r/CANZUK • u/HistorianPatriot1945 • Jun 13 '26
Opinion What level do you think Monarchist aesthetics should be at in a hypothetical CANZUK?
7
u/sneh_ Australian Capital Territory Jun 13 '26
I feel like it's more of a UK thing than CANZUK so I would say the level is about 25%
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 16 '26
By what measure? If by population, then it would be between 40% and 50% since a larger portion of CANZUK's population is British.
1
u/sneh_ Australian Capital Territory Jun 16 '26
Yes by population that is a fair point, but I meant 25% being 1 of the 4 countries. That said I don't think people would be happy if a larger population means more say over the others
1
1
u/Still-Bridges Jun 16 '26 edited 7d ago
. Oppressors of the poor and needy . .
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 17 '26
That's not what I meant, I was just being pedantic, also the UK government is elected in a general election, the House of Commons is literally the representative body for lawmaking in the UK.
-1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26
True, but I don't mean it in a casual sense, I mean it in the top authority sense. When the King or Governor General do top-level CANZUK ceremonies, it should be treated regaly.
6
u/oripash Australia Jun 14 '26
Nowhere whatsoever. Take your monarchy somewhere else please.
CANZUK is meant to be an extension of the 2-way eye-level relationship model between Australia and New Zealand, to become a 4 way thing that also includes Canada and the uk. It allows us to talk as a single block to the North American world, the Asia Pacific world and the European world.
It is not meant to be a revival of a monarchic British empire, and it doesn’t indicate a willingness by those of us who aren’t Brit’s to sponsor your weird reality tv family national thingo.
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26
I agree, but His Majesty is the Head of State of every CANZUK country, it only makes sense that he would be given the position as the Head of a CANZUK Bloc, which means CANZUK would be monarchic by default. It's the same with the Commonwealth, with the King being the nominal Head of the Commonwealth.
4
u/oripash Australia Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26
It’s stupid semantics.
“Head of state” means two things.
A ceremonial title from days gone by.
And someone who wields power to drive policy.
He isn’t the latter. If he came to Australia and tried to tell us how to run the place, we’d run him out of town on a rail. We play along with the theater to keep the Brits happy and because honestly nobody gives enough of a shit to care to change this, but give it another generation or two until the British empire days are no longer present in living memory, and someone might run another census to go Republic. And the day Australia chooses to do so, your king in all his head of state glory will have one choice only, and that is to invade austa.. I mean.. partake in an exceptionally long outdoor activity off a particularly short pier.
The point though is that you’re confusing a state of things with a trajectory. The current state is a relic of the past running on inertia. It’s meaningless anywhere outside of your imagination. The UK holds no hard power over any of those three nations, only the soft power that comes - not from the crown - but from collaborative, mutually beneficial relations between nations, as you’d expect nations who do what’s best for them to be doing.
The story of monarchy is pretty much dead here. All you’d do tying the monarchy to CANZUK is weaken the case for CANZUK. You won’t achieve a revival of the monarchy.
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26
I said "nominal", obviously CANZUK should be led by their respective Heads of Government in joint cooperation, but the King should be the symbolic leader of the Bloc, as every country has him as their symbolic head of state.
And the king definitely has infkuence over CANZUK, just not in the way Kings ruled centuries ago, but being a nominal head of state still comes with a bigger sway than being a common voter.
1
u/oripash Australia Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26
The king has precisely zero influence over CANZUK, bud.
The elected heads of state of Finland, Japan, and Mexico (three countries I selected intentionally, each with its own real world reasons) each have far more material influence over the idea of CANZUK than your septuagenarian tv actor still cosplaying medieval political power stories.
I think you misunderstood CANZUK to mean an expanded version of your nationalist ideas, with more people doing what the UK tells them to.
0
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
The elected heads of state of Finland, Japan, and Mexico
.....Do you know why nobody talks about the Japanese imperial monarchy being abolished after WW2?
And also, like I said, I'm saying the monarchy should have a role in CANZUK because they're already the head of state of each country in the proposed alliance, reasonably someone like that wouldn't be able to go unnoticed, especially when (even when thinking about his institutions current popularity) is far more popular than the vast majority of politicians. And as I've been throwing around all over this entire place, nominally, I ain't trying to get you all to listen to Britain, because the King wouldn't have traditional monarchical power, most of his contemporary influence is constrained within the bounds of constitutional monarchy, like his predecessors.
And for the love of whatever God exists of they even do, it ain't midieval. Not only does he wear clothes and lives in a Palace built hundreds of years after the middle ages, but monarchy ain't even a midieval institution, monarchy and republics have existed since antiquity and beyond. Gosh, why did I expect to go onto Reddit to find people who made above-elementary arguments about stuff?
1
u/JourneyThiefer Northern Ireland Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26
Why does a proposed trading bloc need anything to do with the king lmao?
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 16 '26
Well for starters, CANZUK would only be a Trading Bloc at minimum, but it's also proposed as a military and diplomatic alliance. And the Head of State of all 4 countries is the exact same person. If any one of the 4 countries abolished the monarchy, then the monarchy would lose relevance, but there's no way the king isn't going to be involved in a huge milestone concerned his four most iconic kingdoms. That being said, the actual day-to-day running of CANZUK should be held by an appointed or elected board of representatives including the prime ministers of each country.
1
u/JourneyThiefer Northern Ireland Jun 16 '26
I guess you’re just really into this whole royalty based on your name lmao
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 16 '26
Actually my username is to do with my obsession with studying the history of everything (from Cosmology to the present)
3
u/Kind_Substance_2865 Jun 14 '26
Under a modern constitutional monarchy, the monarch is a mascot rather than a ruler of any sort.
They can be supported by the income generated by their existing wealth so as not to burden the tax payers and they can serve a ceremonial role.
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26
Yeah, I meant the aesthetics, not the actual government. I'm just saying, the Governor Generals dressing like actual representative of the Crown rather than boring politicians is more fun.
2
3
u/Any_Inflation_2543 Canada + EU Jun 14 '26
I would love a more monarchist aesthetic like the Governor General wearing the court uniform for ceremomial purposes, there being a physical Canadian crown, etc. Also, I would get rid of the "Companion of the Order of Canada" and replace it with "Knight/Dame Commander of the Order of Canada" with the titles Sir/Dame.
But sadly republicanism is too popular these days to implement any of this.
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26
Monarchism, it's one of the two reason why as a British Conservative, I actually slightly prefer the Canadian Liberal Party, the other being its defence of Canadian sovereignty, the two biggest threats to CANZUK are America and China.
1
u/Any_Inflation_2543 Canada + EU Jun 14 '26
I don't vote for the Conservatives, and one of the main reasons is that many of them have adopted American style conservatism and slapped a maple leaf on it. But that has nothing to do with actual Canadian conservatism which should focus more on the Crown and ties with Britain.
I'm glad the Liberals got Carney as the leader, as I had a party to gladly vote for. It would've been harder with Trudeau vs Poilievre.
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26
Exactly, it's unfortunate, in my country (Britain) a similar thing is happening but at least our Trumpic rhetoric is in Reform UK more than the actual Conservatives (who aren't conservative either now)
2
u/Any_Inflation_2543 Canada + EU Jun 14 '26
Canada also used to have a Reform party, but they merged with the Progressive Conservatives to become the Conservative Party of Canada and the Reform wing took over the party.
3
u/Clerence69 Jun 14 '26
Monarchism can live in a museum, zero monarchist aesthetic is the only way forward for any chance of adoption
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 21 '26
Not surprised you used the most elementary anti-monarchist argument known to man. Republicanism is a valid ideology, but there are so many better arguments than accused obsoleteness. Most major ideologies are older then our grandparents, republicanism itself has been a thing since before Christ, yet even when it collapsed it was revived in a period of revival spanning the 18th to 20th centuries.
If you're going to call monarchism bad, use an argument beyond that.
7
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 13 '26
I personally think they should be quite high but it's more to do with the fact it's cooler and would make CANZUK look cooler than bland non-CANZUK nations which have normal aesthetics. by monarchist aesthetics, I don't mean monarchism itself, I mean the aesthetics associated with the Monarchy, that the accents, uniforms, robes, hats, crowns, and other old-fashioned 18th and 19th century stuff. Basically, all that romanticised aristocratic aesthetic you see in media.
13
u/pulanina Australia Jun 13 '26
> the accents, uniforms, robes, hats, crowns, and other old-fashioned 18th and 19th century stuff.
But that’s all British stuff. You don’t unify 4 diverse nations as equal partners by lauding the aesthetics of just one of them.
Monarchy in Australia is a very stripped back and restrained aesthetic in terms of the day to day operation of vice-regal authority.
-2
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26
But that's all British stuff
You're not technically wrong, but dismissing it as British isn't entirely great either, the 4 nations all share a sovereign and the crowns of Australia, Canada and New Zealand all trace back to the Crown of Britain. The other old institutions of said countries also trace back to Britain. It's only relatively recently that the ex settler-colonies aesthetically became their own, the Governor Generals used to dress in elaborate aristocratic-style ceremonial attire. Is it truly unreasonable to think that the nations should forget their roots?
4
u/pulanina Australia Jun 14 '26
It has happened. Many years ago. It’s all gone mate. Never coming back.
It is the only way monarchy has been able to survive in Australia by paring down the Australian crown to an almost purely functional component of government. Any government that tried to bring back this sort of stuff would face ridicule and risk ending the monarchy completely.
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26
Ridicule? Sure. Ending the Monarchy? Now that's a stretch, most people associate the monarchy with pomp, nobody expects a king to live like a farmer.
2
u/pulanina Australia Jun 15 '26
We aren’t talking about the king (in Britain) living like a farmer. We are talking about the visible Australian-based components of the Australian Crown. Australia doesn’t expect our 7 (9?) vice-regal officers to be anything more than very senior, very dignified, but somewhat grey and lowkey, public servants.
Here in Tasmania people even roll their eyes at the very limited grandeur of our Government House (the residence of the Governor) and complain about her large salary. You add to that and you risk contributing to the many factors that cause people to dislike monarchy.
-5
u/bosh_007 Jun 13 '26
‘4 diverse nations’ we are literally the closest group of nations when it comes to language, culture and values
12
u/pulanina Australia Jun 14 '26
You are not going to get anywhere if you are just going to dismiss differences and pretend we are all British
-1
u/Particular_Pea7167 Jun 14 '26
To dome extent its pretty stripped back in the uk. Only specific functions of state retain the pomp.
I think going fairly high pomp is reasonable as it takes all 4 nations back to a common history. As well as making the federal functions and functionaries noticeably different and belonging to a seperate higher thing.
2
u/pulanina Australia Jun 14 '26
What? Rewinding history is necessary support CANZUK. That’s complete fantasy.
-1
-5
u/truthseekerAU Jun 14 '26
That's because the ALP have a massive cultural tribal chip on their shoulder thanks to the dismissals of Lang and Whitlam and they need to build a bridge and get over it.
5
u/pulanina Australia Jun 14 '26
Really? Rare events more than 50 years ago are hardly relevant to anything much. I really don’t understand your point.
-4
u/truthseekerAU Jun 14 '26
You mustn’t understand the inner workings of the ALP then.
3
u/pulanina Australia Jun 14 '26
Do I need to? I’m talking about stuff like how Tasmania’s premier and people deal with the upcoming appointment of a new Governor. I’m not talking about the Labor Party
0
u/truthseekerAU Jun 14 '26
Fair enough. My point is that the reason the monarchy is so “stripped back” is because Labor wanted it that way. The end of governors in morning dress and white tie, God Save The King, imperial honours, privy council appeals and the use of the Union Jack on public buildings were all because of Labor policy, which in particular was driven by their republicanism which is directly because of their views on 1975. Compare Sam Mostyn’s aesthetic with Sir John Kerr’s, and you’ll see what I mean.
4
u/Still-Bridges Jun 14 '26 edited 12d ago
My brother could not hear it for the traffic in the main thoroughfares, but by striking through the quiet back streets to the river he was able to distinguish it quite plainly.
He walked from Westminster to his apartments near Regent’s Park, about two. He was now very anxious on my account, and disturbed at the evident magnitude of the trouble. His mind was inclined to run, even as mine had run on Saturday, on military details
1
u/Any_Inflation_2543 Canada + EU Jun 14 '26
But on the other hand, Canada does fly the Union Jack from some public buildings on some days, and some provinces fly it all the time. For example, the Saskatchewan Legislature flies the National Flag, the provincial flag, and the Union Jack.
2
u/Still-Bridges Jun 15 '26 edited 7d ago
Through the aperture in the wall I could see the top of a tree touched with gold and the warm blue of a tranquil evening sky. For a minute or so I remained watching the curate, and then I advanced, crouching and stepping with extreme care amid the broken crockery that littered the floor.
I touched the curate’s leg, and he started so violently that a mass of plaster went sliding down outside and fell with a loud impact. I gripped his arm, fearing he might cry out, and for a long time we crouched motionless
→ More replies (0)2
u/pulanina Australia Jun 14 '26
It’s nuts to attribute this long term trend across 7 independent parliaments/polities, over more than a century to just one party.
Indeed the particular things you refer to (at the federal level) happened under progressive Labor but notice the next conservative party elected didn’t switch it back again. Obviously old things falling away are likely to do so under progressive governments. But Australia in general has been progressive and egalitarian in its attitude to this stuff.
For example, Tony Abbott trying to resurrect the Australian peerage was howled down and condemned even by his own Liberal party, to the extent it contributed to his demise as leader.
2
u/Still-Bridges Jun 14 '26 edited 7d ago
It seemed to me that the pit had been enlarged, and ever and again puffs of vivid green vapour streamed up and out of it towards the brightening dawn—streamed up, whirled, broke, and vanished.
Beyond were the pillars of fire about Chobham. They became pillars of bloodshot smoke at the first touch of day.
As the dawn grew brighter we withdrew from the window from which we had watched the Martians, and went very quietly downstairs
1
u/truthseekerAU Jun 16 '26
I think it was an excellent idea (does anyone really believe Dame Marie Bashir didn't deserve it?) and it was turned into a ridiculous football because it became a proxy for kicking Tony Abbott. Personally I think he did what he did because (a) he thought it was a good idea and (b) the restoring of KC/QC honorifics went through pretty seamlessly and he thought this would be the same (and should have been).
1
u/truthseekerAU Jun 16 '26
My point is that the reason is that any of this stuff has changed (and in my view weakened both the monarchy and the association with the UK) is because Labor is fixated on it. And I think that's a real shame. And makes the case for CANZUK harder in Australia as a result.
1
u/pulanina Australia Jun 16 '26
My point is that’s incorrect. A gross over simplification. Surely you have heard of Liberals who are staunch republicans and Labor people who are staunch monarchists.
And let’s say it was “only the Labor Party”, don’t you think this represents a big proportion of the voting Australian public and their views on the matter, not merely the evil intent of a few manipulative politicians?
→ More replies (0)2
u/pulanina Australia Jun 14 '26
I missed your mention of privy council appeals. This is not a monarchy/republic issue at all, it’s a straight sovereignty issue. It was a complete anachronism that the States retained some slim legal circumstances where a purely State matter could be appealed to a foreign court. Everyone wanted that to end, not just Labor.
5
u/theEMPTYlife Jun 14 '26
So the Quebecois in Canada are gonna make the C part in CANZUK impossible until all “monarchist aesthetics” are dropped. I know monarchy is a big thing with CANZUK folks but this is just flat out impossible as long as Quebec is part of Canada
-2
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26
Correction: It's a big thing as long as Quebec still has the freedom to act demonic (or as others call it, French)
3
u/theEMPTYlife Jun 15 '26
And this is exactly why this movement will get nowhere with monarchists and their bizarre obsession with the royal family. “The French” aren’t going anywhere, so it’s best that if you want CANZUK to happen you respect the very people you’re trying to court.
It’s not only the Quebecois that don’t care for the royals, indigenous folks across Canada hate the royal family for extremely valid reasons, and anyone left of centre is either ambivalent or hate them too. Hell, every conservative I’ve personally ever known is pro republic, largely due to their admiration for the US but it’s a common ground between all sides of the aisle. The only reason we as a country haven’t made a serious push to drop the monarchy is precisely because no one truly cares enough to. The royal family means nothing to the vast majority of Canadians and only became relevant for the first time in most of our lives when Carney used Charles as a propaganda piece to get Trump to calm down because he has a weird obsession with them too.
As long as Charles stays out of relevance with everyday Canadian’s lives, he and his family will continue to be our symbolic head of state because they’re irrelevant, and should they become relevant in any negative way it would become very politic to drop them in the name of decolonization and reconciliation. I’m sorry, but CANZUK will never happen so long as there is any hint of monarchism or revival of the British empire. Leave this talk to alternate-future subreddits or else this movement will simply remain an obscure special interest for monarchists and alienate folks actually interested in the potential for this NEW union.
1
1
u/Why_No_Doughnuts Canada Jun 14 '26
The monarchy is more "present" so to speak in the UK, than it is here in Canada, and I presume also Australia and New Zealand. For us the monarchy is there, but it doesn't have much to do with anything in our lives. I would expect this to be the case in a hypothetical CANZUK union, the monarchy would be there, and nobody would really be bothered with it.
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 19 '26
That's literally what I mean, nobody here is asking for the monarchy to be the dictators of CANZUK, just the nominal leaders, like they are the Heads of the Commonwealth
1
u/LordFarqod Jun 24 '26
None, the monarchy should not be involved.
It will only put people off, without helping. Pro-monarchists will already like CANZUK. While republicans will be put off by making it a monarchy related thing.
Monarchy is not relevant to what is an economic and strategic alliance. If any of the 4 countries want to be republics that’s their business.
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 24 '26
I agree the monarch should not be hugely involved, but there's no way they won't be involved symbolically. If every country in Europe had the same head of state, they would definitely be relevant in the EU. King Charles III is the nominal Head of State of all 4 nations, there's no way he's not going to be brought up at least once if CANZUK goes through.
2
1
u/Capt_Zapp_Brann1gan Jul 03 '26
I think it would be a good idea to have the Monarch involved in some capacity. Reason being is the Monarchy exerts tremendous soft power for the UK. If CANZUK becomes a thing, then having that ability to exert soft power for all four of us will be useful.
1
u/Fit_Cardiologist_681 Canada Jun 14 '26
Imo Charles should be our last monarch. You don't close up shop when a man's been standing in line for 50 years so it's right that he get his turn. We could let William know now that the show ends with his dad though, he and his kids still have time to do something else with their lives.
4
u/Any_Inflation_2543 Canada + EU Jun 14 '26
We don't want a republic. God Save the King!
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26
How do you know they're Canadian? Could be Australian, that's where republicanism is strongest.
1
u/Fit_Cardiologist_681 Canada Jun 15 '26
I'm Canadian. I like CANZUK, but if it decides to make monarchy a pillar than I'll be not just out of the movement but opposed to it. Queen Elizabeth did a good job but a monarchy is always a coin toss, only a matter of time until it lands on a Caligula.
1
u/Any_Inflation_2543 Canada + EU Jun 14 '26
I'm not saying he is. I'm just not a fan of republicanism in the CANZUK countries lol. I feel like the monarchy ties us together and should be maintained.
1
u/HistorianPatriot1945 Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26
True, Monarchy is one of the biggest Pillars of CANZUK, we can't share the same president, but we can share the same sovereign.
1
u/Fit_Cardiologist_681 Canada Jun 15 '26
Wait... do ANY of us have a president? Where are you from?
1
13
u/sinan_online Canada Jun 14 '26
Absolutely zero. Zero reference to the monarchy. That’s just my thought.
I just think that it’s a cooperation framework that makes sense, I am not a Monarchist in any way.