Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

happyColoradoDave t1_iu1lw59 wrote

It's that the nature of separatist is to want to separate.

90

surfingNerd t1_iu1mlxb wrote

I call for a rebellion. Throw those Dr. Martens, Burberry, rolls Royce, minis off to the sea. That will show if Charles really is in charge.

−5

DaSauceBawss t1_iu1nyu9 wrote

Bro they tried it already...its not gonna happen....

4

Jormakalevi t1_iu1org6 wrote

In a way that is sad, because the British commonwealth and especially its core The UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand is such a glorious brand.

7

InoyouS2 t1_iu1rs28 wrote

Is anyone really surprised that French Canadians aren't too keen on the British monarchy?

40

A-Perfect_Tool t1_iu1uc2v wrote

It's a bold strategy Cotton, let's see if it pays off for him

1

saldeapio t1_iu1uuxv wrote

The monarchy should have died with the Queen

16

supershutze t1_iu1v7w0 wrote

Replying to DonDove (#269,251)

The only time that vote ever came anywhere near close was the time the question was deliberately obfuscating to the point where people didn't understand what was being asked.

Every single time the question was presented in a way people could actually understand the answer has been a resounding NO.

3

vonindyatwork t1_iu1wmvp wrote

If they had real commitment they'd abstain from parliament like Sinn Féin does in Northern Ireland.

But they don't, they just want to make noise and push the 'oh woe is us' narrative that riles up their base.

10

VedsDeadBaby t1_iu1xuz6 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#269,127)

Anyone who thinks ditching the Crown makes sense for Canada is profoundly ignorant of our political system. They have no real authority here and it would cause the biggest inter-provincial clusterfuck in decades as provinces tried to extract concessions for providing their assent. That's not even getting the mess it would cause with indigenous tribes who have signed treaties with the Crown.

22

halfabrandybuck t1_iu21wof wrote

I respect the crown as a unifying symbol of national sovereignty and authority - and importantly, not as a personage. I personally dislike King Charles but I respect the office of the crown as a symbol. Every nation has these symbols and they’re profoundly important because they sort of centre you in a common national identity.

3

VedsDeadBaby t1_iu24e4e wrote

Replying to mais_de_mort_lente (#271,492)

It's unlikely that it would cause the country to collapse, the issue is that it would be a massive boondoggle, cost a fortune, and inevitably fail, all for the sake of making a pointless statement. Why on earth would we want that?

11

mydogisanassholeama t1_iu26a4b wrote

Replying to vonindyatwork (#270,277)

Yeah, this is basically just Quebecois populism. Empty rhetoric to get their voters worked up. While I also want to get rid of the monarchy in Canada, it isn't like Quebec separatists, who by virtue of their own platform want to leave Canada, should get to choose such an important step for the entire country (we would basically have to re-do our entire constitution.

7

Qlawen t1_iu26f3w wrote

Replying to DonDove (#269,251)

Even if that 1% tipped in the other direction Quebec could still not separate. The Supreme Court of Canada reviewed and made a ruling on separation of the provinces in Canada. It is almost impossible for provinces to leave Canada. Keyword almost.

4

Anon_throwawayacc20 t1_iu2f2jl wrote

Replying to VedsDeadBaby (#270,470)

Solution: pass an amendment making the oath optional.

Alternatively: pass an amendment clarifying that the monarch of canada is a fictional entity, and change how the governor general is chosen.

Done.

It's like swapping one variable in X for another variable in X. You can keep the same general formula otherwise. Or in legal terms, you won't have to rewrite the constitution.

Would that not be a viable solution?

2

VedsDeadBaby t1_iu2j9e9 wrote

Replying to Anon_throwawayacc20 (#273,205)

That would require the assent of every province due to the ay our constitution is structured, and every indigenous tribe with a treaty signed by the Crown because one party to a treaty can't unilaterally alter the terms like that. That would make it every bit the shitshow that totally removing the Crown would be.

The only way something like this could happen would be if the monarchy tried to pull some bullshit like they did in Australia. That would cause a constitutional crisis of epic proportions and create the political will to remove them entirely. I don't think it's a realistic thing, though. The monarchy know damned well that we're only content to leave this can of worms unopened because they don't interfere with us.

9

Kunaak t1_iu2oiv0 wrote

It is rather absurd that a king or queen that have virtually no purpose, are still tolerated. This something that should have been gone from the Canadian system 100 years ago.

1

ritabook84 t1_iu2ytc8 wrote

Replying to Kevundoe (#272,939)

We aren’t. It’s just extremely complicated to get rid of them and would mean opening up a whole bunch of constitutional issues that make it not worth trying

7

barriekansai t1_iu37ooj wrote

Replying to DonDove (#269,251)

I was a child living on Île des Sœurs in Montreal during the 1980 referendum. I remember seeing as many Oui (Yes to separation) signs as Non (remain in Canada). My non-French-speaking parents were shitting themselves.

2

PunchFox t1_iu3dgou wrote

Replying to haixin (#268,607)

Not really sure that finally realizing it's time to ditch your shitty, archaic monarchy is the equivalent to leaving one of the most powerful and prosperous economic zones in the world

3

3dio t1_iu3hmh1 wrote

A quexit?

0

Xodarkcloud t1_iu482yb wrote

none of them can tell you the point of seperating other than trying to conserve a french identity. No economic benefit or legal benefit.. no benefit whatsoever.

−1

PunchFox t1_iu57jcu wrote

Replying to vonindyatwork (#288,186)

I might have misunderstood, but I thought this was just the Quebec party saying Canada should tell the monarchy to fuck off, not saying they should split from Canada. I know they do that too, but not here.

2

vonindyatwork t1_iu5oke3 wrote

Replying to PunchFox (#290,334)

Yes, but also no. It's a bit deeper then just the monarchy.

This sentiment is coming from two political parties/sources: the federal Bloc Quebeqois, and the provincial Parti Quebecois. Both of them are Quebec Separatist parties that want an independent Quebec.

The issue is they don't want to swear allegiance to the head of state of Canada, who now happens to be King Charles. It isn't really so much an anti-monarchy statement so much as it an anti-confederation statement, coming from them.

The brexit joke is that Canada dropping the monarchy would open a massive unknown can of worms similar to what Brexit did, while actual Quebec separation would be a boondoggle for them that would make Brexit look like a picnic.

1

VedsDeadBaby t1_iu5zipv wrote

Replying to doiwinaprize (#295,468)

If you don't understand how opening up the constitution could turn into a massive clusterfuck then I'd suggest you do a little research into the controversies surrounding the Constitution Act of 1982 and its passage without the assent of Quebec.

1

doiwinaprize t1_iu68ec6 wrote

Replying to VedsDeadBaby (#296,211)

I mean, we literally print their face on our currency. There was a federal holiday for the queen's funeral. Just because they don't have any involvement in immediate decision making doesn't mean they don't have a big influence on Canadian society that is beneficial to them, it's certainly not by accident.

1

ashtraygirl t1_iu6l8ug wrote

Replying to Kevundoe (#272,875)

I remember that day well… ‘’my 13 year old teenage girl self wore a t-shirt on the day of the referendum that said: « what part of NO don’t you understand »

1