Canada was a major first for a country of its kind - a country ruled by a monarch of a country that happens to be one of our founding nations, namely the British. The additional arrangement would be that a vice-regal appointee would be, in a sense, a steward while the sovereign is not in the country at the time. It was the perfect compromise, since neither party had the stomach for a revolutionary war, especially after fighting one almost a century before confederation and 50 years after showing their loyalty to the crown by driving an American invasion out of the Niagara Peninsula. They did have to do something.
Normally, the third or fourth Monday of May is used to celebrate the Queen's birthday in the United Kingdom, but we choose to celebrate the Queen that got the ball rolling towards our independence as a country and for whom we are grateful. Her name was Victoria, soon to be the second longest reigning British sovereign, as Queen Elizabeth II is right now on the verge of eclipsing that very record held in the previous century.
So now the hangover begins and so begins another adult conversation which we've been dancing around for a long time: what is the importance of the monarchy and is it still relevant? I suppose the real question here is what is the alternative? Will having a republic make this country any better? I mean, the power to dissolve parliament is one that is used with great care and the last guy to do it without advice from the Prime Minister got his head chopped off. And we begin to wonder if the Governor General can refuse advice from the Prime Minister since none have done so for decades. What is really the Governor General's job, other than a rubber stamp for the government of the day. As a teenager, I thought is was an interesting job, because it would also be an opportunity to be enlightened about the country of which you've been made head of state on the sovereign's behalf. But as we go forward understanding the role, would it make sense to elect one?
My answer would be no. The one thing that Canadians generally like about our Governor-General, it's that the person is supposedly above the politics of the day. We need interesting people like Adrienne Clarkson and even Michaele Jean to be the country's steward, because the one thing that is missing in the American republic is something that we individually have: a conscience. We actually have someone who embodies our country as a whole. That is the true purpose of the monarchy. And while they are still human, frailties and all, they are still a symbol.
Now if you understand some of the history behind it, there are people who believe that the monarchy is not relevant to us at all. Most of these people have no roots in Europe. These were peoples oppressed through the imperialistic tendencies of the European countries, the worst of them being Spanish, but England made more than its share of enemies as well. India, Pakistan, Zimbabwe and many other countries were left in a mess, mostly because they were formed following a revolt. So I empathize with them and since its the patron countries that have to answer for these, I leave it to them.
And while the system works well right now, it is only as reliable as the guardians. Michaele Jean's term as Governor-General is coming to a close and the question of who is next is one that has brought about great anxiety. Stephen Harper has probably made his choice and he might have chosen someone he can control. The problem with that is there could be politics coming in to play in an area that an unwritten rule comes to mind: you choose someone who embodies our collective conscience or you risk cheapening the job. That is the purpose behind the constitutional monarchy. Abuse it at your own peril.
The only alternative is a republic with a president and if you've been watching south of the border, you've been watching presidential primaries and elections running on for almost two years. So while the president is running things in the first three years, he has to spend the fourth one organizing his re-election campaign and sometimes it just isn't entertaining watching presidential campaigns with no apparent end. Politics is interesting, but it's also tedious and mind-numbing after a while.
So all in all, I do believe that the monarchy has relevance, because of its continuity. While governments come and go, the crown will always remain. I would rather see this kind of long term continuity than see presidents coming, going and continuously campaigning. And if you are still on the fence about it, here's a question that you could answer: In a battle, what symbol do you have an easier time rallying around? Would you rally around a person or an object? I'll leave that one to you.
No comments:
Post a Comment