babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
Trudeau did not need to be directed by the Governor General to invoke the War Measures Act.
It's not at all difficult to imagine troups being sent into Canada--if you imagine it will be British troups at the request of the Queen that will cross the border, you are delusional.
There is a story that, as the Russian Revolution broke out into violence, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church was engaged in a heated debate about the use of seasonally coloured vestments.
We face serious economic challenges, riing economic inequality and the undermining of constitutional liberties, yet so many on the left prefer we tinker with constitutional trifles that have zero practical efect on the way our system actually functions.
Wow. You learn something every day.
I had no idea Her Majesty was skulking behind the scenes in the kitchen, pretending to mash potatoes while she was really playing puppetmaster and bending everyone to comply with her evil wishes.
From Wikipedia:
That night — November 4, 1981 — the Minister of Justice, Jean Chrétien, met with Attorney General of Saskatchewan Roy Romanow and Attorney General of Ontario Roy McMurtry in the kitchen of Ottawa's Château Laurier hotel. The premiers agreed to get rid of the "opt out" clause, while Chrétien reluctantly offered to include the Notwithstanding Clause in the constitution. Hatfield and Davis agreed to the compromise and told Trudeau that he should take the deal. Trudeau accepted what would be called the Kitchen Accord. The men at the table that night became known as the Kitchen Cabinet.
(the hyperlink takes you back to a larger article with more of the details on the notwithstanding clause)
And the whole time she had them fooled into thinking they were actually taking power away from her and moving toward sovreignty. The scope of her fiendish mind knows no bounds, I tell you!
And on the eve of Guy Fawkes Day too.... how serendipitous!
Tuppence for the Guy! A farthing? Ayup
http://letsallselfdestruct.blogspot.com/2010/12/monty-python-agorist-sce...
Monty Python always had a knack for making fun of rulers, whether the monarchy, government, or religion. Good stuff!
What Canadians voted for in 1988 and 1993 elections and what they got were totally different outcomes, too. The cult of impotence in Ottawa is a myth. Phony majority governments really are able to get things done when they want to.
I suppose we should all move to Jamaica once that country rids itself of the hated monarchy and thereby creates a paradise of freedom and democracy. After all, they won't have the nasty Queen to take away their rights and freedoms any more.
Just a reminder. Such an signed aquiescence to foreign military intervention for "law enforcement" (key provisions still secret) was eagerly embraced by the Harper junta in 2008:
http://impolitical.blogspot.com/2008/05/canada-us-civil-assistance-plan-...
Phew, at least the dread Queen in her chartreuse high-heel jackboots, won't be among them.
Chartreuse high-heeled jackboots?
Is she a Roxy Music fan too?
6 Quebec MPs Return Queen's Jubilee Medals in Protest
http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120206/Quebec-MPs-return-Queens-j...
"...NDP Pierre Nantel who represents Quebec's Longueuil-Pierre-Boucher riding confirmed to CTV News he's returning his medal.."
bravo for that - now if he and the others stop voting yes to imperialist wars like Libya, that would be even better..
love this, i hope a lot more mps do it. giving medals to mps in the name of the queen of the uk is just mind-bending. these monarchist types are living on another planet.
II hate the bloody queen!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThrkJKxRNXo
A couple more years and she will have reigned as long as Vicky.
Often in the United States it seems that the President is generally only criticized in a humourous context (IE, talk-show hosts etc), because to seriously criticize the President often is seen as disrespectful and unpatriotic. Here, on the other hand, we have the relatively powerless Monarchy to take the role of head of state. So, the danger is removing a Head of State like the Queen and her representatives here in Canada (who are all relatively powerless figureheads) is that the same aura of untouchable patriotism could shift to the Prime Minister, who does have power and should be open to be questioned without it seeming as if it is unpatriotic to do so. Thus, the Monarchy plays an important role in ensuring a climate of better accountability of our executive by ensuring our executive does not become seen as entities of patriotism that are beyond serious reproach.
If having a symbolic head of state is important to avoid the problem of being questioned as disrespectful and unpatriotic in criticizing the government, the solution is simple: elect a president to fill this symbolic role and leave the politics to the prime minister. Since the British monarchy is based on an undemocratic aristocratic model and its empire ruled 1/4 of the world's population (including our aboriginal population and the ancestors of many of Canada's citizens) by force of arms, I see no reason to support it and every reason to terminate its rule.
Things aren't all rosy though, in the German Symbolic Presidential Utopia. As I understand it, the financial cost is about the same either way. I'd prefer to focus on other things and then see where things stand after Elizabeth's passing.
No system is perfect or ever will be. However, a democratic alternative to a undemocratic system founded on imperialism is far better in my opinion. In addition, many Canadians from many ethnic backgrounds (many from First Nations, French-Canadians, Irish, Scottish and Blacks to name just a few) have little use for what this form of imperialism did to their ancestors. Many also say little on this issue, including myself generally, because they are focused on more immediate political concerns, but nevertheless would like this system to end.
@ jerrym
Not to get into the argument again, but there is no need for a figurehead to be elected, and in my opinion, it would ibe a pointless introduction of politics into a place where it would be not just counterproductive, but possibly damaging. The only thing worse than the speculation around the proroguing event as it happened would be the same scenario with the GG as a partisan tool.
And if we want to get into the argument of imperialist culture and multiculturalism, I would ask you to consider the legacy of some of the people who have served recently as GG in Canada.
W-Smith wrote
Not to get into the argument again, but there is no need for a figurehead to be elected, and in my opinion, it would ibe a pointless introduction of politics into a place where it would be not just counterproductive, but possibly damaging. The only thing worse than the speculation around the proroguing event as it happened would be the same scenario with the GG as a partisan tool.
The Governor General was the unelected representative of the monarchy during this crisis. The current GG was Harper's own choice and under the current arrangement any GG would always be subject to being picked on the basis of being used as a partisan tool. I'd rather take my chances with a respected individual being elected to be the symbolic head of state than have the potential for abuse a prime ministerial appointment brings. Note that I said if you feel you need a symbolic head of state, I would prefer an elected president. I could easily live without any such position. Every province has done away with the provincial equivalent -the lieutenant governor - and faced no significant problems because of this. Furthermore, in the 1950s, the appointed Lieutenant Governor of BC (a representative of the monarchy), helped install a Social Credit government in order to avoid a NDP minority government (read David Mitchell's biography of W. C. Bennett). Furthermore, these monarch's representatives were the supporters of the Family Compact ruling clique in early Ontario and its equivalent in Quebec. Lets end this institution. it does not represent Canadians.
jerrym
All provinces still have lieutenants governor.
And in fact Lord Elgin - goverrnor general in the 1840s. was instrumental in ending the power of the family compact. legislating equal treatment for francophone residents of Lower Canada, and making this country the first democratic colony in the world. It was also a government which, for a time, recognized the rights of some women to vote.
He stood with the elected representatives in the face of mob violence, the burning of parliament, and the stoning of his own carriage while he was riding in it by people who supported the power of the compact.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bruce,_8th_Earl_of_Elgin
He could have easily refused and kept things the way they were; electoral and social reform would not have happened without his active support. At that time - unlike today - governors general had that power.
I have pointed out a few times why electing a figurehead is pointless; I don't need to do it again.
I am glad everyone is so happy with things they way they are these days. Still, when you have the biggest government in Canadian history, that has got to be ideologically excellent! It's so nice to get what you want, eh?
Oh and I really enjoyed being called 'delusional'. Do you have a psychiatric institution you want to put me in because I have incorrect political beliefs? Just like in Nazi Germany or Communist Russia?
God Save the Queen!
:D
This guy tried to send the monarchy to the dark side of the moon.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/offbeat/story/2012/02/14/man-moons-queen.html
Saw recently on CBC - maybe during the recent summit in Ottawa - that Canadian First Nations are going to to the UK to take their concerns about their treaty rights not being observed by the federal government here to the Queen. I seem to recall this tactic was used before, but the exact case escapes me.
UK Prince Labeled Jamaica Slave Master
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/230652.html
"Jamaica's anti-British monarchy demonstrators have called UK's Prince Harry a 'slave master' while protesting against the visit of the Prince to the Caribbean nation..Demonstraters held placards reading 'Down With Harry the Slave Master,' Reparations for 400 Years of Slavery' and 'Your Granny Says Slavery Was Not A Crime, What Do You Think Harry?'..."
Just turned on the TV and there's a yokel singing "God save the Queen" in Regina to Charles and Camilla. Question: is there an athiest version of that anthem?
Yokel?
What, did he forget to scrape the manure off his rubber boots?
And as for the atheist version, I think Samuel Smith took care of that in the American adaptation - at least until you get to the last verse.
And besides, there's also Rule Britannia, though that might not be quite the angle they are going for.
I couldn't tell, the cameras only showed him from the waist up.
I believe the Sex Pistols have the definitive version.
Gotta dig that one up!