cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/57392984
America in 2025:
Me hearing some Hoser talking shit about 200 years ago:
this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2026
326 points (99.4% liked)
Political Memes
11971 readers
2117 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes quickly, before the pos levels it completely himself.
Unfortunately I think that in reality Canadians have almost as much work to do on their own government as Americans have to do on ours before they can be considered anything other than one of the US's closest allies and supporters.
Um. The US got crazy in 1812 because the British were kidnapping our citizens. I don't know what you think that war was about.
Multiple factors led to the US declaration of war on Great Britain that began the War of 1812:[26]
- Trade restrictions introduced by the UK under the orders in council of 1807 to impede trade with France, with whom Britain was at war (the US contested the restrictions as illegal under contemporary international law).[27] The impressment (forced recruitment) of seamen on US vessels into the British Royal Navy (men who Britain claimed were British subjects).
- British military support for American Indian tribes who were offering armed resistance against the US expansion of the American frontier in the Northwest Territory.
- A possible desire by the US to annex some or all of Canada.[28]
- US desire to uphold national honor in the face of what they considered to be British insults, such as the Chesapeake affair.[29]
🤔
Oh please oh please oh pretty pretty please
If you wait it out there won't be a white house to burn, 1/3 of it is already gone.
Just fyi you might need to change a setting on your acct, it's showing you as a bot controlled account.
Maybe they identify as a bot?
I've fixed it since.
Edit:or so I thought.
Nope
Still there
Nope, still showing for me
Do you want me to get on my knees and beg? I'll do it. What are you waiting for?
Technically it was the British that did it but hey whoever can get the job done.
I mean Canada is a British colony, no? Aren't they still under UK rule by some technicality?
Nope! We're part of a commonwealth (we have the same monarch as the UK, Australia, etc) but no other connection to the UK other than history.
Canada was not independent in 1814, though, so it would have been as a British colony.
How can you have the same monarch and not be under their control, even if that is a loosely applied term? I've read that the British royals still have a legal method of dissolving the British parliament and taking direct control of the government. It would likely lead to a massive revolt but is still technically possible. Is there a similar mechanism for the Brits to take over Canada? If not, what does it mean to have a monarch with no authority?
Sorry, for bombarding you with questions. It's funny timing because a friend and I were just discussing this the other day and we only ended with more questions than we started with.
The monarchy of the commonwealth is little more than just a diplomat with a title. They may have stated power in law but because of modern conventions they never use them or intervene in any of the politics of said countries.
It's considered two different monarchies. There is a King of Canada and a King of the United Kingdom. Same person, two different institutions.
So it wouldn't be a Brit taking over Canada, it would Canada's head of state seizing control.
I don't mean to sound rude so please don't take offense, but isn't that sort of nonsensical? King Charles is only one man and the vast majority of his life and time is spent in the UK so I think it's fair to say he considers himself more British than Canadian or Australian or a citizen of any other commonwealth nation, even if legally speaking it is defined differently. Doesn't that mean that the main thing preventing him from prioritizing the wellbeing of one nation over another is his own integrity? What happens if the next king is a dick?
Again, I really don't mean to be rude I'm just very curious about this topic. I'm sure watching Trump shit all over the American system of government is a factor in my thought process as well. Feel free to tell me to shut up if I'm making you think about this more than you want to.
Basically, the current King is the King of Canada, and also the King of the UK, and also the King of 13 other places. So this one dude is king of many places, but there's otherwise no connection between the governments of Canada and the UK, or Australia, etc.
So we're an independent nation, but in an open relationship with our monarch.
I don't think I fully understand the situation. From reading that it seems that Canadian bills require royal assent to become law. Doesn't that effectively mean that the King of England determines Canadian law? It seems there's some obfuscation going on between the governor general and the monarch but I don't think I'm getting how that changes things at a fundamental level.
Canada has a king.
The UK also has a king.
They happen to be the same person.
So the king has similar authority in both Canada and the UK (plus 12 other countries). With respect to Canada, the king is just as much Canadian as he is British (or Australian, etc). With respect to the monarchy, each realm (country) in the commonwealth is on an equal footing with each other.
So the UK has no more bearing on Canadian law than Canada has on UK law.
The Governor General rubber stamps the bill passed by the Parliament. The Governor General is nominally an agent appointed by the King of Canada (who happens to be the same person as the King of the UK), but they are recommended to the king by the Prime Minister. The king similarly rubber stamps whoever the Prime Minister recommended.
In Canada, the monarchy is mostly symbolic. There is a delegate of the monarchy called the governor general who speaks on behalf of the current monarch (plus leutenant governers at the provincial level). Their primary function is to veto bills they believe are unconstitutional or otherwise not in the interest of the public, plus a number of ceremonial things.
The monarch themself may be biased toward the attitudes and views of the UK, but there is no mechanism for British parliament to have any (legal) sway in Canadian politics (or in any of the other 12 countries in the commonwealth).
So the monarch has authority in all 14 countries, but nobody else can do anything in any other country.
The more you know 🌟
Canada patriated its constitution in the 1980s, the only 'thing still under UK rule' is that our monarch is automatically the monarch of the UK, but technically the monarchy of Canada is a separate title he holds.
Americans, please? Please? ~shit I got a $20 maybe we can gofundme this?~
Its gotta come down anyways. The stench cannot be washed away. And all that guady tacky shit? Gross.
I say, once that fat fuck dies, we hold an auction for our former allies to see who gets to burn it down. Could be a peace offering or something?
(Relax, we'll rebuild the fucking thing, but with Big Bold Reminders that the next fascist PoS will be burned INSIDE the building)
but with Big Bold Reminders that the next fascist PoS will be burned INSIDE the building)
Why wait for the next one? The best 'reminder' would be a practical demonstration.
Well? We're waiting.
LOL not with Carney at the helm. He's practically selling them Canada wholesale.
Wen