Why did they choose the Queen over Liberty?

Why did they choose the Queen over Liberty?

Our situation was different from the US, Britain learned from its mistakes and instead allowed the Dominions self-governance.

We have liberty thanks to the British, our parliaments wouldn't exist without them, constitutional monarchy isn't less free then American style republic.

Because its an expensive change that ultimately changes very little. The people that consider it a top priority overestimate the Queens involvement in the political landscape or they just want to be part of a movement.

>We have liberty thanks to the British, our parliaments wouldn't exist without them, constitutional monarchy isn't less free then American style republic.

Reminder that constitutional monarchies are more democratic than republics.

They didn't want to be retarded amerishoots

CANZUK WHEN?

Monarchy is more free than corrupt tyranny of the majority.

>except its not bait and actually true

>Only America couldn't legally secede from the Empire
lol

We're a family.

It must be so weird for other European countries as they don't have former colonies around the world that are so ethnically and culturally similar it's like you're from the same country (tbqh I can understand yanks/cancucks/aussies/kiwis better than that of scouse or highlanders). Further more like it's not even a meme Anglo banter is a genetic thing, every Anglo I've met has cheeky savage banter. It's actually slightly upsetting that the USA is the least Anglo but even they still shows sparks of brilliance.
Do countries like Spain have the same level of relationship with Latin America as the UK does with the anglosphere? If not that's a shame because it is fucking mint.

>India
>ethnically similar
Well nowadays you pretty much are.

India is the weird brown kid dad adopted on the fly
Austrailia was a mistake
Canada a product of a one night stand with France
New Zealand... we don't talk about their origins

Being family is not claiming to be perfect.

Hopefully soon. I always chuckle when visitors to my country complain about the cost of getting a visa to travel to Australia. I literally never even think about it.

America had a well established landed gentry by the 18th century, they could run the place perfectly adequately themselves, so I guess they figured , 'why not?'

so thats why UK has such draconian control over civilians compared to US which has its 1st 2nd amendment and therefore some actual freedoms
it is a good demonstrations on the ills of democracy then (you can easily vote away basic freedoms to your own citizens if you do not have both strong culture and a constitution protecting these rights)

That's because the USA had so much immigration that it changed its culture.

Now about Spain, they don't. Why? Because of mestizaje (race mixing) and the fact that even then most latin americans are like 70% indian whose old tradition and culture are still a thing despite they don't know they are practicing it. For example, most religious festivities in latin america come from old indigenous festivities, they just replace their god with a local saint.

In Canada and those countries the brits either expelled or killed indians, who they weren't many because they didn't have urban settlements unlike the Incan Empire or the Aztecs and Mayans. Because of this there was few intermixing between races and intercultural communication. so the anglo culture prevailed.

As a Brit I'm rather annoyed that our support isn't higher. I bet that other 36% would rather have pakis and kebabs swarming over here with their radical islam than some people who actually share our culture and values.

TURKS OUT
ANGLOS IN

>Do countries like Spain have the same level of relationship with Latin America as the UK does with the anglosphere?
Only Spain with Argentina have this level of relationship.

Though Argentine culture has a strong Italian influence as well as some British, German and French influence due to immigration, the relationship has been similar to America and the UK.

Argentina fought Spain in the War of Independence, both became friendly again in the late 19th century, Argentina received countless of recent Spanish immigrants between the wars and sent food aid to Franco's regime after the Spanish Civil War.

Mexicans on the other side resent Spain pretty badly, they still call us Spaniards "gabachos" or "gachupines" (ethnic slurs) and blame us for every single problem.

In Venezuela there were even riots against descendants of Spanish immigrants (shopkeepers) but Venezuela is a shithole and a whole other matter altogether.

You forgot
>South Africa is that weird kid your dad adopted from her Dutch Parents

>South Africa is the weird kid your dad adopted out of guilt after murdering his Dutch farming parents.

So you mean that america is really free and democratic?

...

Constitutional monarchies generally speaking are far less corrupt than republics.

>2nd amendment
>Being shot by Muslims is true freedom

Americans, everyone.

>be burger
>get shot

What's your country lad?

Its like saying why do you chose to live in the company of friends and family rather than live in shack by yourself.

France might have quebec one day, and don't their former subjects use a version of the franc?

They're not wrong, like msot things in british elgal history, the Dissolution of the Empire was a long complicated legal process that you could argue about forever.

No

The French don't like the Quebecois. Gutteral French. They sound like hillbillies.

I mean it's not like British people find the former colonies accents a bit screwy.

No matter how quirky the Anglo colonies might be, it nothing compared to how clinically retarded Quebec looks to French observers. At this point Quebec might as well be Italian or Sicilian when you factor in how much organized crime from Mob families ad Bikers stem from there.

Maybe Portugal and Brazil? Fuck, what even is Portugal's relations with her colonies nowadays?

I want to know why you all choose the State over the union of egoists

As an Australian my worry is we'll get Pakis and kebabs coming here from the UK. In fact I don't even want New Zealanders having an easier time getting here either because they are literally the backdoor Chinese people use to come here. I would much prefer government incentives for larger families than encouraging immigration.

Internal migration would allow us to reduce our dependence on migration from asia and africa though. Might sting a tiny bit short term, but it'd be beneficial long term.

Besides, most foreigners over here in the UK are either not prepared to move at all or would want to move to their homeland provided it wasn't so shit. Any migrants you'd get in Straya would be Britons

That's what I worry about. We've got enough filth coming in Aus we don't need more. Australia would not benefit from free travel

They don't have to pay for the Queen. The only reason there's any kind of anti-monarchism in the UK is that we give them millions and people think "THAT COULD FIX THE NHS, FUCK THESE OLDIES". But of course, the rest of the commonwealth don't have to pay a thing, it's a free head of state and a symbol of historical national pride.

I'd take backdoor chinks over the Maoris and Pacific Islanders that flow from NZ any day

New Zealand, Canada, Australia and the UK all come above the US in the democracy index. Three are in the top ten, when the US is at 21

No one likes the Quebecois

At least the Polynesia degenerates we have flying in only commit petty crimes life theft and assault. Chinks drive up property prices around of the major population centres and buy their way into influencing the government.

Most of those Chink investors don't actually live here, it's an entirely different problem from the immigrating ones

Sometimes, these are really neat

fuck you.