Political Pipedreams?

[Liriena]

Catalonian and Galician independence, full unification of the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland, the end of human rights abuses in the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation, the end of Justicialism and Radicalism in Argentina, the end of theocratic regimes in Iran and the Arab peninsula, the socioeconomic development of the African continent, and the end of near-slave labor in Asia.

It's strange that you have concerns regarding human rights and generally seem to want to improve peoples lives but at the same time want to completely ignore the wishes of other groups

Human rights are not a popularity contest.

[Old Tyrannia]

It's too edgy for me too. It's a good thing a person's nationality is defined by what their fucking nationality is and not 'DO YOU SUPPORT THE QUEEN? Y/N?" What a fucking police state that would be. I like my freedoms.

Indeed. I don't care for the monarchy, and I'd rather not change my views so I can move in.

I'd have to disagree. The state should by no means be obliged to allow people who are openly disloyal and hostile to that state to live within its borders. This seems pretty much basic logic. In Canada, the State and the Crown are one entity; disloyalty to the Crown is tantamount to disloyalty to the State, and the State has every right to expect the loyalty of those wishing to become citizens of that state.

[Luveria]

False. My parents both have Canadian citizenships and they were not born in Canada. I have a Polish citizenship but I was not born in Poland. You're mistaken about how citizenships work.

My view on Candadian citizenship.

And yes, I did make that previous post just so I could post this.

Lighten up!

If you say so, but I'm really too lazy to watch it.

No, the US bought it from the Russian Empire, and Canada could have bought it but we didn't when we should have.

Wow, this is peculiar.
How did Russia get their hands on the Americas? Did the Canucks just not really care in those days?

See above. Us Canadians are too busy guzzling alcohol to care about much else.

http://ca.shine.yahoo.com/blogs/shine-on/canadians-consume-50-more-alcohol-rest-world-claims-185457109.html

[The Flood]

We are well-aware Canada's got universal healthcare. Talk about ad nauseam.

Do you have something to say to me?

In name only.

Legally isn't in name only.

Laws are what define what a person's nationality is.

You're not getting what I'm saying here. I'm not saying a person who is anti-monarchy is literally not Canadian; they aren't Canadian in spirit. They don't act like a Canadian, they don't support their country's culture and identity. Get it?

[Divair]

Indeed. I don't care for the monarchy, and I'd rather not change my views so I can move in.

I'd have to disagree. The state should by no means be obliged to allow people who are openly disloyal and hostile to that state to live within its borders. This seems pretty much basic logic. In Canada, the State and the Crown are one entity; disloyalty to the Crown is tantamount to disloyalty to the State, and the State has every right to expect the loyalty of those wishing to become citizens of that state.

*pat head*
That's nice.

[Luveria]

Do you have something to say to me?



Legally isn't in name only.

Laws are what define what a person's nationality is.

You're not getting what I'm saying here. I'm not saying a person who is anti-monarchy is literally not Canadian; they aren't Canadian in spirit. They don't act like a Canadian, they don't support their country's culture and identity. Get it?

You're very much wrong, because the opinion to be against the Crown, is actually legally allowed here. In fact, if the majority of Canada were opposed to the Crown, they could have a Republicanist movement like South Africa did. But no, Canadians generally don't give a fuck, because for the most part, the Queen leaves us be, so we have no practical reason to be actively opposed to her. It's not that Canadians are pro-monarchy, it's that most Canadians simply don't give a fuck because it doesn't matter enough to them, due to it not being a problem.

Legally, a Canadian is defined as anyone with a Canadian citizenship. That is how things are in multi-culturalist Canada. I suggest you accept the official Canadian view on what a Canadian is.

[The Flood]

They bought it from Russia.

The Russians should have kept Alaska.

That sure would have been bad news during the Cold War O_o

[Souriya Al-Assad]

No, the US bought it from the Russian Empire, and Canada could have bought it but we didn't when we should have.

Wow, this is peculiar.
How did Russia get their hands on the Americas? Did the Canucks just not really care in those days?

Russian explorers found Alaska first, ruled it for some time, thence sold it off because at the time nothing interested the explorers that went there.

Seriously, they should have kept it.

The Russians should have kept Alaska.

That sure would have been bad news during the Cold War O_o

At least in this current era I would have been able to cross the Atlantic on a dinghy, hopefully land somewhere in Mother Russian Alaska, thence say, "Comrades I am seeking asylum. Please take me in" without difficulties.

[Northwest Slobovia]

No, the US bought it from the Russian Empire, and Canada could have bought it but we didn't when we should have.

Wow, this is peculiar.
How did Russia get their hands on the Americas? Did the Canucks just not really care in those days?

The usual way: an explorer -- some guy named Bering; I hear he was in dire straits -- a flag, and a claim.

[The Flood]

No, the US bought it from the Russian Empire, and Canada could have bought it but we didn't when we should have.

Wow, this is peculiar.
How did Russia get their hands on the Americas? Did the Canucks just not really care in those days?

Well, the Russian border is very close to the edge of Alaska, they almost touch. And the British had no presence in Alaska at the time.

[Kington Langley]

United States as a multi-party parliamentary republic.

[Northwest Slobovia]

Wow, this is peculiar.
How did Russia get their hands on the Americas? Did the Canucks just not really care in those days?

Russian explorers found Alaska first, ruled it for some time, thence sold it off because at the time nothing interested the explorers that went there.

Eh? The area was happily exploited by Russian fur trappers initially. But... the Russians were broke, and they figured the Brits would eventually grab it from them, so they sold it to the US.

[Luveria]

The Russians should have kept Alaska.

That sure would have been bad news during the Cold War O_o

No, it would not have been.

Trudeau had tried to warm relations with the USSR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2%80%93Soviet_Union_relations

After Pierre Trudeau came to power in Canada, Canadian policy changed dramatically. Trudeau was a left-wing leader who was more sympathetic to communist nations than other heads of government. Trudeau wanted to lessen Canada's reliance on the United States by forging closer ties with other countries and breaking out the of the Cold War straitjacket. During a trip to the Soviet Union in 1971 he identified the United States as a bigger threat to Canada than the remote Soviet Union. The Americans, he said, are "a danger to our national identity from a cultural, economic and perhaps even military point of view."

[Souriya Al-Assad]

Russian explorers found Alaska first, ruled it for some time, thence sold it off because at the time nothing interested the explorers that went there.

Eh? The area was happily exploited by Russian fur trappers initially. But... the Russians were broke, and they figured the Brits would eventually grab it from them, so they sold it to the US.

Well, this is also true.

[The Flood]

You're not getting what I'm saying here. I'm not saying a person who is anti-monarchy is literally not Canadian; they aren't Canadian in spirit. They don't act like a Canadian, they don't support their country's culture and identity. Get it?

You're very much wrong, because the opinion to be against the Crown, is actually legally allowed here. In fact, if the majority of Canada were opposed to the Crown, they could have a Republicanist movement like South Africa did. But no, Canadians generally don't give a fuck, because for the most part, the Queen leaves us be, so we have no practical reason to be actively opposed to her. It's not that Canadians are pro-monarchy, it's that most Canadians simply don't give a fuck because it doesn't matter enough to them, due to it not being a problem.

Legally, a Canadian is defined as anyone with a Canadian citizenship. That is how things are in multi-culturalist Canada. I suggest you accept the official Canadian view on what a Canadian is.

God.
Save.
the Queen.

[Souriya Al-Assad]

That sure would have been bad news during the Cold War O_o

No, it would not have been.

Trudeau had tried to warm relations with the USSR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2%80%93Soviet_Union_relations

After Pierre Trudeau came to power in Canada, Canadian policy changed dramatically. Trudeau was a left-wing leader who was more sympathetic to communist nations than other heads of government. Trudeau wanted to lessen Canada's reliance on the United States by forging closer ties with other countries and breaking out the of the Cold War straitjacket. During a trip to the Soviet Union in 1971 he identified the United States as a bigger threat to Canada than the remote Soviet Union. The Americans, he said, are "a danger to our national identity from a cultural, economic and perhaps even military point of view."

Trudeau was quite interesting in that regard.

[Inruptus]

The death of the Tea Party before 2017.

[Luveria]

You're very much wrong, because the opinion to be against the Crown, is actually legally allowed here. In fact, if the majority of Canada were opposed to the Crown, they could have a Republicanist movement like South Africa did. But no, Canadians generally don't give a fuck, because for the most part, the Queen leaves us be, so we have no practical reason to be actively opposed to her. It's not that Canadians are pro-monarchy, it's that most Canadians simply don't give a fuck because it doesn't matter enough to them, due to it not being a problem.

Legally, a Canadian is defined as anyone with a Canadian citizenship. That is how things are in multi-culturalist Canada. I suggest you accept the official Canadian view on what a Canadian is.

God.
Save.
the Queen.

If they want to. There's no legal requirement for it. There's an expectation and not a requirement. As I've explained, the reasons the vast majority of Canadians aren't opposed to the Queen, is because for the most part, she leaves us be. That means there is no possible reason to be anti-monarchist, and as I said, if someone really wants to be a secessionist, there is a legal system in place for that, but the majority are not in favour of it. Do understand that officially, and culturally, a "true Canadian" is anyone who holds a Canadian citizenship. It's an inherently multiculturalist country, having been divided nearly from the start by Francophone Quebec. The only defining factor for being a Canadian is legally being a Canadian. Nothing else.

[Divair]

The death of the Tea Party before 2017.

Not a pipe-dream

[Personal Freedom]

I would like to see Great Britain absorb the USA.

[Luveria]

No, it would not have been.

Trudeau had tried to warm relations with the USSR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2%80%93Soviet_Union_relations

After Pierre Trudeau came to power in Canada, Canadian policy changed dramatically. Trudeau was a left-wing leader who was more sympathetic to communist nations than other heads of government. Trudeau wanted to lessen Canada's reliance on the United States by forging closer ties with other countries and breaking out the of the Cold War straitjacket. During a trip to the Soviet Union in 1971 he identified the United States as a bigger threat to Canada than the remote Soviet Union. The Americans, he said, are "a danger to our national identity from a cultural, economic and perhaps even military point of view."

Trudeau was quite interesting in that regard.

He was a decent leader. I'm anti-communist, and Trudeau, I suspect, was similar, but he didn't want to be fighting a futile and pointless cold war when Canada was better off trying to forge peaceful ties with opposing nations, and thus, avoiding any need for a cold war. I am in complement agreement with his stance on that. If peace and mutual trade can be achieved, there is no need for a cold war.

[The Flood]

God.
Save.
the Queen.

If they want to. There's no legal requirement for it. There's an expectation and not a requirement. As I've explained, the reasons the vast majority of Canadians aren't opposed to the Queen, is because for the most part, she leaves us be. That means there is no possible reason to be anti-monarchist, and as I said, if someone really wants to be a secessionist, there is a legal system in place for that, but the majority are not in favour of it. Do understand that officially, and culturally, a "true Canadian" is anyone who holds a Canadian citizenship. It's an inherently multiculturalist country, having been divided nearly from the start by Francophone Quebec. The only defining factor for being a Canadian is legally being a Canadian. Nothing else.

Were it up to me, it'd be treason to trash the monarchy of Canada.

[Ainin]

Were it up to me, it'd be treason to trash the monarchy of Canada.

Yeah, hello, there's something called the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...

I presume you've never heard of it?

[Northwest Slobovia]

You're very much wrong, because the opinion to be against the Crown, is actually legally allowed here. In fact, if the majority of Canada were opposed to the Crown, they could have a Republicanist movement like South Africa did. But no, Canadians generally don't give a fuck, because for the most part, the Queen leaves us be, so we have no practical reason to be actively opposed to her. It's not that Canadians are pro-monarchy, it's that most Canadians simply don't give a fuck because it doesn't matter enough to them, due to it not being a problem.

Legally, a Canadian is defined as anyone with a Canadian citizenship. That is how things are in multi-culturalist Canada. I suggest you accept the official Canadian view on what a Canadian is.

God.
Save.
the Queen.

Okay... I've relocated her to a special hereditary monarchy preserve. Monarchus Europa seems badly inbred, so We're going to try crossing it with closely related species in Africa and the Middle East in order to restore the species' genetic viability. Due to habitat destruction -- especially by Res publica Occidental -- I Expect that reintroduction in the wild will be limited to small areas of its native habitat, such as Monaco and Lichtenstein.

[Luveria]

If they want to. There's no legal requirement for it. There's an expectation and not a requirement. As I've explained, the reasons the vast majority of Canadians aren't opposed to the Queen, is because for the most part, she leaves us be. That means there is no possible reason to be anti-monarchist, and as I said, if someone really wants to be a secessionist, there is a legal system in place for that, but the majority are not in favour of it. Do understand that officially, and culturally, a "true Canadian" is anyone who holds a Canadian citizenship. It's an inherently multiculturalist country, having been divided nearly from the start by Francophone Quebec. The only defining factor for being a Canadian is legally being a Canadian. Nothing else.

Were it up to me, it'd be treason to trash the monarchy of Canada.

There is no reason to do so. If it's a finely managed system and one of the top countries in the world to live in, what reason is there to shake things up? There is none at all.