An Independent Canadian Monarchy?

[Frozen Royalist]

Okay, we talk about nations that could become monarchies while also talking about the popularity and maintaining of existing monarchies, how about we talk about something specific?

What I'd like this thread to be about is Canada having its own royal family outside of the Commonwealth Realm, I'm talking about Canada going from being the Dominion of Canada to the United Kingdom of Canada (It is a federal state and it would be best in my opinion that would be United Kingdom of Canada rather then simply Kingdom of Canada because of Quebec), a Canada that isn't sharing with the UK in terms of Head of State.

I would like discussions about Canadian republicanism and Windsor-loyalism to stay out of this thread because it is primarily hypothetical meaning in theory. Meaning just discuss about there being a Canadian Royal Family in general, don't say it's impossible, don't say it would be more likely for Canada to form a United North American Republic with the US, just talk about an independent Canadian monarchy.

So what are your thoughts of an independent Canadian Royal Family? How should it be established? Should somebody from the House of Windsor be voted as the first monarch? Perhaps somebody from the House of Bourbon because of Quebec? Or a different dynasty entirely form Europe or a prominent Canadian family? How would you like there to be a United Kingdom of Canada?

The reasons I'm asking is because I have recently received a new perspective of Canadian Monarchism, some people have pointed that the polls I've seen about the monarchy in Canada are rather rubbish like the Serbian Restoration polls. While thinking I'm afraid I received a brain fart and thought about how cool it would be for Canada to have its own royal family. This would mean that there is an independent constitutional monarchy in the Western Hemisphere (I'm not saying Canada isn't independent I'm just saying Canada would be independent of the Commonwealth Realm) which in turn could cause the idea of monarchism to become more popular or resurface even further in Brazil and maybe even Mexico, crazier things have happened.

-Frozen Royalist

P.S. Once again the purpose of this thread is just to talk about stuff that is in theory, hypothetical, etc. I hope the rules make sense.

[Denville]

I don't think it would have a snowballs chance...

[Frozen Royalist]

This is a what if scenario, meaning stuff about likelihood and what not is completely irrelevant. Meaning what if an independent Canadian monarchy came to existence despite all the odds for or against it.

-Frozen Royalist

[Osipi]

The big question for me would be how would Canada even start to figure out just who the Royal Family of Canada would be? Who picks and chooses or do they hold an election and elevate someone to "royal" status? Do they import someone like Greece did that is already deemed to be "royalty" to be King or perhaps someone with a royal pedigree that somehow relates to Canada?

Basically to me, it would be the same scenario as becoming a republic and figuring out who would be the President of Canada.

BTW: If I'm remembering right, in Australia, there is only the Queen of Australia (HM, Elizabeth II) and no royal family of Australia.

[Somebody]

Not realistic indeed but I've entertained the thought of having the queen's other children as the monarch's of other commonwealth countries (especially the bigger three) when Charles ascends the throne as it doesn't seem to make sense to have a very British head of state if you are on the other side of the planet.

Canada could go to Anne and the next queen would be Canadian-born queen Autumn!

My main concern would be Andrew. I have a hard time picturing him as king (of Australia or New Zealand). Edward and Sophie would do fine imo.

[csw]

I'm game. I'm thinking about who would fill the role of monarch under each of the 4 possibilities you mentioned:

1: House of Windsor
I don't think Harry would go for it but I could see the Duke of York wanting it big time. It would be a way to ensure his daughters are active royals. But would the Canadians want him? Are there any Windsors who are closely aligned with Canada and are popular?

2: House of Bourbon
I don't know enough about this family to even know who to consider.

3: Other European
I have no ideas here. I can't imagine going for a total outsider

4: Canadian
I would like to see a chief of one of the first nations take the role. This would have historic weight on its side and would appeal to the Canadian spirit

[Frozen Royalist]

Originally Posted by Osipi

The big question for me would be how would Canada even start to figure out just who the Royal Family of Canada would be? Who picks and chooses or do they hold an election and elevate someone to "royal" status? Do they import someone like Greece did that is already deemed to be "royalty" to be King or perhaps someone with a royal pedigree that somehow relates to Canada?

Basically to me, it would be the same scenario as becoming a republic and figuring out who would be the President of Canada.

BTW: If I'm remembering right, in Australia, there is only the Queen of Australia (HM, Elizabeth II) and no royal family of Australia.

Well I suppose there is that, I had the idea of somebody from the British or Spanish (The reason I bring up Spain is because of the Bourbon Dynasty and Quebec, the Bourbons originated from France, the current Spanish branch have claimants to the French throne and Quebec was established during the days of Bourbon France, Royal Families being asked along with the Canadian Parliament having an extensive debate about he subject. They'd finish and somebody would be asked.

-Frozen Royalist

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by csw

4: Canadian
I would like to see a chief of one of the first nations take the role. This would have historic weight on its side and would appeal to the Canadian spirit

Oh this approach is totally unique and the one I like the best.

[Frozen Royalist]

Originally Posted by csw

I'm game. I'm thinking about who would fill the role of monarch under each of the 4 possibilities you mentioned:

1: House of Windsor
I don't think Harry would go for it but I could see the Duke of York wanting it big time. It would be a way to ensure his daughters are active royals. But would the Canadians want him? Are there any Windsors who are closely aligned with Canada and are popular?

2: House of Bourbon
I don't know enough about this family to even know who to consider.

3: Other European
I have no ideas here. I can't imagine going for a total outsider

4: Canadian
I would like to see a chief of one of the first nations take the role. This would have historic weight on its side and would appeal to the Canadian spirit

I think Prince Andrew is too controversial as it is and might not be the greatest of choices. Maybe ask one of Prince William's children in a few decades.

-Frozen Royalist

[Frozen Royalist]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Oh this approach is totally unique and the one I like the best.

I suppose asking one of the first families of Canada would make sense, just which family though?

-Frozen Royalist

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by csw

1: House of Windsor
I don't think Harry would go for it but I could see the Duke of York wanting it big time. It would be a way to ensure his daughters are active royals. But would the Canadians want him? Are there any Windsors who are closely aligned with Canada and are popular?

Does being a Canadian, born and raised in Canada count? In that case I repeat my suggestion:

Queen Anne & prince consort Timothy
Crown prince Peter & crown princess Autumn
Hereditary princess Savannah

Other members of the royal family:
Princess Isla
Princess Zara & Mike Tindall
Mia Tindall

With a line of succession consisting of 5 members and one on the way, succession is rather secure as well.

[Rudolph]

As it stands now Elizabeth II is Queen of Canada and Canada has its own royal family independent of Britain.

There is a quote from 1983 when The Queen was leaving America after a visit.

She was asked where she was headed to next and she replied “I’m going home to Canada”

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Frozen Royalist

I suppose asking one of the first families of Canada would make sense, just which family though?

-Frozen Royalist

The more I looked into this, the more I come to realize that should Canada elect to have a head of state that is of the First Nations, it wouldn't resemble anything like a monarchy. Monarchies are a predominately European construct and played no part in the lives or the governing of the people of the First Nations.

"With regard to government, Indian societies ranged from very loose democracies in which all discussed important decisions to the more formal confederacies, such as that of the League of Five Nations (also called the Iroquois Confederacy). In general, cross-cultural studies suggest that communities with 500 or fewer individuals tend to be egalitarian without formal leadership roles. Most of the so-called “hunting and gathering” tribes would fall into this category. However, as population increases there is a need for a more formal governmental structure. With a population of about 2,500, societies tend to have formal, political hierarchies. With regard to American Indians, many of the agricultural tribes would fall into this group."

Indian Chiefs | Native American Netroots

[Frozen Royalist]

Originally Posted by Osipi

The more I looked into this, the more I come to realize that should Canada elect to have a head of state that is of the First Nations, it wouldn't resemble anything like a monarchy. Monarchies are a predominately European construct and played no part in the lives or the governing of the people of the First Nations.

"With regard to government, Indian societies ranged from very loose democracies in which all discussed important decisions to the more formal confederacies, such as that of the League of Five Nations (also called the Iroquois Confederacy). In general, cross-cultural studies suggest that communities with 500 or fewer individuals tend to be egalitarian without formal leadership roles. Most of the so-called “hunting and gathering” tribes would fall into this category. However, as population increases there is a need for a more formal governmental structure. With a population of about 2,500, societies tend to have formal, political hierarchies. With regard to American Indians, many of the agricultural tribes would fall into this group."

Indian Chiefs | Native American Netroots

Well, although it would make sense only a small portion of Canada's population is indigenous, roughly 4.9% to be exact. So would it make sense to have a monarchy that came from 4.9% of the population, I know the Windsors are German and all but that isn't what I'm getting at. What I'm getting at is that I'm not sure the other 95.1% of the population would really be on board with a monarchy that originated from the Native Canadian population. Considering that the majority of Canadians are of European decent I guess it would only make sense for the royal family to of European decent as well.

-Frozen Royalist

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Does being a Canadian, born and raised in Canada count? In that case I repeat my suggestion:

Queen Anne & prince consort Timothy
Crown prince Peter & crown princess Autumn
Hereditary princess Savannah

Other members of the royal family:
Princess Isla
Princess Zara & Mike Tindall
Mia Tindall

With a line of succession consisting of 5 members and one on the way, succession is rather secure as well.

It is a silly thread, but if Québec ever became independent, rather than becoming a republic, they could offer the crown to one of the "legitimist" pretenders to the throne of France such as the self-styled "Duc d'Anjou".

[JR76]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

It is a silly thread, but if Québec ever became independent, rather than becoming a republic, they could offer the crown to one of the "legitimist" pretenders to the throne of France such as the self-styled "Duc d'Anjou".

The Duc d'Anjou and his ancestors have been living in Spain for 300 years so he's not exactly French

[cepe]

I understand the rules of this include the fact that it is pure speculation. But what is happening is that the base idea is getting lost in opinions of specific personalities.

Its the principle that needs acceptance and then the who.

No one in the UK knew Sophie of Hanover or her son George but they worked out that it had to be someone who was part of the royal family ( even if they had to go way back) and had to be Protestant. Hence House of Hanover and George I

So what are requirements of this monarchy?

[Countessmeout]

Originally Posted by Frozen Royalist

Okay, we talk about nations that could become monarchies while also talking about the popularity and maintaining of existing monarchies, how about we talk about something specific?

What I'd like this thread to be about is Canada having its own royal family outside of the Commonwealth Realm, I'm talking about Canada going from being the Dominion of Canada to the United Kingdom of Canada (It is a federal state and it would be best in my opinion that would be United Kingdom of Canada rather then simply Kingdom of Canada because of Quebec), a Canada that isn't sharing with the UK in terms of Head of State.

I would like discussions about Canadian republicanism and Windsor-loyalism to stay out of this thread because it is primarily hypothetical meaning in theory. Meaning just discuss about there being a Canadian Royal Family in general, don't say it's impossible, don't say it would be more likely for Canada to form a United North American Republic with the US, just talk about an independent Canadian monarchy.

So what are your thoughts of an independent Canadian Royal Family? How should it be established? Should somebody from the House of Windsor be voted as the first monarch? Perhaps somebody from the House of Bourbon because of Quebec? Or a different dynasty entirely form Europe or a prominent Canadian family? How would you like there to be a United Kingdom of Canada?

The reasons I'm asking is because I have recently received a new perspective of Canadian Monarchism, some people have pointed that the polls I've seen about the monarchy in Canada are rather rubbish like the Serbian Restoration polls. While thinking I'm afraid I received a brain fart and thought about how cool it would be for Canada to have its own royal family. This would mean that there is an independent constitutional monarchy in the Western Hemisphere (I'm not saying Canada isn't independent I'm just saying Canada would be independent of the Commonwealth Realm) which in turn could cause the idea of monarchism to become more popular or resurface even further in Brazil and maybe even Mexico, crazier things have happened.

-Frozen Royalist

P.S. Once again the purpose of this thread is just to talk about stuff that is in theory, hypothetical, etc. I hope the rules make sense.

Not that this has a snowballs chance in Hades of happening but:

Bourbon: definitely no. The French population of Canada is about 20%. There is also the lack of perceived loyalty of Quebec (the constant desire of many in the province to leave Canada all together). Going back to a throne that hasn't had power in Canada since the 7 years war (during the reign of Louis XV) that doesn't represent even close to a majority of the population of Canada, would make little sense.

Same with another monarchy: why would Canadians ever want say a Norweigan royal on the throne? What is the connection at all?

While Canadian first nations has some merit I don't think it would work. Not only is there too much division among the tribes, which one would you choose a king from, but the cultures don't match up with a monarchy. A government is meant to unify a country, and I don't see a native monarchy being able to do so.

The only chance a monarchy would have of standing is to be a Windsor one. Keeping the traditions and such we love, but making it 'our own'.

But to really make it our own, we could argue that should be 'Canadian'. There are two options really. One much closer to the throne, but there really isn't a need for them to be physically close.

-King Peter, Queen Autumn and Princesses Savanah and Isla: Anne is firmly entrenched in royal life in the UK and her role there. Her Canadian daughter in law as a Canadian queen consort.

or a bit further from the throne but still Windsor blood:
-King George, Queen Sylvana and prince/ss Edward, Marina and Amelia

Both you'd have the whole transitioning private citizens into royals, but then again this is a new monarchy anyways. They have the royal blood, but no real link to the running of the family back in the UK. George though is heir to Kent, though I guess he could pass over his right in favor of his brother. Or Edward could remain heir to his grandfather, and Marina could be the future queen. I don't see Canada, if we had our own monarchy, embracing anything less then equal inheritance.

[Al_bina]

Representatives of the colonial powers (France and UK) can not become a royal family of Canada. One can presume that indigenous tribes in Canada have their own royalty/aristocracy, who can be elected/chosen to be a monarch.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Al_bina

Representatives of the colonial powers (France and UK) can not become a royal family of Canada. One can presume that indigenous tribes in Canada have their own royalty/aristocracy, who can be elected/chosen to be a monarch.

The construct of a monarchy and a related hierarchy is something that is foreign to the First Nations and their way of governing. I posted information on this back in post #13. With a First Nations head of state, its more likely to be a confederation rather than a monarchy.

I think we've pretty much ruled this option out.