Page 3 of 3

Re: A History of the Future

Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 6:12 am
by con quesa
A comment on the Kingdom of Canada thing, I can't see how there could possibly be any change in the status of the monarchy in Canada that isn't abolishing it. My understanding is that the commonwealth states only keep the institution of the monarch around because the monarchy isn't actually very important on a day-to-day basis, and because people like tradition. If the monarch is active enough that some people would like to see it changed, why wouldn't the republicanist impulse that already exists in Canada become widespread enough to do away with the monarchy entirely?

Re: A History of the Future

Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:02 am
by Chuma
No need for a library - have a look here.

Re: A History of the Future

Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2011 9:47 am
by Twpsyn Pentref
Is the name of your blog misspelled intentionally? It bugs me.

Re: A History of the Future

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:24 pm
by Salmoneus
con quesa wrote:A comment on the Kingdom of Canada thing, I can't see how there could possibly be any change in the status of the monarchy in Canada that isn't abolishing it. My understanding is that the commonwealth states only keep the institution of the monarch around because the monarchy isn't actually very important on a day-to-day basis, and because people like tradition. If the monarch is active enough that some people would like to see it changed, why wouldn't the republicanist impulse that already exists in Canada become widespread enough to do away with the monarchy entirely?
Well, I'm not a Canadian - but in the UK, the fact that we don't want the monarchy playing a major role doesn't mean that we don't care about who the monarch is. Rumour has it, for instance, that Charles may have to refuse the crown - certainly there'll be very great unrest if his wife is allowed to be called 'queen consort' (just as she's currently not allowed to be 'princess of wales'). If his mother had died shortly after Diana, I think he would have had to refuse the crown or have the monarchy overthrown - not due to dislike of the monarchy but due to dislike of HIM. I think it's plausible for a country to refuse to have a monarch it considers 'anti' that country, while still wanting a monarchy.

Re: A History of the Future

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:28 pm
by Salmoneus
Twpsyn Pentref wrote:Is the name of your blog misspelled intentionally? It bugs me.
Yes, it is. I thought I said so somewhere on it, but it seems not. Anyway, it's a common mistake I make, and I included as an intentional metavain self-mockery. I might change it some day, I suppose.