Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it was somewhere between a formality and truly asking permission. But I too am interested if it would have stood up had George VI not formally assented.
Oh sure, it would have stood up. Canada had already made the declaration of war but was asking the monarch to approve it in his name. It's like asking for blessings, it was not asking the monarch for permission for Canada to go to war. Read the wording of the letter carefully. It was a formality to ask for his blessings because Canada is a monarchy and formalities are important with monarchies, it's what monarchies do. If the monarch had not given his blessings and not approved it in his name then Canada would have still followed through on its declaration and would have gone to war anyway. Canada just would not have been doing it in the name of and with the blessings of the monarch. That's all, as I understand the formality.
Oh sure, it would have stood up. Canada had already made the declaration of war but was asking the monarch to approve it in his name. It's like asking for blessings, it was not asking the monarch for permission for Canada to go to war. Read the wording of the letter carefully. It was a formality to ask for his blessings because Canada is a monarchy and formalities are important with monarchies, it's what monarchies do. If the monarch had not given his blessings and not approved it in his name then Canada would have still followed through on its declaration and would have gone to war anyway. Canada just would not have been doing it in the name of and with the blessings of the monarch. That's all, as I understand the formality.
.
I don’t believe you’re quite right here. Look at this example in 1937/38, which was after the Statue of Westminster of 1931 but before repatriation in 1982. After 1982 I’d agree with your train of thought but back then assent was a requirement not a “good to have”.
“The Aberhart government launched a legal challenge over the Lieutenant Governor’s power to reserve Royal Assent. On March 4, 1938, the Supreme Court of Canada supported Lieutenant Governor Bowen’s actions and ruled that the powers of reservation and disallowance of vice-regal offices were “subject to no limitation or restriction.” “
Again, we are debating a hypothetical as it would have been incredibly unlikely for the Crown and Canadian governments to be in disagreement here. Also, Canada’s GGs were solely named by the sovereign until 1931, and were all British until 1952.
But I think this Supreme Court case could have been a precedent. So if Lord Tweedsmuir had said “no, you may not declare war”, that would have been it.
As to the flowery language, strip it away and it says “we need you to agree to this”. Not just “we’d love your best wishes”.
It sounds like you are drinking the Kool-Aid served up by the Human Rights Commissions of the kind that electronically lynched Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn. To my mind groups and people that are successful and happy don't seek victim status, and endlessly whine about slights. The Jews have suffered slavery, and then deadly persecution. Are we hiding behind the nanny state? When a synagogue or graveyard is desecrated with swastikas, we are at the police department, not some HRC.
Yuo mentioned immigration. I'm so glad you did. The U.S. has over the last two centuries attracted far more immigrants that stayed than Canada, though I must share a personal story which makes me grateful towards Canada. In 1895 or 1896 Jacob Osavsky (sp) was a successful shoemaker (i.e. shoe repair man) in the Czar's army in modern Ukraine, now Russia. The Russians liked his work so much that his conscription was "renewed" for another five years. He and Lena Osavsky hit the ground, I mean deck, running, and boarded a ship. I always assumed it was to the U.S. until my 91 year uncle discovered a photo in a photo album that my late mother kept a photo developer's stamp--from Montreal. In other words, Canada gave him refuge and taught him English. Shortly thereafter, Jacob and Lena moved to Yonkers, New York (just north of NYC, at the end of the trolley from NYC, because the "country air" was better for his asthma. Jacob and Lena were two of my great-grandparents; if not for Canada I would not be here. But I digress.
The U.S. has been a great magnet for immigration from the sewers of the Old World. We are really not such a bad country.
As for memorizing the names of Presidents and Prime Ministers, it was nothing that was drilled into me at school. Despite what you consider to be my stupidity, I am a major history buff. The people in charge are some part of the historical process. As far as the U.S. "being "not appealing" I caution you that a large percentage of the world would give their eyeteeth to come here. I can tell you that my first Hebrew school teacher, one my childrens' former doctors, and several prestigious lawyers with whom I practice are Canadian ex-patriot, as well as per-eminent rabbinical leader Lawrence Hoffman and the late, great economist John Kenneth Galbraith. That being said, Canada does not have a large brain drain to the U.S.
The U.S. and Canada, as I have posted previously owe their greatness in substantial part due to their peace with each other. Please skip the vitriol.
Canada provided refuge to many around the time of war. It's complicated:
I sent my son to the USA for a week and he came back saying he never wanted to return because it is so materialistic compared to other countries. It wasn't his first trip out of the country, but it was the first where he said not again.
I do not consider stupidity. My thing is Napoleonic history.
As for people giving teeth to live in the violent, aggressive, mob-style, social-disrupt environment of the USA, I would caution regarding stupidity and direct towards respecting others, other nations and Commonwealth Nations. Canada is a Commonwealth country, not a USA province.
Religion seems to transcend borders.
The USA has held a position of power by virtue of having Canada stand side by side with the USA, but somewhere along the way the USA got it wrong and has insulted Canada for the last 4 years. Can the USA do better to retain a relevant position in world politics, or is the USA a stand alone goof? The global community is fed up with me-me-me too dishonesty.
Does anyone remember the Iroquois scalpers on the B-side of the Kelloggs' cereal box? Was it the Frosted Flakes box - Iroquois scalping the white-skins pop-out stand-up figures? That was 1960s Canada, but the product came from Kelloggs USA.
Were the Iroquois scalper stories on the back of the cereal boxes only distributed in Canada, or did that image of Canada land on the breakfast tables of people across the USA as well? Were the scalping Iroquois in the USA too?
Is that why USA people more than half a century later are wondering about foreign countries? Feed the hungry stories tell us about Africa. Is that how people in the USA view Canada - a cereal box story?
I don’t believe you’re quite right here. Look at this example in 1937/38, which was after the Statue of Westminster of 1931 but before repatriation in 1982. After 1982 I’d agree with your train of thought but back then assent was a requirement not a “good to have”.
“The Aberhart government launched a legal challenge over the Lieutenant Governor’s power to reserve Royal Assent. On March 4, 1938, the Supreme Court of Canada supported Lieutenant Governor Bowen’s actions and ruled that the powers of reservation and disallowance of vice-regal offices were “subject to no limitation or restriction.” “
Again, we are debating a hypothetical as it would have been incredibly unlikely for the Crown and Canadian governments to be in disagreement here. Also, Canada’s GGs were solely named by the sovereign until 1931, and were all British until 1952.
But I think this Supreme Court case could have been a precedent. So if Lord Tweedsmuir had said “no, you may not declare war”, that would have been it.
As to the flowery language, strip it away and it says “we need you to agree to this”. Not just “we’d love your best wishes”.
That is about the Lieutenant Governor of one province. I'm wondering if perhaps you are confusing a province's Lieutenant Governor with the nation's Governor General, and confusing a single province and its provincial government with the whole nation, the crown, the federal government and Parliament.
Canada gained authority to declare war in 1931 and Canada's government has only ever made declarations of war during WW 2, those 6 declarations being made against 6 individual countries. I think you should read the following, which is an explanation of the purpose of that letter for royal assent that you posted above. The same copy of that letter is also shown, plus there is explanation about the procedure each time Canada made a declaration of war against another nation:
Does anyone remember the Iroquois scalpers on the B-side of the Kelloggs' cereal box? Was it the Frosted Flakes box - Iroquois scalping the white-skins pop-out stand-up figures? That was 1960s Canada, but the product came from Kelloggs USA.
Were the Iroquois scalper stories on the back of the cereal boxes only distributed in Canada, or did that image of Canada land on the breakfast tables of people across the USA as well? Were the scalping Iroquois in the USA too?
Is that why USA people more than half a century later are wondering about foreign countries? Feed the hungry stories tell us about Africa. Is that how people in the USA view Canada - a cereal box story?
I don't recall that Kelloggs one of scalpers, but Post Honeycombs cereal that was produced in Canada had their own version - it was called the Cowboys and Indians Game and featured 8 piece sets of free plastic toys inside the box, of Cowboys and Indians all displayed pointing guns or knives or bows and arrows. Post and Kelloggs weren't the only companies that were selling stuff like that. See pictures:
I sent my son to the USA for a week and he came back saying he never wanted to return because it is so materialistic compared to other countries. It wasn't his first trip out of the country, but it was the first where he said not again.
I do not consider stupidity. My thing is Napoleonic history.
As for people giving teeth to live in the violent, aggressive, mob-style, social-disrupt environment of the USA, I would caution regarding stupidity and direct towards respecting others, other nations and Commonwealth Nations. Canada is a Commonwealth country, not a USA province.
Religion seems to transcend borders.
The USA has held a position of power by virtue of having Canada stand side by side with the USA, but somewhere along the way the USA got it wrong and has insulted Canada for the last 4 years. Can the USA do better to retain a relevant position in world politics, or is the USA a stand alone goof? The global community is fed up with me-me-me too dishonesty.
You pay a lot of attention to and have a lot of views on the U.S. for someone who insinuates that our neighbouring country has barely more effect on you than the Congo or Bhutan!
The USA has held a position of power by virtue of having Canada stand side by side with the USA, but somewhere along the way the USA got it wrong and has insulted Canada for the last 4 years. Can the USA do better to retain a relevant position in world politics, or is the USA a stand alone goof? The global community is fed up with me-me-me too dishonesty.
The U.S. has benefited from having Canada as an ally and neighbour, but not sure its uncontested superpower status was "by virtue" of us in a significant way.
You pay a lot of attention to and have a lot of views on the U.S. for someone who insinuates that our neighbouring country has barely more effect on you than the Congo or Bhutan!
I haven't seen anyone from countries other than the one to the South asking Canadians so many questions about how we feel about them, but I would have just as much to say if that ever happened.
I don't recall that Kelloggs one of scalpers, but Post Honeycombs cereal that was produced in Canada had their own version - it was called the Cowboys and Indians Game and featured 8 piece sets of free plastic toys inside the box, of Cowboys and Indians all displayed pointing guns or knives or bows and arrows. Post and Kelloggs weren't the only companies that were selling stuff like that. See pictures:
I remember those little plastic toys as well! I wonder how much influence cereal box information had on perceptions that children formed about other peoples and countries.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
