I'm just saying, you don't really have freedom of speech if the government can decide to violate it if they feel like it.

Edit: I'm apparently rate-limited. Anyway, if words on paper don't mean anything, then bringing up the Charter as evidence that Canadians have free speech is completely irrelevant.

Second, the notwithstanding clause isn't a theoretical possibility.

> I find my American friends sometimes freak out over the “but they could take your freedoms away!” when they read about stuff like that. Well, yeah they could do anything. Like make secret courts that ignore constitutional freedoms.

This is a cute way of pretending the clause is never used.

It’s also written somewhere that I’m subject to a king, so I’m not really free anyways.

Also I don’t actually own any land. It all belongs to my king. That’s written down too.

This is actually a really fascinating subject but not for a Friday night. Long story short: what’s written, and what actually is, are often quite different. I find my American friends sometimes freak out over the “but they could take your freedoms away!” when they read about stuff like that. Well, yeah they could do anything. Like make secret courts that ignore constitutional freedoms.

I think it’s healthier to be aware that it’s all a social construct that demands political activism.

> I find my American friends sometimes freak out over the “but they could take your freedoms away!” when they read about stuff like that

But did they?

> It’s also written somewhere that I’m subject to a king, so I’m not really free anyways. Also I don’t actually own any land. It all belongs to my king. That’s written down too.

Is it something that people are proud of? A big part of the culture?

Nobody here really cares about the monarchy beyond the novelty. But we don’t feel threatened by the fact that technically the monarchy has sweeping powers to dissolve government and walk away with our freedoms. Heck we aren’t even accumulating weapons just in case!

> But we don’t feel threatened by the fact that technically the monarchy has sweeping powers to dissolve government and walk away with our freedoms.

> Heck we aren’t even accumulating weapons just in case!

Not like you could do anything about it, seeing as the monarch took the guns!

>Not like you could do anything about it, seeing as the monarch took the guns!

This is silly. Canada is free to legislate however it wants on gun ownership. King Charles has nothing to do with it.

> But we don’t feel threatened by the fact that technically the monarchy has sweeping powers to dissolve government and walk away with our freedoms.

FWIW, technically they do not have that power. In a constitutional monarchy the monarch is subject to the constitution. The king can't technically abolish canadian parliment anymore than the us president would be able to technically abolish congress.

Of course there is a certain truth to the idea that its all a social construct, and anyone can abolish the government if they are backed by a large enough number of people with guns.

The government can decide to violate any freedom you think you have at any time for any reason regardless of what any law may or may not say. Freedoms are social constructs, nothing more. They exist to the degree that people believe in them.