Queen Elizabeth II Has Died

[Locke]

Originally Posted by getbak

It makes sense that he'd choose to stick with Charles. It would be weird to be almost 74 years old and have people start calling you by a different name.

Yeah. Thats what would be weird. Not the whole 'By the way, you're the King now' thing.

[Shazam]

Apparently the previous two Charles had some notoriety, so he's just continuing the tradition.

[CaptainCrunch]

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/wa...g-world-war-ii

As the war progressed, Princess Elizabeth championed more aspects of wartime life and resilience. In 1943, she was photographed tending her allotments at Windsor Castle as part of the government’s “Dig for Victory” campaign, in which people were urged to use gardens and every spare piece of land to grow vegetables to help combat food shortages. Before the Second World War, Britain had relied on food imports from across the world, but when the war started, shipping was threatened by enemy submarines and warships. This resulted in food shortages and led to rationing of foods such as meat, butter cheese, eggs, and sugar.
On the morning of her sixteenth birthday, Princess Elizabeth undertook her first inspection of a military regiment during a parade at Windsor Castle. She had been given the role of honorary colonel of the Grenadier Guards, which symbolized her military involvement in the war effort. When Princess Elizabeth turned 18 in 1944, she insisted upon joining the Auxiliary Territorial Service (ATS), the women’s branch of the British Army. For several years during the war, Britain had conscripted women to join the war effort. Unmarried women under 30 had to join the armed forces or work on the land or in industry. King George made sure that his daughter was not given a special rank in the Army. She started as a second subaltern in the ATS and was later promoted to Junior Commander, the equivalent of Captain.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by _Q_

How does a monarch, who is constitutionally prevented from passing any laws in Canada, have a positive affect on this country?

Probably the same way someone like Celine Dion has a positive impact on the country despite having no political authority.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by getbak

It makes sense that he'd choose to stick with Charles. It would be weird to be almost 74 years old and have people start calling you by a different name.

I suspect anyone who's on a first name basis would continue to call him Charles.
For everyone else it's "Your Majesty", so probably not a lot really changes for him.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It's unifying for people who can culturally and historically relate to monarchy and power it symbolizes. For minorities, indigenous people, and people who were absorbed into it through conquest, it's just a historical reminder of injustice.

It’s not that cut and dried. Canada’s Indigenous people have a closer relationship with the monarchy than average Canadians do, and many still consider their treaties to be a compact between themselves and the Crown. That relationship is a significant barrier to republicanism in Canada.

[getbak]

Not surprisingly, Charles is the oldest King at the time of accession by almost a full decade. Of course, given his parents' longevity, he could still be King for a couple decades or more.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

I suspect anyone who's on a first name basis would continue to call him Charles.
For everyone else it's "Your Majesty", so probably not a lot really changes for him.

No 'King Chuck?'

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by _Q_

How does a monarch, who is constitutionally prevented from passing any laws in Canada, have a positive affect on this country?

I think it was said best in a previous post that constitutional monarchies tend to be the most stable governments in the world. In a time of many trying to lessen respect for and rip down institutions (especially down south), symbolically it might serve Canada well through this time period to maintain this tie to the past.

[Acey]

It's unfortunate that Diana is not alive.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Locke

No 'King Chuck?'

No, but the next round of twoonies are going to be called a "Two Buck Chuck"

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I think it was said best in a previous post that constitutional monarchies tend to be the most stable governments in the world. In a time of many trying to lessen respect for and rip down institutions (especially down south), symbolically it might serve Canada well through this time period to maintain this tie to the past.

How though? I don't understand.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by Acey

It's unfortunate that Diana is not alive.

Camilla says neigh.

[shermanator]

She was queen for 45% of Canada's history.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Acey

It's unfortunate that Diana is not alive.

I suppose it is but why today more than any other...she wouldn't have much to do with this at all

[Hack&Lube]

Charles the I presided over the abolishment of the monarchy and was beheaded.

Hopefully Charles the III avoids the same fate. One of the main reasons people thought he would change his name but he's probably too used to it by now.

[midniteowl]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

You folks think Charles is going to take the throne? Pounds to Biscuits he passes it straight through to Willy.

I really hope so, can't stand that witch of his to be called queen.

[Swift]

Nm

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

Charles the I presided over the abolishment of the monarchy and was beheaded.

Hopefully Charles the III avoids the same fate. One of the main reasons people thought he would change his name but he's probably too used to it by now.

Charles II was the reinstatement of the monarchy.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by _Q_

How though? I don't understand.

This is from Cliff's posted article and quite frankly might be the most important consideration:

An apolitical head of state with no electoral mandate can act as a broadly unifying figure and a voice for shared principles while being counted on to stay out of the political fray. While deferring to the democratically elected legislature — maintaining clear lines of political accountability and avoiding gridlock — they can still act as a neutral safeguard for democracy, ensuring the continuance and orderly transition of government.

Think about transition of government and maintenance of institutions and decorum in light of what has happened over the last many years in the US. January 6th, a significant amount of MAGA supporters questioning the legitimacy of the 2020 election, many Hilary supporters questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election. Biden calling out MAGA last week as enemies of democracy. It might be good to have an institution above the political parties who has a formal process in place to turn over and transition governments.

There's also some element of comfort knowing there's many other jurisdictions around the world who have a similar governing structure to look to at times of constitutional and institutional questions.