Trashy's World Rotating Header Image

CPC pays homage to yet another anachronism…

… by putting “Royal” back in the names of the Navy and the Air Force.

Loving anachronisms – it’s the CPC way…

This move is just plain bone-headed on so many levels! Even some Cons that I know are scratching their heads a bit over this one! Some traditionalists are saying: “Hooray! We’re going back to the days before that mean PM Trudeau combined the Forces together!”. To them I say – welcome to the 21st century! Here is a calendar!

Look, I don’t pretend to know what those in the Forces think about this. But I don’t “get” why adding “Royal” in front of the “Canadian Air Force” and the “Navy” would matter one way or the other to them. Aren’t they more concerned about having up-to-date equipment in the field and fair pensions and health care in their post-military years?

Just sayin’…

Hey! Maybe under King Harper we can be the once again the sacrificial lambs that we once were for the British Empire. Doesn’t anyone remember World War I? Or Dieppe?

What’s next? Here are some ideas.

  • Regressive Cons rename Ontario Upper Canada

  • Ottawa is removed as the National Capital. Instead, an on-line contest is held – sponsored by Tim Horton’s. Canmore, Alberta wins.

  • God Save the Queen replaces O Canada.

  • The Red Ensign returns
  • Dollar is replaced by pounds, shillings and pence

  • Public servants have to take an Oath of Loyalty to the Queen… oh wait – we already do that….



Be Sociable, Share!


  1. Why it matters:

    There are a few reasons why it matters. First and foremost, this act undoes the previously mentioned “fuck you” from the Trudeau Liberals. Amalgamating the military into a unified command structure probably wasn’t a bad idea, but trying to crush the soldiers’, sailors’ and airmens’ service identity was just mean. A military force survives partly on its deep-seated traditions. Taking away their identity and putting the soldiers in ugly green bus-driver uniforms destroyed that. It wrecked morale, and lowered the prestige of Canadian military men and women around the world. That means it lowered our operational effectiveness… it’s harder to be good fighters and peacekeepers when you feel like your government hates you. That means it cost Canada money – ineffective soldiers are like anything else you spend money on that doesn’t work as well as it can. This change costs nothing and will make soldiers feel good. Happy soldiers are better soldiers.

    Second, it costs essentially nothing to do this, and it affects no Canadians outside the military. For you, the generic blog writer, other than providing fodder for you to demonstrate complete ignorance of the subject-matter, it doesn’t matter one iota. The cost is essentially zero, or very close to it. Uniforms will be modified as they are replaced, logos will be repainted with any new logos as they need to be repainted on the maintenance schedule. Some small amount of money is going to be spent, sure, but it will be shitload less than, say, moving the tax office to Shawinigan, or a check clearing facility to Riviere-du-Loup, or buying off Bombardier yet again.

    Third, from a purely political point of view, it will gain the CPC the support of tens of thousands of military voters. Much like Mulroney capitalized on this in 1984 by giving the three services different uniforms, undoing the green bus-driver uniform bullshit of 1968, so is Harper completing the job.

    Fourth, it’s a name restoration… not even a change. I can’t find a list of all the current military units in the CF, but a huge number of them already have the name royal, because the ’68 Liberals didn’t understand what they were doing well enough to remove the Royal from them… they just screwed two easy targets because it was politically expedient. In fact, they could have reorganized the military without doing the name change then, but they didn’t want to. They knew the important effect that changing the names would have on the navy and the air force. If you think it’s stupid now, why wasn’t it stupid then, and why wasn’t it a good enough idea to expunge the Royal completely from the military?

    Fifth, the actual good part of the 1968 amalgamation remains – the military will continue to operate under a unified command structure with one headquarters, answering to one commander. This is a trivial change.

    This whole fiasco has demonstrated to me that we do need to roll back the calendar to a time when people were actually made to learn a bit of history.

    1. trashee says:

      You and I agree on much, Squid-dude, but matters military are points that we will never see eye to eye on.

      You seem to think that many – including me- are ignorant about the history. I am not. I am fully aware of wht “Royal” was attched to the names of forces or regiments, etc. When I was younger, I went on a bit of a military history reading spree and learned much. Interesting stuff.

      BUT I strongly believe Canada would be stronger and more self-assured if we were to totally divorce ourselves from the Union Jack. Completely.

      It is not ignoring history – it is evolving as a nation.

      And this is not some Johnny-come-lately talking. My English ancestors on my Mom’s side settled in the Eastern Townships over 200 years ago. Yet I have no allegiance to the Crown in spite of my heritage. None. Zero.

      And I consider it an insult that the current government is trying to symbolically re-build ties to our old colonial hiostory and YES, we were a Colony. Great Britian was an Empire and the use of the word “colonial” is quite appropriate) This is a time when we should be looking to redeign our democratic institution by infusing new ideas – not resurrecting long-dead symbols.

      Squid-dude – this is not a case where one can simply imply that “you don’t know what you are talking about because you are not nor ever have been in the military”. I can say what I wish and I do so with the full knowledge of the historical context. And I disagree wholeheartedly with this politically crass and regressive move. Period.

      Now – if you come back and tell me that this is a move that will help the troops on the ground. That will prevent young men and women from being killed or maimed. That will matter deeply to troops – not just grizzled vets, but to young recruits from a plethora of backgrounds, then I might change my views on this. But, and again, I am NOT military, it would seem to me that what would matter more to these troops would be the availability of top notch training and equipment, sound judgement from their superiors and quality care and pensions in their post-military years.

      1. If you think this is a regressive move, then be consistent: get on about all the “Royal” that’s out there elsewhere in places that don’t really function on tradition… Start with the Royal Ontario Museum, the Royal Ottawa Hospital, the Royal Conservatory of Music, the Royal Winnipeg Ballet… damn, the list goes on and on. Again, I am quite certain that the vast majority of people complaining about this move have absolutely no idea what they’re talking about.

        Hell, start with Mount Royal, and rename the city while you’re at it. I am certain you can get a groundswell of support for Ville de Levesque.

        Then take the Royal out of the RCMP and just call them the Canadian Mounted Police… only they’re not really mounted, and they don’t do a lot of hardcore policing but mostly investigations at the federal level, so why not something more appropriate… how about Federal Bureau of Investigation? That wouldn’t be colonial.

        I’m quite serious here… if this is such a regressive issue, then BE CONSISTENT – speak with the same vehemence against the mountain of Royal out there OTHER than the handful of Royal styles in the military. Doesn’t it make more sense to do that then to take a shot at an organization that kind of got screwed over 40 years ago?

        If you know the historical context then you do know that this has nothing to do with colonialism. To associate it with that is faulty logic. The style Royal is deeply rooted in Canadian history. What the government did to the Navy and the Air Force in the 60’s was just petty. It wasn’t reasonable, it wasn’t logical, and it certainly had nothing to do with colonialism then either.

        But will this help the soldier on the ground? I think so, at least as much as boosting morale helps anyone. I genuinely think that it will give the soldiers a better sense of belonging, and will give them at least the illusion that the government actually cares a little bit more about them than has been the case over the last 40 years. That will make them perform better, and that’s a good thing. it’s not a matter of whether you or I are or were in the military… it’s a matter of value for tax dollar spent, and I think this move increases the value I get for the tax dollars spent.

      2. ***BUT I strongly believe Canada would be stronger and more self-assured if we were to totally divorce ourselves from the Union Jack. Completely.

        I wanted to address this separately, because I actually agree with that statement.

        However, no matter how much we divorce ourselves from it, it will still be part of our history.

        Just to expunge the style Royal would probably cost billions of dollars, and I can’t see any scenario where I could consider that to be money well spent. From a practical point of view, there’s just no value in it.

        Royal Canadian Mounted Police
        Royal Ottawa Hospital
        Royal Ontario Museum
        Royal Winnipeg Ballet
        Royal Bank of Canada
        Mount Royal
        Royal Roads University
        Royal Roads (the waterway)
        Royal Architectural Institute of Canada
        Royal Canadian Golf Association
        Royal Canadian Mint
        Royal British Columbia Museum
        Royal College of Dentists
        Royal Astronomical Society of Canada
        Royal Hunt Club Golf &CC
        Royal Colwood Golf &CC
        Royal Archmasons of Canada
        Royal Canadian Geographical Society
        Royal Opera Canada
        Royal Botanical Gardens
        Royal College of Dental Surgeons
        Royal Canadian Yacht Club
        Royal College of Massage Therapists (didn’t know this one)
        Royal Victoria Hospital

        I could go on and on here… That’s just a quick list, mostly off the top of my head and is far from complete and doesn’t contain anything military related. Yes, many of those aren’t government, but a whole bunch of them are government controlled.

        You see what I’m getting at? The people whinging against this are missing the forest, not for the trees, but for a sapling whose existence supports a little bird nest.

        1. trashee says:

          Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons.

          And I’m surprised that you missed the RMC!

          There is one difference between these names and the REINSTATEMENT of the “Royal” moniker to the military branches – they are being re-instated after being removed. I am not suggesting that the word “royal” be purged from Canadian history. I am not a revisionist.

          And I am not passing judgement one way or another on what PM Trudeau did 40 years ago.

          But I am saying that there is little sense in going back in time to dredge up old monikers. I have not heard a concerted call from active and retired servicemen and women for the return of “royal”.

          But I have heard about the need for better post-service care. Better equipment, etc.
          Yet, if you say that this change will positively impact those on the ground and potentially save young Canadian lives, then I cede to your insights…

          Though, man… I just don’t see it…

          1. I didn’t include RMC because it’s military.

          2. There was a concerted call for it. Repeated every few years. This is the first time it got traction.

            I remember calls for it when I served, nearly 30 years ago.

  2. Your ignorance is utterly astounding.

    A better question might have been to ask why the “royal” was taken away in the first place given that it was not removed from dozens of active military units. In effect, it was used as a sort of “fuck you” to the military by the reigning Liberals. Not really an effective use of government time.

    The change cost the government millions and damaged morale.

    It would be nice if the people railing against this were not so ignorant of the history of the military. A little learning goes a long way. The Royal designator is more-or-less an award like a battle honour. Taking it away was just petty (we know you got first place Johnny, but you can’t display the trophy or ever talk about it because… well because it might may the dumb kids feel all weird).

    These are the traditional names of the Canadian navy and air force. There’s nothing colonial about it.

    The whole debate, however, has really demonstrated that Canadians really are ignorant hicks when it comes to knowing their own history. That’s much more like the Tea Party than anything Harper is doing.

  3. John Shipley says:

    Just Harper trying to be like the GOP/Tea Party in the U.S.
    If we could just bring our country back to like it was for our forefathers…. 🙂

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: