Oh Fuck, Not This Shit Again!!!

For the third time, now, the most powerful non-existent political office in this pretend country has decided, on a mere whim, to again suspend Parliament and hold a throne speech in October of this year. The excuses from Herpes has been anything but existent, like his office.

What’s very interesting in the article, however, is a small note (I’m certain no-one will ever take notice) is made when mentioning that this wasn’t the first time Herpes suspended parliament to spare himself political embarassment:

“… prorogation, a standard parliamentary tool that has the effect of cancelling any legislation that’s still before the House.”

Is this true? Really? In order to stop a bill from becoming law in Canada, parliament should be suspended by the executive? As opposed to getting the bill vetoed by the chief executive? All that trouble for terminating a bill? Hell, the President of the United States and France respectively don’t terminate bills, but merely return them to Congress or the National Assembly for reconsideration! Reconsideration, where the legislature looks at the bill again, then by vote decides whether to terminate it or pass it again! Why do Canadians prefer to use rocket science for even the simplest of matters is far beyond me!

That said, this is blatantly abuse of power. Not just suspending parliament for any reason, but also dissolving it, especially for non-confidence motions, budget failures, and whenever elections are called whenever the executive feels like it! We may have health care, but that doesn’t justify conserving a shitty form of government, nor any more ties to the British crown!

And once again, the Queen will allow this to happen. And even if she did meddle against it, it’s still interference by someone that isn’t Canadian and wasn’t elected by Canadians. And Canadians won’t riot over this, either. But they should. Against this, and against the Crown as well.

Canada’s Queen Raids Coffers

Speaking of money, as the royalists cloak the eyes of an unsuspecting and apathetic public (too apathetic to care about the queen, yet too apathetic, cowardly and stupid to do anything about it), Canada’s Queen gets a pay raise … of $58 million.

In a report by Acence France Presse that’s been carried by the Huffington Post, the Old Slag herself is getting what royalists call a 5% raise from all the land she has loaned out to the British government, which in turn had decided to compromise democracy instead of seizing the loot, cash and lands and all.

Appeal To Money

One of the stupidest arguments royalists use to condemn and damn democracy is that elections are so expensive. They use numbers drawn from elections in the United States, the compares them to that of maintaining the monarchy. This is an abhorrent attempt to trick the people into thinking with their wallets at the expense of their fundamental right to choose their governments, that we should sacrifice a fundamental democratic right that so many fight and die for because it would squeeze our wallets. They deliberately skewer figures and numbers, to confuse the reception and spending of money by political parties and candidates with that of the money spent on the electoral process itself. And being conservatives, they will cheat and lie about the numbers and the sources from whence it came.

First of all, Canadian royalists will always attack the United States, in an attempt to discredit it and its experiment with a republican form of government, which may be less than perfect (indirect election of the President vie electoral collage, for example) but far better than the stale, overused mockup of Westminster we have in Ottawa. The monarchists are still bitter over the loss of their colonies, and will always whitewash the British Empire’s own legacy of colonial terrorism and slavery, so that in Canada’s history books, Britain’s Empire was founded on peace and love.

Why do they resort to this? Rather simply: to appeal to the people’s wallets, especially of those who don’t vote, and don’t care about the effects of politics that happen in their lives. Yet suppose we get rid of all our representatives, and just have direct rule by the monarchy. Then the monarchy decides to impose taxes that are excessive and unnecessary, to spend on only personal expenses at the expense of the public well being and security. Who can appeal to her, then? Who can influence her? Only the most insane, unworthy of influencing anyone or holding any power, would blindly trust and defend a deified person, rivaled only by the Pharaohs of Egypt who were literally, in the eyes and minds of virtually all Egyptians, a god in human form. Why should an unelected, undemocratic head of state with powers unenumerated and inherited by blood, regardless of public opinion, have any right or say in how the state should spend its money, or in reverse and better yet, why should it even care about the people she rules over, or rely on any approval of the very people royalists dismiss as unable to govern themselves?

And speaking of money, what has our monarchy done about the Senate scandals with Mike Duffy, or the SUNTV fiasco with the CRTC? What has she said or done about the fraudulent elections that the Conservatives engaged in? Of course she doesn’t care about elections or democracy! She’s a fucking monarch. She relies on the concept of divine choice, without solid evidence or consent of the people, to govern a people that she not only looks down upon for their supposed ignorance, or lack of “class”, but also wants to deny them their inherent right a sound and solid education.

If the masses are so grossly ignorant as claimed by the royalists, then why deny them sound education, to teach them as children the ability to use logic, reason, and critical thinking? They want to rob the people blind of quality education in the name of money the same way they want to rob and deny people the right to vote, to elect their representatives, to choose their governments, in the name of money. Granted, democracy should be affordable, economical, financially beneficial. Yet it is a dangerous folly to think that the cheapest government is the government you can’t choose or change.

Fuck Victoria Day, And Fuck You Too!

Every time we have to celebrate the birth of this dictator, I cringe. I cringe at the millions of Canadians being utterly smug by their bondage to a foreign power. I wrench from the Natives that demand to retain colonialism as a way of relieving themselves from the plight that the same Crown allows to happen to them. I nearly shit out my insides knowing that Canada is still, now, a colony of a long-dead empire. Death to monarchy, to dictatorship, to inequality! I, a rational man, am sick of this blind reverence to someone whom we didn’t elect, nor have a say in, that is synonymous with absolute power, arbitrary power, tyranny, and abuse of power, which rules for life, is accountable to none, and is succeeded by blood. Power is private property in a monarchy, inherited like trinkets by someone we have no “right” to vote for.

Spanish Republicans Demand End To Their Monarchy

Well, this is a surprise!

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/04/2013414182728336313.html

http://rt.com/news/spain-anti-monarchy-rally-847/

Solidarity from Canada! Long live the Spanish Republic! Long live the future Third Spanish Republic!
Solidarité du Canada! Vive la République espagnole! Vive la future troisième République espagnole!
¡Solidaridad de Canadá! ¡Viva la República Española! ¡Viva la Tercera República Española futura!

Best quote ever, because it’s technically true: “This monarchy was imposed on us by the dictatorship, therefore we consider it to be illegal,” 45-year-old teacher Maria Ayuso said.

Best quote ever, because it’s so sickeningly typcial: Juan Carlos apologised, saying as he left the hospital: “I am very sorry. I made a mistake. It won’t happen again.”

I mean, if any politician said that . . . no one would believe him and he’d either be thrown out of office or lose the next election, and replaced by someone better. If a monarch did this . . . we’re be forced to accept his apology, forced to keep him in power til he dies, and rationalize his sins even after death. And this is the benefit of a republic, of an elected head of state. To represent the people, the head of state must be elected. If the politician is bad, the people would throw him out and replace him with someone better. Term limits significantly improves it, because life-terms are a symptom of monarchs/dictators.

Go Ask Your Mother

or The Queen Refuses to Hold an Inquiry into Electoral Fraud; Elizabeth May and Royalists Proven Wrong AGAIN

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/04/05/queen-elizabeth-elizabeth-may_n_3020303.html?utm_hp_ref=canada

“The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crisis maintain their neutrality” ~Dante

Once more, for the 1175th time, the constitutional monarchy has proven itself why it is so wrong on so many levels. Months after Elizabeth May, the US-born leader of the Green Party, wrote a letter calling upon Old Liz to launch a royal inquiry into accusations of election fraud (or as the lamestream media would call it, the “robocall scandal”) against the Conservative Party, the Old Hag of Windsor wrote back, saying that she didn’t want to, because we have a Governor General as the Queen’s representative and that we should go to her representative instead. The idea of having an unelected monarchy as head of state is absurd. The idea of a non-partisan office (or, in the monarchy’s case, “office”) is not only absurd, but also very dangerous, because it is a form of tyranny, where the power to protect and correct is deliberately denied to the people, and on behalf of those in power. She allowed parliament to be suspended twice. She allowed non-violent protesters to be subject to police brutality and wrongful arrest. She rejected calls to intervene on behalf of the so-called hunger strike of the Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence, and refused to summon a Royal Inquiry into the so-called “Robocalls Scandal” (or, to put it more accurately, electoral fraud). In each of her condescending nonsensical responses to the last two letters, one sent by a man in BC who was concerned for the Chief, and the other Elizabeth May, she merely refused to intervene, and referred them to her representatives. It’s being lazy, folks. It’s also tyrannical, yet done so softly, so quietly, so gently, that the most gullible would rally behind her to justify her actions, since they care more about class and style than policy and substance. Better to have an elected partisan politician that can take the side of the weak and the oppressed, than the callous, cruel, indifferent eye and deaf ear of a non-partisan monarchy that doesn’t change and doesn’t heed to the cries of the people when they are in agony. And even if she did anything, that doesn’t merit her, someone who isn’t elected, as a credible, reliable and even necessary protector of democracy. How the fuck is even this monarch a protector of democracy, when she refuses to intervene on the behalf of democracy? And furthermore, since some claim her as a representative of the people (she isn’t because she isn’t elected), then why the fuck would this representative . . . have a representative?

And yet the royalists claim that “The Crown’s role … [is] to ensure that ‘the rules of the game’ are always followed, and to provide a non-partisan, non-violent safeguard . . . should normal democratic processes ever be threatened or break down.” Well, fuck you and your bullshit. That’s not true in the slightest! How is electoral fraud NOT a threat to democracy? How is electoral fraud NOT a threat to the normal democratic process of election? You fucks have been proven so wrong more than once, and yet you ratfuckers still lie! And fuck you, Michael Valpy, for calling the Rancid Old Whore a “constitutional fire extinguisher.” She isn’t, so you’ve proven to us that you became a professor by sucking a lot of cocks.

Canada’s political system is not based on any logic, but on the bizarre mental fecal matter of asylum inmates mad with power. Monarchy only appeals to three groups of people, all tightly related and working together in a matter reflective to the inbreeding of the monarchy itself: the simple-minded who are easily puzzled by organized society, the inmates of an asylum, and the power-ravenous. If the monarchy is democratic, then war is peace. If the monarchy guarantees and protects democracy, then freedom is slavery.  And if monarchy costs less and is non-partisan, then ignorance is strength.

As for the Americans who yearn for a constitutional monarchy, or a parliamentary system, well, you’re already living in one. Obama’s going to cut Social Security because, well, he’s a puppet of the GOP. Take a hint!

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.” ~Desmond Tutu

Is constitutional monarchy willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then it is impotent. Is it able, but not willing? Then it is malevolent. Is it both able and willing? Whence then is its unwillingness to act? How would it not use its to worsen, aid, or make evil? And what right does it have to hold any power when it’s not been earned.

Ze BABIES!!!

*beeeeep*

I’ve been a little late on this, I know, but I’ve been preoccupied. Now that time’s on my hands . . .

Late last month, on the 28th of January, one of our beloved PM’s minions unveiled a bill that would change the rules of succession of the British throne by abolishing the requirement of the eldest male child to become next-in-line to the throne, allowing any child first-born, regardless of sex, to become successor. This obviously is an attempt to cash in to the marriage and relationship of Prince William to Kate Middleton, and to make the monarchy popular, which is ironic, considering how undemocratic, anti-democratic and essentially anti-popular monarchy really is. This is something that royalist filth on all sides rejoice in, with left-wing royalists and neo-colonialists who suffer from cognitive dissonance hailing this as a step towards equality (I’m calling you out, Thwap!), while right-wing cancer cells rejoice this as a step in the right direction to appease the ignorant masses with royal pageantry, I honestly couldn’t care less. Whether or not this passes, whether it’s constitutional or not, whether or not first-born children would be allowed to succeed the throne regardless of sex or even sexual orientation (monarchy is anti-gay anyway, with its fixation on heirs and birth-lines and conditioning children to be nothing but next-in-line, even if it means exterminating their ambitions of becoming, say, an astronaut or a doctor), this does not change the fact that monarchy is inherently evil, undemocratic, anti-democratic, elitist, aristocratic, who rules for life, cannot be elected nor removed from office, is at best (or worst) a powerless symbol or at worst a tyrant, and is succeeded by their children regardless of their merit or popular opinion, and that power is inherited, like private property, by blood regardless of popular opinion, rather than earned by ballot, regardless of blood. I don’t care whether or not Kate Middleton is hot. I don’t care if William is hip, of whether he wanted to invite the poor to their wedding, and wanted bike to their wedding. I don’t care if they’re intelligent. The point is I didn’t vote for them, can’t vote for them, because I somehow, for whatever reason, don’t have a right to, as does anyone else.

If you want a female head of state, rather than simply wait until by mere and sheer coincidence and chance one just so happens to be farted out of some royal family member’s womb, just put it to a vote, and vote on the girl with the best and brightest ideas, not the best looks, or the fact that she’s just a girl. There are a lot of ugly people I wouldn’t fuck that I would definitely vote for if they had great ideas and policies, and a lot of pretty people I would definitely have kinky sex with that I would definitely NEVER vote for because of their shitty ideas and policies.

As for you Pommies across the pond, how embarrassed are you? Just how little pride do you have in yourselves, to rely on other “countries” (which are really dominions, colonies that form the skeletal remnants of your once mighty [and evil] empire [as are all empires evil]) to have any say in your monarchy? I mean, come on! Shouldn’t this be Britain’s affair? You’re apprehensive, if not hostile, about the meddlesome nature of the EU, yet somehow you don’t mind countries that are outside the EU, if not far beyond it, to have a say in your affairs? It would be only possible for you to deal with your monarchy alone, if you released your remaining colonies and allowed them to become truly independent, and dissolved your commonwealth.

The Media & The Monarchy

Never in the history of any country has the media of Canada been such a whore to such a vile institution (except in Thailand, where even the slightest criticism of the monarchy is literally illegal). Any mainstream mention of the monarchy reads like something out of a celebrity gossip magazine, lauding people who are famous for no other reason other than because they were born “special”. It’s a sickening spectacle that only few had ever questioned, yet those who question are often ignored or put in the backpages of editorials, and at best have their education and intelligence either questioned or insulted, or at worst suffer accusations of treason and sedition, and suffer calls for their murder. Monarchists, of course, are more insulted than their precious monarch. Despite this, even if our media were to nakedly and openly criticize and question monarchy, while our media should do so, it’s not going to be enough in the struggle against aristocracy and colonialism.

Granted there are some pieces written about dumping the monarchy, but they are very few in number, and often written by people who say nice things about the Queen and don’t think she’s a bad person, some by people who are defeatist, soft republicans that no one either knew about nor cared about. Because of this horrible inequality in reporting, as well as the well-funded, all-powerful personality cult called the Monarchist League, Canadians young and old and in between have been brainwashed by their media, combined with a widespread lack of education and the absence of or discouraging the use of critical thought, into thinking that a benevolent dictatorship is a good dictatorship, often used in stark contrast to the more democratic United States. Security shouldn’t be a justification to conserve such an utterly evil institution, let alone any dictatorship. It may be necessary to have a strong-man in times of crisis or of war, but once that threat is removed, so should the strong-man to be replaced by someone who’d be willing enough and has the vision to deal with some lesser problems.

In any case, even if the majority of Canadians support the monarchy, it’s because they’re stupid and too infantile to handle any political discussion within this pretend country we’re living in. In Quebec, the politicians there have been devoted, for decades, towards an independent Quebec, while the Anglophones are comfortable with the sense of superiority they have over “lesser folk”. The media has pandered to the royalists, fascists, and Anglo-nationalists (like Canada’s other import from Britain, the terrorist organization called the Orange Order) alike (and this is coming from an Anglo!), who demonize and stereotype our French and Indigenous brethren, as though they’re trophies of conquest rather than human beings deserving of the same rights as anyone else. The newspapers of Canada, majority of which always pandered to the conservative, and encourage backward thought, are garbage. Why are they so conservative? Because they’re owned by royalists, and all royalists hate democracy, and hate the people, who are manipulated into being apathetic. Even the most mild of monarchists shouldn’t be trusted by any republican. Canada, which is literally a pretend country with an imported constitution written by the British parliament and an imperial colony with a British monarch as its head of state, wasn’t created because the people wanted freedom. It was only created to protect the interests of the provincial governments, regardless of the people, and to reaffirm the British Empire’s interests.

There’s been only three rebellions out of the entirety of Canadian history, all of them failures and took place in the 1800’s. Since then, we’ve been rather quiet, complicit with the way things are ever since because Canadians are in every way cowardly and stupid, and always find a way to excuse the abuses of the government, as manifest in the appalling little reaction we had towards the Ontario Privy Council imposing virtually martial law without consent of the provincial legislature. And I will keep insulting Canadians alike until Canadians wake up, until Canada becomes a real country, with a republican form of government, and until we become more energetic, more aware of the state of our newfound independence. Currently, we’re not independent. We never have been. Canada is a dominion, which is different than an independent state. It’s basically a supposedly self-governing part of a country, that country being the British Empire. But we’re not truly self-governing when we have someone elsewhere as our head of state, and a constitution that’s been imported from Britain. Canadians don’t want full independence because they’re also children, because apathy has been drilled into them because of the Canadian media, which panders these sort of things, to become instant tabloids gushing about the looks and styles of monarchs. Why do they have any political power anyway? It’s a repugnant practice that must come to an end. But only with extreme measures. The civility shit, the business-like mentality of the left, has to be dumped. We’ve got to stop purging or silencing anyone who says anything “offensive.” Offensive. What about something untrue? In fact, rather than silencing someone by, say, using the ban hammer as what the forum section of Rabble.ca frequently does, we should be able to handle and deal with the opinions of others that we don’t like, even find “offensive.” While the right merely crowds out public opinion through control of the medium, leftists simply banishes people to the nether-regions for even the mere tone of their writing, rather than trying to calm everyone down without resorting to threats or even outright banishment, as Rebecca West habitually does in the Rabble.ca forums. And this is a problem. A huge problem.

And whatever excuses the royalists have to protect or endorse monarchy (democracy is transient; power is only temporarily in a republic; all politicians, regardless of political affiliation; so-called “divine right” [nevermind the fact that there’s no god or gods or goddesses of any kind, or that humanity is one and equal with each other] and other unbelievably painful, stupid, vile and downright dangerous excuses to destroy or dismiss democracy), the lamestream media, which has been perpetually in the stranglehold of conservatives, waters such garbage down to make it more palatable to the unassuming masses to consume. Ironic how the royalists, perpetually deluded, hate democracy, yet at the same time rely on public opinion and want to appease the very masses they insult and yearn to keep enslaved, blind and obedient to their favourite demig0d or demigoddess. That job is done by Canada’s media, who are part of a well-organized conservative campaign to keep monarchy in power at all costs, even exploiting the fact that the medium is the message. And whenever they mention republican views, they have the nerve to merely mention the main reasons perpetuated by Tom Freda: fiscal necessity and chronological relevance.

In a truly free country, people should be able to speak freely about anything, however repugnant, as long as others get to freely criticize the other person’s opinion, argument, etc. Of course, royalists only believe in free speech as long as it’s not anything negative about their favourite celebrity. “We must respect her.” Why. “She’s our Queen.” So what if she’s our queen? Or king? Simply because something is, such as authority, it doesn’t automatically give them respect and immunity from any form of questioning or criticism. This is why monarchy is so evil: because someone’s in authority for no reason other than by bloodline, not by consent of the people, and answers to no one. Respect is the mantra, just as it is the mantra, the primary goal of gangsters and mafiosi. Why? Respect for what? Tradition? Power? Without question or condemnation? They have no answer.