this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
269 points (99.6% liked)

World News

39096 readers
2734 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Dawson City in Canada is facing a crisis as the new mayor and councillors won’t take the required oath of allegiance to King Charles.

They refused in support of an Indigenous councillor who opposes the oath due to the Crown’s history with Indigenous people.

Without the oath, their election could be canceled, and they can’t make official decisions.

The council has asked for a different oath, but Yukon law requires the pledge. Authorities are now looking into the situation.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Eiri@lemmy.ca 11 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

Weren't people a bit more positive about monarchy back when Elizabeth II was alive? I feel like she had a sort of mystique that made her feel more legit for some reason.

[–] Aphelion@lemm.ee 10 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

He's widely unpopular in the UK because he's very politically involved via the massive amount of lobbying efforts he personally funds; something that the crown specifically promised not to do. Then there's Charles' hush money payments to cover up Prince Andrew's "indiscretions" with their family friend, Jeffrey Epstein.

[–] palordrolap@fedia.io 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Rumour has it that Charles is incredibly angry about the whole thing and Andrew is very much in danger of being cut off completely if he doesn't keep his head down, so while Charles has paid people off, he has not forgiven or forgotten.

There's also that he wasn't king at the time he made those payments and may have been protecting their mother rather than his brother at the time. Andrew, idiot though he is, was the Queen's favourite.

Had the Queen already been dead and Charles been king at the time the news broke, he might well have let Andrew suffer the consequences.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Uh huh, but then he paid hush money. But he is angry! He is furious about "the whole thing".

Dude, come on.

[–] palordrolap@fedia.io 1 points 38 minutes ago (1 children)

I never said what he did was right, only why he might have done it.

[–] Maalus@lemmy.world 1 points 5 minutes ago

The rumor and further theorizing that had he been king during the "whole thing" he would've punished him somehow, makes you seem sympathetic instead of acknowledging that hush money was paid, he is still part of the "family" and isn't in jail when he should be.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 9 points 5 hours ago

She was more relatable. She had corgis. She loved cows. She was an ambulance driver and mechanic during WWII. Nobody likes Charles.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 7 points 5 hours ago

The Queen's face and name has been on everything for decades. There are Canadians in their 70s who never knew anything different. That's just the way things were. It was tradition. That's how I saw it anyways. Anyone who complained about it was just complaining about a symbolic action we've all been doing for generations. Nobody is actually swearing their life to the queen--it's just a tradition. Then she died.

Now some random old guy's face and name is going to be on everything. If we're going to change everything anyways, then why not change it to something different? The argument that was seen as a small complaint before now makes a lot of sense. If we're changing the words to our oath anyways, then why not change them to words we can all agree on?

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 hours ago

Everyone loved the powder pink lizard queen.