosperity or protecting our people.

To think that King Charles III is in any way protecting us from nefarious foreign powers seeking to "pillage or suck dry our country for resources, clout, or interfere in our affairs" is frankly quite laughable.

 

[lenaitch]

Talking about the GG is a waste of time. The GG has zero impact on anything in Canada and is nothing more than a show piece.

Let's get to the crux of the issue:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1771281041505808729

O'leary knocks it out of the park.

Gad. Not him again.

 

[dimsum]

I dunno out institutions aren't beings themselves. They are made up of Canadians.

I would argue it's cultural laziness that's kept it from happening so far. And we have bigger fish to fry at the moment.

I don’t think it’s cultural laziness. Every province and territory would have to agree.

What are the chances of that?

 

[rmc_wannabe]

I don’t think it’s cultural laziness. Every province and territory would have to agree.

What are the chances of that?

This was more my point. The Constitutional horsepower needed to renounce the monarchy in Canada would be gargantuan.

The federation itself is comprised of 10 provinces themselves that are constitutional monarchies in their own right, with their own Viceroys and legislatures that are under the same Crown.

I do not for a moment think that dissolving the Crown is an effort anyone wants to undertake, akin to changing the wallpaper as the foundation is sinking year by year.

 

[OldSolduer]

The federation itself is comprised of 10 provinces themselves that are constitutional monarchies in their own right, with their own Viceroys and legislatures that are under the same Crown.

IF we are constitutional monarchies may I be King of Saskatchewan?

Ya didn't expect that did ya?

 

[dapaterson]

IF we are constitutional monarchies may I be King of Saskatchewan?

Ya didn't expect that did ya?

Will you rid the province of pirates?

 

[dimsum]

IF we are constitutional monarchies may I be King of Saskatchewan?

Ya didn't expect that did ya?

Hail the Potash King!

 

[Eaglelord17]

IF we are constitutional monarchies may I be King of Saskatchewan?

Ya didn't expect that did ya?

Last guy who played that role (Riel) ended up hanged, not sure I would want that role myself knowing the outcome