Why all Canadians should be monarchists

Mark Milke, The Western Standard, June 4, 2022

A few years back while browsing through an antique shop in a small town in southern British Columbia, I spotted a “retro” print: A framed picture of Queen Elizabeth II. The photograph appeared as if had been from the early 1960s, back when it would have hung in a classroom, Elizabeth II being the head of state and all that.

With the 70th anniversary of Queen Elizabeth’s coronation upon us, it is a useful opportunity to ponder the monarchy in Canada and whether it should remain attached to our institutions.

On the “nay” side, there are multiple reasons some might want the monarchy abolished. Some will assert that in a representative democracy, the concept of royalty was long ago outmoded—it’s not as if anyone takes seriously the divine right of kings, for example. Thus, they might argue Canada should turn itself into a republic a la America or France.

Others oppose what Queen Elizabeth II represents—colonialism, imperialism, the British Empire—and thus that necessitates a move away from the monarchy. The assumption is that such concepts are so discredited that any connection to them should likewise be abolished, especially with an ever-more diverse Canadian mosaic composed of peoples from around the world.

Yet others might argue that the cost of the monarchy is reason enough to abolish it, though this argument applies more in the United Kingdom than in Canada. In 2021, payments from British taxpayers to the royals amounted  at 87.5 million British pounds, or $140 million Canadian, but a large part of that transfer, almost 60%, pays for the upkeep of royal residences.

The dollars and cents arguments against the monarchy is the least persuasive. If the British royals were converted to “commoners” tomorrow, the British, who quite properly love their heritage sites, would spend similar amounts to what they do now. Instead, let’s ponder the two stronger arguments against the monarchy and for Canadians: How it represents a link to the British Empire which some Canadians despise, and the fact that the concept of monarchy is itself ancient.

History is not simple: Let’s give more credit to the British 

On the first, the anti-British Empire/anti-imperialism argument only works if you think history can easily be divided into “bad guys” and “good guys,” and by ethnic or national origin. That’s simplistic because good and evil are not the unique possession of one ethnicity or nationality but displayed by all.

The British in particular contributed one unarguable benefit to Canada: The abolition of slavery. Space does not permit a full recounting of events but here’s the short version: British abolitionists such as William Wilberforce popularized anti-slavery ideas in Great Britain. Early pre-Confederation governors in Canada from Upper Canada to British Columbia were influenced by that and were determined to wipe out slavery in Canada.

Slavery was effectively abolished in practice by 1820 in Canada, but in law across the British Empire in 1833. However, slavery lingered in British Columbia long after 1833 and into the later 19th century because Indigenous peoples had long practiced slavery and some opposed its abolition. “Slavery was a permanent status in all Northwest Coast societies,” wrote anthropologist Leland Donald in his 1997 book, Aboriginal Slavery on the Northwest Coast of North America, who notes that slavery in the Pacific Northwest developed between 500 B.C. and A.D. 500, long before European contact.

Specific to BC, Donald points out how James Douglas, later a governor of Vancouver Island but in 1840 commanding Fort Vancouver, encountered resistance to abolishing slavery from some indigenous communities. Douglas’ strategies to abolish slavery included buying slaves from indigenous communities and freeing them. Slavery in remote parts of British Columbia and in Alaska would last until later in the 19th century.

To wit, British rule was not perfect, but that should be obvious for any government in any age and regardless of whether rulers are foreign- or native-born. But the British were the instigators of a worldwide movement to free slaves, including in Canada among indigenous communities.

What has this to do with the monarchy in 2022? Canada’s liberal democracy and its institutions did not appear out of thin air. Concepts such as the value of the individual including the personhood of everyone—slaves and women, for example, came from thinkers in Great Britain such as John Stuart Mill and Mary Wollstonecraft. Their prior influences included religion—abolitionists were driven by evangelical Christian notions of individuals created in the image of God, and agnostics and atheists who were key to the Scottish and European Enlightenment and its belief in tolerance.

Beyond abolishing slavery, the British brought other useful concepts to our world: parliamentary supremacy vis-à-vis the monarch, or on the economic side, consider Adam Smith and his articulation of why free markets were superior to other economic models and integral to a free, flourishing society.

In that sense, Queen Elizabeth II is representative of and heir to such ideas, traditions and their outworking in society over the centuries—and today in Canada we all are, no matter if one’s ancestors arrived 20,000 years ago from Asia across the Bering Strait, ten years ago escaping a repressive regime in Syria, or two weeks ago from Ukraine fleeing war.

There was never anything wrong with British liberalism and its colonial-era ideas. Such ideas of freedom and flourishing were always preferable to the collectivist impulse present in most societies in most of human history. What was missing was a fuller sharing of those same ideals of liberty with everyone, earlier. Instead, women only gained suffrage in 1918 and indigenous Canadians only received the vote in 1960, to give two examples of such omissions.

Evolutionary change is Canadian

Beyond being a symbol of informed and nuanced history, there’s another, useful reason to retain the monarchy and celebrate Elizabeth II: She is a reminder that evolutionary change is preferable to revolutionary upheaval. Many revolutions be they the French Revolution in 1789 or the Russian version in 1917 were spurred by notions that countries could be recreated from scratch. Thus, monarchs and others were overthrown and with blood in the streets the result.

That’s never been the Canadian way—Canada was in fact created in reaction to the American Revolution of 1776. While it is popular now among the chattering classes in Canada to also take a revolutionary, “year zero” rhetorical approach to Canada and argue we should start over—one sees this in caustic anti-British, anti-European sentiment today and with past colonial wrongs trumpeted out but never British virtues—the wiser approach is usually to change countries gradually.

Of note, even harsh critics of Canada seem not to notice that when they appeal, for example, to The Royal Proclamation of 1763 vis-à-vis indigenous peoples, or to honouring treaties with indigenous Canadians, they in fact appeal to a British concept: the rule of law.

To be sure, had the British abolished the monarchy and themselves moved to a presidential republic, it is entirely possible that British ideas including free enterprise, the rule of law, abolition and wider suffrage would have anyway thrived. But the fact of history is that the ideas arrived and were implemented under kings and queens, so the monarchy as an institution represents that link with our British past. Abolish that symbol and the already weak link with the many positive aspects of Canadian history would be subject to even further fading and revision of the non-nuanced sort.

In that sense, the 70-year-reign of Queen Elizabeth II should be celebrated because she represents continuity with the past. That includes the best developments in Canadian history: the rule of law, the abolition of slavery, and the equality of opportunity that eventually arrived for all in law and policy, and free enterprise—and all of it accessible now regardless of whether one is Indigenous, Irish or Indian.

We should retain the monarchy because it represents continuity with our past—all of it, including the positive parts too often forgotten. We should celebrate that, including Queen Elizabeth II and her 70 years as head of state, with a toast. 

MARK MILKE is the executive director of The Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy. His newest book is THE VICTIM CULT: HOW THE GRIEVANCE CULTURE HURTS EVERYONE AND WRECKS CIVILIZATIONS. Image credit: CBC.