this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
167 points (96.6% liked)

World News

51402 readers
2553 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] orclev@lemmy.world 31 points 6 months ago (27 children)

As an outsider looking in this seems very weird. I guess the king of England is also technically the king of Canada, but I'm failing to see why that matters even if it's incredibly strange. I know in England the monarchy is almost entirely symbolic with nearly all the actual governing done by the PM and Parliament. I would assume Canada is the same. Does the monarchy have any actual power in Canada? I believe in England they have a (incredibly rarely used) veto power over parliament but that's it. Is Canada not the same?

[–] non_burglar@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago (4 children)

That's largely correct, and this demonstration is mostly symbolic as well.

The treaties with indigenous peoples of Canada are administered by an arm of the federal government, but the treaty agreements themselves are technically between the indigenous peoples and the crown, hence the address to King Charles.

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (3 children)

That does raise an interesting question though. What would happen to those treaties if Canada decided to officially become fully independent of the crown? I don't think anything is really stopping that from happening other than there not really being a significant upside for Canada.

Also side question, is the king (and I guess the entire royal family) considered a citizen of Canada and all the other countries that apparently never really got their independence from England? That's got to be incredibly weird for someone marrying into the royal family. "Congratulations you married a royal, here's your new citizenship to a dozen different countries most of which you've probably never set foot in before".

[–] Jack_Burton@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

If Canada became fully independent from the Crown we'd have to draw up a completely new constitution as the current one is tightly tied to the Crown. Personally, I don't trust anyone these days to create a new constitution, as an unfortunate chunk of the country seems to want to eliminate current rights as it is. For as much as some Canadians want or demand to remove the Crown from Canada, it's really not feasible, and could potentially (probably) completely destroy the country.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)