Liberal government destroyed the Crown

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Well sure.  It’s similar to the fact that the Loyalists held forts on the US at side the end of the War of 1812 but gave them up in treaty negotiations.  Letting the Fenians reap havoc was bad for business on both sides of the border. British North America had better ways of resolving Irish fervour.  The Yanks needed to contain sectarianism for similar reasons of unity.  

the Union only stopped the Fenians due to war fatigue

Grant did not actually oppose the Fenian cause

the Americans simply did not want to incite a war with Britain at that juncture

in the wake of Antietam Creek to Appomattox Court House

Deo Vindice

 

[Dougie93]

10 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

The Yanks needed to contain sectarianism for similar reasons of unity.  

that sectarian war could never happen in America

as we Ulster Scots dwarfed the Fenians there, by many orders of magnitude

don't forget, the American Civil War was Lowland Scot against Lowland Scot

the Confederates & the Abolitionists were all Scots Irish Protestant zealots

 

[Zeitgeist]

14 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the Union only stopped the Fenians due to war fatigue

Grant did not actually oppose the Fenian cause

the Americans simply did not want to incite a war with Britain at that juncture

in the wake of Antietam Creek to Appomattox Court House

Deo Vindice

 

Agreed.  It simply wasn’t worth the fight, because within the Fenian cause itself were trouble makers.  Sometimes political leaders take up a cause and realize they’re being played and the cause isn’t so black and white.  It wasn’t clear, for example, that supporting more rebellions against Britain was in America’s interests.  Don’t forget about the uprisings of the 1840’s and 50’s in Europe as well as the Paris Commune of the 1870’s.  The battle back and forth between the republicans and royalists in Europe didn’t always result in republics, because some of the revolutionaries caused real shit for the people.  The French Revolution was an obvious example, but as a soldier you would know that there was great pride and fervour in the British Crown in the 19th century.  The monarch was a kind of check on the excesses of the mob. I’m not saying it worked that way everywhere, but certainly for Britain and Canada.  The Russian Revolution was certainly a dumpster fire.

It’s very hard to separate British military strength from the Crown, and when you compare how Britain fared versus France in the world wars, I’ll throw my support behind Britain’s Crown every day of the week.

Edited February 10 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

 were trouble makers.

to wit, bloody Papists

American Scots Irish Protestant pilgrims of the Second Great Awakening from 1820

did not abide Romanism

[Dougie93]

5 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

 Sometimes political leaders take up a cause and realize they’re being played and the cause isn’t so black and white.

the Civil War was a holy war

thus why it was to terrible

Ulster Scots Protestant Orangeman turned against Ulster Scots Protestant Orangeman

the most fearsome Christian soldiers that ever were, pitted against one other

both sides fighting in the name of God Himself, with fiery Evangelical zeal

[Zeitgeist]

10 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

to wit, bloody Papists

American Scots Irish Protestant pilgrims of the Second Great Awakening from 1820

did not abide Romanism

It’s interesting.  I think the two sides keep each other in check in important ways.  The individualistic Protestant adventurist risks excess much like the compliant papist in the Roman Empire risks becoming fodder for the regime. Both are regimes but one has somewhat let the flock do its own thing.  Now the Catholic Church seems to be bending to secular influences in dangerous ways.  I think the Anglican Church did this a long time ago.  Anyway, keep questioning and in all things moderation, said the oracle at Delphi.  God is greater than our human understanding. All we can do is believe and try to do holy things.

Edited February 10 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

17 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

  The Russian Revolution was certainly a dumpster fire.

there were two Russian Revolutions

first the troops revolted against the Czar

not even because he was responsible for losing the war

but actually because they thought the Czarina was consorting with Grigori Rasputin

which was not actually true

Nicolas & Alexandra were utterly devoted to each other, a passionate love afair

then in the wake of this misdirected crisis

the Bolsheviks, sent from Vienna to Russia through German territory on a train by the Kaiser

took advantage of the chaos to stage the October Revolution

 

[BeaverFever]

On 2/7/2024 at 11:57 AM, I am Groot said:

Yeah? But the monarchy is just about all that's left that Liberal governments haven't eliminated.

All cultures and societies evolve including your beloved British. Even the descendants of the original British colonists have sincerely intermarried with other European and non-European people and while they may still enjoy the  part of their heritage that is descended from Britain it is not their primary identity. They identified as Canadian now. That’s just how humans worked. You talk as though you believe Adam and Eve were British and their culture remained pure and untouched  through the millennia until the Liberal Party of Canada came along. 

 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:57 AM, I am Groot said:

Nonsense. I'm all for memorializing the great points of Canada's history. Unfortunately, we don't do that. The last time I went to the National History Museum in Gatineau it had virtually nothing about Canada there other than the natives. Exhibit after exhibit after exhibit on natives but ZERO on how confederation came about. IS that weird and wild or what? Nothing on our prime ministers through the ages. Nothing on the struggle to unite the country, on building the railroad, on incorporating Newfoundland. Lots of natives, though! 

That place has been decolonized like hell. It's a perfect Liberal museum!

Again more of conservative fake news BS.  It’s been over a decade since I’ve been to that museum but you can even see online there is STILL one hall dedicated to “First Peoples” and another one to “Canadian History” which is further subdivided into halls for  “Early Canada”  “Colonial Canada” and Modern Canada, fully covering the period from before European arrival right up to the present day  On addition  the temporary exhibits are usually about post-colonial Canadiana like hockey, the war years, the Order of Canada etc.  The next travelling exhibit coming this spring is “The First Royals of Europe,” wow, so woke and “decolonized”.   

https://www.historymuseum.ca/history-hall/the-stories/#featured-stories

But hey don’t let reality interfere with your deep religious beliefs. 

 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:57 AM, I am Groot said:

Nice straw man! Except it's pretty obvious. I'm sure you can do better if you work at it.

You didn’t even use the term “straw man” correctly in that lame dodge of yours. 
 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:57 AM, I am Groot said:

In other words, the laws in place were controlled by the people we put in place. And if we didn't like those laws we could replace those people and get new ones. I like that concept! It's call de-mo-cra-cy, I think.

Now our rights are decided by unelected people based on on their own ideological views and beliefs. And we can't do a thing about them.

So you’re going on record saying you are opposed to the very principle of inalienable rights that can’t be taken away by government, which considered a key feature of modern democracy? Are you one of those new authoritarian Putinist conservatives?  I didn’t take you for being that far gone like some of the other right wing cranks on this site. What’s your feeling about Trudeau’s use of the emergency act?  If there aren’t any rights how do you keep a government from declaring itself a dictatorship?

 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:57 AM, I am Groot said:

And yet, oddly, you haven't done so.

Because there so many that work every day to protect is from being abused by people more powerful in government and in the private sector. Like literally name any right in the constitution. Before you had virtually no recourse if you found yourself suffering at the hands of some overzealous authority figure like a cop unreasonably searching seizing or detaining. But rights mean you have protection as a default setting amd many of these abuses never happen in the first place, rather than having to beg some aloof politician for help after the fact. 
 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:57 AM, I am Groot said:

Because I like rule by elected rather than appointed leaders?

We don’t have rule by appointed leaders. Judges don’t rule. 

[Dougie93]

34 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

 the compliant papist in the Roman Empire risks becoming fodder for the regime.

the Nazarene refused to comply

literally the moral of the story

[BeaverFever]

On 2/7/2024 at 11:53 AM, I am Groot said:

t was the flag the Canadian military fought under in WW2 and Korea. It was the flag flown by Canadian warships in both wars and afterward as well as at Canadian military bases in Europe after the war. 

Officially the Canadian army fought under the British Union Jack and Red Ensign use was occasional and unofficial.  At any rate so what that debate ended 60 years ago and people are over it, even conservatives.  People today like the current flag just fine. 
 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:53 AM, I am Groot said:

But they do have symbols of England, Ireland, Wales and Scotland to symbolize the union. Which was considered somewhat more important than the 'migrants' who arrived many hundreds of years earlier. There's only so much you can put on a flag, after all.

And yet you’re tearing your chest hairs out because we Canadians symbolize the colonoals who came together to form Canada instead of British migrants who came here centuries earlier. Why the double standard?

 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:53 AM, I am Groot said:

If you have to develop an identity by government forcefully removing symbols and ties of your historical origins then you're in trouble. And hey! We're in trouble! Our own prime minister (proudly) says we HAVE no core identity! And furthermore, we're not a nation! So how's that going, boy!?

How do you think others nations symbols came about?  Divine intervention? By definition official symbols are ordained by government. Governments and rulers throughout human history replaced and even outlawed previous symbols.  And nothing has been “erased” Canada still is chock full of British symbols and place names it’s ridiculous actually. Just as ridiculous the claim British history has been removed just because a very smaller number of symbols changed.  Practically every street and town in Ontario is named after a person or place in Britain and is “york” this and “royal that” and so on,, to the point it’s absurdly repetitive and unoriginal.   It’s almost reminiscent of the Middle East where everything is named some iteration of “Muhammad” or “Allah”
 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:53 AM, I am Groot said:

Yeah, but they decided this place sucked ass and they'd rather have Haiti, so they traded Quebec away. Doesn't sound like they deserve to be on the flag.

You Conservatives and your perpetual hang ups about “deserving”. That’s not how history works History is about all facts not just the ones you subjectively judge to be “deserving”. But you don’t believe in universal rights so it’s not surprising you don’t believe in universal facts. 

 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:53 AM, I am Groot said:

Royal what? We used to have royal everywhere but the Liberals removed that from everything they could, from the mail to the mint. They even stopped calling government ministries ministries and called them departments, instead. And you can bet they're itching to remove Charles from our coins and the last bill he's still on, the $20. I

Royal what are tou kidding me?  RCMP RCAF RCN just to name a few not to mention our all of our money, our coat of arms, our citizenship oath, , our parliamentary procedures, our court system that you hate much. We still have it in too many places IMO. 
 

On 2/7/2024 at 11:53 AM, I am Groot said:

a hairdresser whose only historical contribution to Canada was she was black and got fined for sitting in the wrong part of a movie theater!

A civil rights activist who refused to move out of in the “whites only” section and won a landmark court case as a result, becoming the Canadian Rosa Parks. . Pretty disgusting and racist of you to describe thatbthe way you did but you’ve already made clear you despise even the concept of rights. 

[I am Groot]

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Officially the Canadian army fought under the British Union Jack and Red Ensign use was occasional and unofficial.

Once they had their own divisions they fought under the red ensign. And Canadian warships always flew the red ensign.

 

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

And yet you’re tearing your chest hairs out because we Canadians symbolize

Why is it you flakes on the far left seem to think anytime anyone disagrees with you they must be enraged and banging their fists on walls or something? Is that because you assume they must be of the same angry mentality as you have yourself?

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

How do you think others nations symbols came about?  Divine intervention? By definition official symbols are ordained by government.

Yes, and the Liberals have, for many decades, deliberately sought to erase symbols that suggested any linkage or historical ties between Canada and Great Britain because they thought they were offensive to Quebecers. 

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Just as ridiculous the claim British history has been removed just because a very smaller number of symbols changed.  Practically every street and town in Ontario is named after a person or place in Britain and is “york” this and “royal that” 

Almost no one knows the history of street or place names. And I note that again, left-wing governments at a lower level in Canada are doing their best to rename symbols that tie us to our British or colonial past with new names - native names most people can't even pronounce.

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

You Conservatives and your perpetual hang ups about “deserving”. That’s not how history works

I'll remind you that deserving is an improper judgement when you demand equity in jobs and positions.

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Royal what are tou kidding me?  RCMP RCAF RCN just to name a few

The RCAF and RCN had their royal designation removed by the Liberals. They were only recently renamed by the Harper Conservatives. And the RCMP are about the last major organization or institution they hadn't yet been able to remove the royal designation from. But I'm seeing a lot of feelers out there about getting rid of them and replacing them with some smaller organiziation that doesn't do local policing. 

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

not to mention our all of our money,

Only the $20 still has the monarch on it.

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

our coat of arms, our citizenship oath, ,

They're changing the coat of arms, and the citizenship oath has had a lot of challenges from the Left but  it's in the constitution. And the Liberals, NDP and BQ would very much like to get rid of it if they could.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-king-charles-oath-monarch-canada/

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

A civil rights activist who refused to move out

She was in no way a civil rights activist. She was a beautician. She never campaigned for anything.

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

of in the “whites only” section and won a landmark court case as a result, becoming the Canadian Rosa Parks. . Pretty disgusting and racist of you to describe thatbthe way you did but you’ve already made clear you despise even the concept of rights. 

You really are a pathetic little twat. She was not remotely comparable to Rosa Parks. She was not an activist. She lost her court case, appealed, lost again, and refused to carry it any further, going back to doing hair and makeup. And if the racism here offended her so much she didn't seem to mind moving south to live in the US under segregation. 

Edited February 10 by I am Groot

[herbie]

9 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Yes, and the Liberals have, for many decades, deliberately sought to erase symbols that suggested any linkage or historical ties between Canada and Great Britain because they thought they were offensive to Quebecers. 

Nice try.
We're Canadians, not Brits. It's only a few old white Tory toadies that claim we must cling to tradition over using our own identity and pull shit like putting back the "Royal" into everything. Just as this thread demonstrates. Moving on equates to erasure in their tiny minds.

[I am Groot]

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

All cultures and societies evolve

Yeah. I have no issue with culture evolving naturally. It's when it's done deliberately by government that I dislike. Especially when it's a deliberate effort to erase our connection with our past in order to please Quebec. 

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Again more of conservative fake news BS.  It’s been over a decade since I’ve been to that museum but you can even see online there is STILL one hall dedicated to “First Peoples” and another one to “Canadian History” which is further subdivided into halls for  “Early Canada”  “Colonial Canada” and Modern Canada,

One hall? There's an enormous entry hall that is dedicated to natives, then a series of halls right off it. And even the "Canada" hall has lots of native inclusion.

So you’re going on record saying you are opposed to the very principle of inalienable rights that can’t be taken away by government, which considered a key feature of modern democracy?

There is no such thing. Government can't and never has guaranteed rights. And judges certainly can't. People guarantee their own rights or they have none. The Soviet constitution guaranteed free speech, as does the Russian constitution. But when the government gets to appoint judges and police and military officials a constitution guarantees nothing. Because judges get to 'interpret' it any way they want to based on their own ideological beliefs. Which is why the judges of the US supreme court were okay with slavery and segregation. Until they weren't. Change the judges and their ideological beliefs, and now the law changes.

 

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

 If there aren’t any rights how do you keep a government from declaring itself a dictatorship?

You have to rely on the people themselves. You have to rely on too many MPs in the government caucus refusing to go along with it so that they lose their majority. Or in an extreme case the governor general, presuming he or she is not a lackey of the present PM, can boot them out of power. You also need to rely on the people themselves to protest, to riot, to refuse to accept a dictatorship, and the knowledge by the government that this would happen if they dared try.

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Because there so many that work every day to protect is from being abused by people more powerful in government and in the private sector.

How are we more free today than in 1980? See, I remember being here in 1980 and I don't seem to recall being constantly harassed by police or government agents. No one I know was a political prisoner, and there were no reports of torture in prisons.

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Before you had virtually no recourse if you found yourself suffering at the hands of some overzealous authority figure like a cop unreasonably searching seizing or detaining.

And you think such things happened more often than they do now? We have cameras on cops now not because of the constitution or judges but because of the government responding to public pressure.

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

We don’t have rule by appointed leaders. Judges don’t rule. 

If they're making laws by changing laws then they are, in effect, ruling.

 

[I am Groot]

5 minutes ago, herbie said:

Nice try.
We're Canadians, not Brits. It's only a few old white Tory toadies that claim we must cling to tradition over using our own identity and pull shit like putting back the "Royal" into everything. Just as this thread demonstrates. Moving on equates to erasure in their tiny minds.

We're Canadians but our entire creation story is closely tied with Britain and many, if not most of our institutions were formed by British people or in imitation of theirs. And what identity are you talking about? You lefties start getting enraged the moment any anglophone even suggests English Canada HAS a culture or identity of its own.

[herbie]

4 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

We're Canadians but our entire creation story was closely tied with Britain

FTFY
And you're under the mistaken impression Canada's "creation" is over and done.
MCGA, eh? It used to be better....

[suds]

44 minutes ago, herbie said:

We're Canadians, not Brits.

Well that is true, but let's not pretend that all Canadians (other than those of British heritage) consider themselves to be 'Canadians' first. Because that is entirely untrue in many cases. Or do you have this belief that Canada hasn't done enough to make those from other countries (and cultures) feel welcome here? I believe most newcomers want the same things everyone else wants, but still want to hold on to their traditions.  It's not a crime you know, for them or for anyone else.

Edited February 10 by suds

[I am Groot]

33 minutes ago, herbie said:

FTFY
And you're under the mistaken impression Canada's "creation" is over and done.
MCGA, eh? It used to be better....

In this case it DID use to be better. 

How is this country better today with 40 million people than it was in 1967 with 20 million?

[suds]

13 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

In this case it DID use to be better. 

How is this country better today with 40 million people than it was in 1967 with 20 million?

Things were definitely better back then. Lots of good paying jobs. One income family's were the norm. Little government debt. And really, that's about as good as it gets.

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, suds said:

Things were definitely better back then. Lots of good paying jobs. One income family's were the norm. Little government debt. And really, that's about as good as it gets.

Well, don't forget this would also have been about the time the 1% were suffering in a deep pit of depression - paying fair wages must have been an awful burden.  The poor things seem much happier these days don't they?

[herbie]

You live in the best country on Earth. Sounds like many of you were so spoiled by that you don't know it.

It used to be better, my ass.

[blackbird]

7 minutes ago, herbie said:

You live in the best country on Earth. Sounds like many of you were so spoiled by that you don't know it.

It used to be better, my ass.

There was a time when a ordinary working person could afford a home.  No longer.

I bought a house in Vancouver in 1971 for about $21,000.

Edited February 11 by blackbird

[herbie]

And I could buy a glass of beer then for 20c then too. What's that got to do with it?

BTW average homes in Burnaby were about $32,000 when I graduated in 1970. In 1983 they were $65,000+ out in Langley, and 40 years later they're $350+ as far away as Prince George. No you're not gonna afford a home in Vancouver or Toronto or even Calgary unless you bought it long ago, Try Spuzzum

[eyeball]

16 minutes ago, blackbird said:

I bought a house in Vancouver in 1971 for about $20,000

Probably worth a million and a half nowadays. Wah.

[cougar]

On 5/7/2023 at 3:11 PM, blackbird said:

This is the Trudeau Crown which is replacing the actual Royal Crown.  This is not a joke.  This is for real.  

This is trading crosses and fleur-de-lis for maple leaves and a snowflake.

I see, more snowflakes and maple leaves.

What about that lion?   Shouldn't it be replaced by a cougar, or at least a bear, moose, beaver, whatever...something more Canadian?

And how about our f-ing multiculturlizm?  Shouldn't our emblem incorporate elements from all cultures ??  A few Chinese letters, some Punjabi text,  a camel etc?

How about the First Nations?  Shouldn't we see indigenous art on the crown?

But does it need to be a crown at all?

Let's replace with a canoe, or an Eskimo tent of a homeless Canadian!

[I am Groot]

11 hours ago, herbie said:

You live in the best country on Earth. Sounds like many of you were so spoiled by that you don't know it.

It used to be better, my ass.

Are you suggesting a country can't ever decline? Perhaps due to bad leadership? 

Why does it offend you to say that life might have been better back when our population was half what it is is now? In what way has doubling our population made life better now?