MINDS DOIN'T CHANGE. TIMES DO CHANGE.

Nothing irritates Canadians more than to be ignored, unrecognized, or simply brushed aside as an irritating neighbour to the United States. How furious was I when I read a supposed-to-be tongue in cheek column in the New York Sunday Times by their London correspondent Sarah Lyall writes that “After they leave the cozy somewhat small-potatoes confines of Canada, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will travel to Los Angeles?” I know, she’s comparing the lotus land of celebrity to Canada but still she doesn't understand. Not only are we not “small potatoes” but we are a shining example of how a country creates a true liberal democracy without a revolution or a civil war. We have had a few bumps in the road like the Métis rebellion and the shameful execution of leader Louis Riel. Do you think that any American, except for some of my good friends who read this blog, will suddenly apologize for continuing to be indifferent and uninformed about their neighbour. My memory gnaws at me when I recall President Nixon referring to Japan as America’s biggest trading partner. When the president gets it wrong, how can I complain about a small minded Times columnist? Not only, my American friends, are we your biggest trading partner (although China is closing in) but we, not the Middle East, are your biggest source of oil and gas.

America should try to understand that in spite of the mindless anti-monarchy protesters in Quebec, the country seems to be enjoying the visit of the royal couple. They are amiable and approachable. They are social and interested. They represent the monarchy of tomorrow. But for some, that is not enough. The anti-monarchists simply do not understand the heritage of constitutional monarchy.

I happened to listen to Cross-Canada check up on CBC and it was all about the visit of William and Kate. One caller, an anti-monarchist from Vancouver went on and on about how “removed” this couple is from the hard realities of life: getting a job, having enough money to get by etc etc. This opaque point of view represents not only republican opinion, but misses the point entirely. The royals occupy a ceremonial and historical part of our lives. But the fact that they are immune from the everyday trials and hardships of "getting by" makes no sense. The sons and daughters of the wealthy also do not have to endure the trauma of making a way for themselves in a competitive society. Should we do away with them too?

Many of the calls rambled on more emotionally that realistically. There are millions of us who grew up singing God Save the Queen in school. But we also grew up saying the Lord’s Prayer. Neither of those reflects today’s reality. The difference is that in the continuum of history, the royals do matter. I don’t subscribe to the notion that from Magna Carta on we were a constitutional monarchy. We weren’t. We still had scoundrels like the Stuart Charles I and II. We had George III who is his madness let the thirteen colonies slip away. Britain, remember, also tried a more-or-less republican style with the great Protector who succeeded Charles I and imposed a Puritan iron hand on the country, and worse, a massacre of the hateful Irish.

Some of the freest and most progressive countries are constitutional monarchies: Holland, Belgium, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway.

What is the famous quote about “Those who forget history…?