So when we flew from Edinborough to Heathrow, why wouldn't the English cabbie take my "Bank of Scotland" pound notes?

She's QEII of Australia and New Zealand too, although Australia will probably become a republic within 10 years. The last referendum to that effect was lost because the monarchist side succeeded in confusing many voters over the model proposed.

As the office of president will be kow-key and mostly ceremonial, that model made sense - it envisaged appointment of the president by a two-thirds majority of Parliament (thus ensuring that the result would be non-party-political). However, the monarchists branded it a "politican's republic" and convinced many that the president should be directly elected by the people (which in reality would have the effect of making the office party-political!). So, despite the fact that opinion polls consistently favour a republic, the vote was for no change.

I think the situation is different in Canada - Michi can correct me on this -because the monarchy helps to distinguish the country from its big neighbour to the south. Although Australians fret about US "cultural colonialism", that's less of an issue for us.

The fact is that despite her nominal role as Head of State the Queen takes no hand in Australian affairs and the Royal Family invariably promotes British trade, etc., interests, not Australian.

The Queen's formal role is delegated to the Governor-General, who is in effect appointed by the Prime Minister. The GG keeps such a low profile that we're not even sure if he's still in the country, and we'd expect a president to continue in that proud tradition.

Now, how did the Brits, Canadians and Australians manage to highjack this board?

scurry, I hate to say it but you're not helping your case by misspelling Edinburgh!

Not taking Scottish banknotes in England is an old story. And I believe (but don't have any handy Loonies to confirm) that Canadian coins have "Elizabeth II Regina" on them. Along with beavers and other famous Canadian Americans. ;-)

Speaking of HM Mrs Q and animals, I found myself a couple of years ago in a Boots the Chemist (think Rite-Aid) shop in England, with a pocket full of coins I'd just brought back from Gibraltar. The coins had the same shapes and sizes and values as UK-minted coins (no coins minted in Scotland, unlike notes) but with some not-so-subtle differences. The Gibraltar 5 pence coin, in particular, had the Queen's profile on its face, very similar to the UK 5p coin; however, the other side had a Barbary Ape on it - those are the critters that live on the Rock of Gibraltar, irritating and occasionally biting tourists. "Regular" 5p coins have, I believe, a Scottish thistle (emblem) on the back.

Shop lady no. 1 (broad Yorkshire accent) to shop lady no. 2, upon me giving her some change: "Eee, what's this? Et looks like 'monkey on't 5p."

Shop lady no. 2 - also from the Dales: "Oh yeah, they all 'ave monkeys on 'em now."

I believe she was referring to the back of the coin and was not making an editorial observation on Family Windsor.

So what's with all this alliance with the Queen? Neil says of Canada "because the monarchy helps to distinguish the country from its big neighbour to the south". How lame! I hear someone's Mama calling. Americans kicked that family out and Canada didn't. I don't understand why Canada, Australia, and New Zealand haven't booted the stigma of the royals out of their society. go figure!

That's what I want to hear, wemr. Bugger that namby-pamby politeness that infests the Australia board, along with the contributions of those wimpy Canadians. What would they know? I've told the Aussies to lift their game and develop a bit of competitive spirit, but it's bloody hard work.

Well, mate, if you'd been reading carefully you might have deduced that actually I'm not a monarchist (now come on, put down that JD and Coke and concentrate!). But I do try to understand the historical reasons for why things as they are in my own and others' countries, yours included.

We all have our little mythologies. One of yours is that the American Way is by definition superior to all others, and that given half the chance the rest of us would jump on the first available plane and apply for a Green Card. Sorry, pal, but it ain't necessarily so.

I've spent a little time in your country - not much, but perhaps more than you've spent in Australia - and actually I like Americans and yes, I think you have a few things to teach us. But the maddening thing about some Americans is this obdurate refusal to accept that anyone else has anything to teach YOU. Believe me, you lose more than us from this mindset.

I could go on about the shortcomings of your culture, and you (in the unlikely event that you're in a position to) could respond in the same vein, but what would be the point? Deep down, you know the skeletons in your closet, and so do I, and I know the bones in ours too.

But back to the immediate point - believe it or not, one of the most effective arguments the Australian monarchists advance is "Do you really want the American system in this country?" A bit simplistic, perhaps, but enough to scare a lot of voters.

By the way, my congratulations on winning the War of Independence. But just keep in mind that this happened because the British forces ran dead as a result of widespread sympathy and support in England for the colonists' cause. Now tell me something about the rebellions of Irish convicts and gold-diggers, and early trade unionists' battles, in 19th century Australia.

Australia doesn't run under the American system? Just because Australia doesn't have a primary yet...

I'm sorry...I can't help myself. Neil, came over here 'cause you noted it's a hoot on the Aus board.

I'm a Yank (ooh, will I now be thrown out of the Oz forum?) who's been living in Sydney for 5 years, yet am also one of those "young'uns" who never had geography classes, per se. Perhaps it's the pack I run in, but we all know our geography, whether it be European, American, etc. And our history ain't that bad, either (now grammar, that's another story!)

You know whose perspective makes me split my sides, both when reading about Australia, the US and GB...Bill Bryson.

Now....should Australian politics start falling in line with US politics, I'd lose my entertainment! Those parliamentary debates! Just give me a bucket of popcorn and some Tim Tams and I've got all the show I need!

Oh, I'm heading to England (London, to be specific) this week so see all you pasty poms there! (just a joke)

Neil, what "big neighbour to the south"? Oh, you mean America! Sorry, I can't help you on the issue of the monarchy in Canada because I'm still working on England, UK and so on.

Gardyloo, you were right about Canadian coins having Elizabeth II Regina on them. But when you said you didn't have any handy Loonies to confirm it, you should have explained the $1 coins are called Loonies and not us Canadians (although it properly describes us). We also have a $2 coin called a Toonie. Ah the Canadian imagination!

Ani:

I didn't know that I was making a case (I was asking a question) -- or that correct spelling was mandatory on computer message boards.

So the Brits still own Gibraltar? I though the Spanish ousted them years ago! Imagine if the Spanish had captured Land's End ! But then again, try explaining to anyone about Guantanamo Bay!! ( Somehow got to twist this back to the US)

Yes, Gibraltar is still a UK outpost, despite constant harrassment from the Spanish and sullen admonishing from the EU. When the Spanish get all self-righteous about it they're usually reminded of Cuetta, the Spanish city on the coast of Morocco - same deal.

michi...the reason why its a problem when people ask 'What part of England are you from' is because not everybody lives in England! This shows how little you must know, and l thought the Canadians were quite well knowledged about this topic. If you are from Wales or Scotland, then you are not from England. You maybe from Britain, the UK, but not England.

Get it?!

And scurry...all l can do is apologise for the bad experience that you went through with the cabbie. Any money that is sterling is legal tender in the UK. This includes Bank of Scotland notes, and Bank of Wales notes. It's probably that the taxi driver was too stupid to realise Scotland was in Britain.

And scurry-sorry to spell check you (I'm surprised, actually to be the only one to do so-on this board its the norm) but Americans already get a bad enough rap (deservedly so) b/c of their ignorance that I couldn't let it be exacerbated by your butchery of the spelling of one of Britain's largest and most historical cities. I'll let it go now.

Well my speling needs Czeching too -
Harassment. Cueta.

Now I have to turn around and ask everyone to stop giving the Brits a hard time. Glyn's posts have reminded me of what it must be like to fall on hard times. How would YOU like it if you'd once had an empire covering a quarter of the globe and were now left with nothing but Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands? After WW2 Australians were encouraged to send food parcels to Britain to relieve shortages in the Old Country - now I'm thinking we should be looking to donate a few islands that we don't really need. New Zealand, perhaps ....

Seems like Americans (whoops I mean US residents) aren't the only ones to get things screwed up. Check this out...

OTTAWA (Reuters) - A contender for the leadership of Canada's opposition Conservative Party was unflatteringly compared with Christopher Columbus this week and reminded that aboriginal Indians and people from India are different.

The politician, Stephen Harper, had to apologize after his office sent a letter to a native group, the Ontario Federation of Indian Friendship Centers, congratulating it on a holiday celebrating India's independence from Britain.

Wrong Indians. And the mistake prompted a stinging rebuke from federation president Rick Lobzun, who said Harper's letter, sent in January, recalled Columbus's error of mistaking America for India.

It seems wrong to bandy about the term 'ignorant' when the subject is, in my opinion, pretty unclear.

I'm not sure that Scotland, Wales or England should be called nations or countries because they don't have sovreign status. They're not in the UN or compete individually in the Olympics.

Perhaps the issue is less ignorance and more poor communications.

Just a thought.

Slavery is a terrible part of American History. Thanks in part to the English. Slavery was introduced to the western hemisphere by the Spanish on Native Americans. The English were next in line. They sent endentured servants (slaves) to work off prison time in America. Aftrican were next in the slavery time line.

I am so ashamed by what has happened here in America. The Royal family and England has dirty hands in North America as do the Spanish who preceeded them. When you visit the fine churches of Spain do not forget that most of that gold has the blood of Native Americans on it.

Ani, we don't spellcheck each other because it is rude.

Clikc on mi nayme an yule fined lots of speling ears.

jor - looking at the past history of the United Kingdom, it was in fact the English who were responsible for the terrible slave trade. It was not the Britain as a whole, but simply England.

And l believe that this is a problem through poor communication thanks to both the British and American media. I'm sure that half the reports that we receive from America are incorrect, and vice versa.

So, yes, l agree. Ignorance does play a part, as in every problem, but l believe that its the communication to blame. All l'm doing is simply spreading the message across, l'm not accusing anyone, just reminding everyone that there is a difference. I hope that you American's are mature enough to realise this.

That's fair Glyn.

So let's use this medium to educate each other instead of pointing fingers.

Tell me, is Cornwall considered a separate country as well?

whoa! This must be a brand new Fodor's then! My bad.

CAUTION:
Don't trust those Australians with anything important. They've managed to loose their tallest mountain and a prime minister in the past and now their governor general is missing. He's the guy who can depose the elected prime minister at the bidding of the CIA ( an organization from the USA part of the N. American continent) or organize nuclear tests at the request of the British Prime Minister who lives in London in that quarter of the UK affectionately called England ( the part that has all those "shoppes") Careless, but carefree sorts.

AndrewDavid

Glyn, to complicate matters further, you'd probably be aware of the school of thought that says even the English would have been OK if the peaceful Anglo-Saxons hadn't been overrun by the warlike and acquisitive Normans, the progenitors of most of today's aristocracy. Still, maybe without the Normans' urge for conquest we wouldn't be able to sit in all these widely separated countries having this discussion.

I just recalled that it was the invading Anglo-Saxons who drove the British tribes out of England, especially into Wales. Ruins that argument.

Hi, all! I'll go eat crow now, thank you very much! I'm the one who thought this thread more appropriate on the "Europe" forum - lo! Shows you how much I know!

Great discussions here - and 'bout as friendly as these discussions can get!

bennnie: "Wrong Indians" LOL! Had me laughing out loud!

GoTravel: "speling ears" - what them be? :)

I have had and still have friends in England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland and I would never - ever! - ever want to get in-between a discussion/fight between and among those fine people.

Now we have the canucks, the aussies and the kiwis joining in - what fun! :)
(Hope I'm not insulting any one!)

STOP THE PRESS.

The states formally know as New England will now be know as New Britian, or should that be New United Kingdom??

Glyn,

You mean to say that in your recent travels that this "issue" stood out as a serious problem??? I can think of so many worthy and serious problems that I have observed in my travels both within the united states and outside. You have been pointing fingers and you are generalizing that all people from America (including canada which you also pointed a finger at) are ignorant simply because a few that you met abroad couldn't decipher where your accent was from. That's arrogant to me. There are far more serious subjects to discuss and complain about than being irritated because you were mistaken for being English. For the record, the media often makes mistakes that people often believe. If this is really an issue for you, you should be directing it towards them since you seem to blame them largely for this miscommunication.

I understand how other countries view the united states when it comes to attitudes of being superior. I love this country but in no way do I think it is perfect or that it is superior to other countries. When I travel to other countries I want to learn about their history, way of life, culture, people, etc... It's this constant bickering about who is better and who sucks that is the real problem. Yes, there are a lot of angry, ignorant, obnoxious stupid americans that travel abroad and are noticed for their behavior but there are plenty of other people visiting the U.S. that are just as obnoxious and ignorant. It will always be that way unfortunatly.

Dear Glyn

I'll try to overlook the insulting remark you made about me and my knowledge, but please don't judge all Canadians by my ignorance. My mother taught me to turn the other cheek (or was that ear?). Now take a good look at your original posting.

You said "It's just like calling America Washington or calling Australia New South Wales. Make sense?" Well that statement makes no sense to me in relation to your beef (in Canada and the United States, in this context, beef means complaint not cattle).

Gardyloo says: "...tell everyone on both sides of the water that "America" refers to a somewhat larger geographic entity than than the 49 US States that happen to occupy a small portion of the continent. People from Guatamala are as much "American" as people from New Jersey. More so,

Hurray for Gardyloo; and my later input:

"Gardyloo, I totally agree with your comment that America refers to something larger than the United States but you left out Canada. ... there are two Americas: north and south, but people overseas (that is, on the other side of the Atlantic or Pacific) like to call the United States "America." This is borne out by the current popular movie "In America," where an Irish family emigrates to New York City via Toronto, Canada. My feelings were hurt. So the next time an overseas person says to me, "I'm going to America," I would feel justified in saying "north or south"?

But I wouldn't be upset Glynis, I would use it as an opportunity if the occasion warranted it. I think Canadians would generally agree to call people living in the United States "Americans" -- actually we insist on this differentiation, but again, generally speaking, we do not appreciate the United States being known as "America." Even Americans call their country "America" but after all these years we can't do much about it since they outnumber us 10 to 1.

So you see Glynis, we have all learned something from your beef. Now if will say United States when referring to the USA instead of America, I'd be smiling.

That last sentence should have read:

So you see Glynis, we have all learned something from your beef. Now if [you] will say United States or United States of America when referring to the US, instead of America, I'd be smiling.

Gardyloo: you missed one state. The last time I looked there were 50 states.

michi; but only 49 of them are in N.America

Barbara

Please tell me you were jokinng ... please.

michi,
no, Barbara is quite right. Technically Hawaii is not part of the continent of North America.

It's funny but when I read Barbara's comment I was thinking she was referring to Alaska, although I can't explain why. I've travelled to Alaska on a number of occasions since it borders on the Yukon where my son lives.

So there are 50 states in the Union, but since Hawaii is not part of continental United States it is not considered part of North America. I understand.

lenleigh,

l merely pointed out a problem that l experienced while on my recent world travels. I experienced the problem in almost every country l visited (although l actually felt that the Australian's and Canadian's were more knowledgeable about the subject).

l did not bother to post the message to the Asian boards simply because 'our good friends from the US of A will be mature and responsible enough to hold a reasonable debate on the matter'. Obviously a majority of your good people have, and l have enjoyed reading about the history of both America, and the UK, some of which l did not even know. I have also enjoyed reading the same message on the Europe boards, and it has been received in a similar way as it has done on these boards.

But clearly you, lenleigh, are not mature enough to read this. If you can not take constructive criticisms on board then maybe this message board is not the place for you to be.

I hope that you understand my views, and do not take them personally, but as a constructive criticism.

It's very strange, I thought Lenleigh gave an intelligent answer. But then I am the ignorant Canadian. But you are right, Australians and Canadians do indeed know more about the subject (except for me) because we share the same queen and whatever that brings with it.

From Neil's Australia postings you will note their GG is missing or hasn't been sighted in the last couple of years. Our situation is the opposite. Our has been too visible it seems at too great an expense tot he taxpayer.

Ah well, as you say, don't take it personally.

michi,

May l ask what your opinions, along with other people that you know, are about being a part of the Commonwealth. Whilst in Australia, the feelings were mixed, probably more towards keeping it a part of the Commonwealth, however when l visited Canada l found it to be the other way around.

What are your opinions?

Glyn

This question should definitely not be posed in the United States forum. I'm not sure where because there are 54 nations in the Commonwealth.

Glyn, the debate in Australia is over whether to become a republic rather than whether to leave the British Commonwealth (you can do one without the other, as India, e.g., did).

We had a referendum on that a few years ago and the vote was to retain the monarchy. On the other hand, opinion polls indicate majority support for a republic. The explanation for this is that when it came to a vote the majority either (a) wanted to keep the monarchy or (b) didn't like the republican model proposed (a president chosen by a 2/3 vote of members of parliament) - the monarchist side managed to play Australians' cynicism about politicians and convinced the punters that they wanted a directly elected president - despite the fact that the office would be largely ceremonial and not much different to the current governor-general in scope.

Our current prime minister is a monarchist and was happy to add to the public confusion. His likely successor and many of his conservative colleagues are republicans, as is probably the entire Labor opposition, the Australian Democrats and the Greens. So there may be more common ground next time the matter comes up.

However, there's no great sense of urgency - the major argument for a republic can be summarised as "it's time we grew up and stopped hanging onto Mum's apron strings". (In reality Mum, having sensibly thrown in her lot with the EU, is no longer attached to the apron anyway.)

There's a subsidiary debate about changing the national flag to remove the Union Jack from the corner, a la Canada. This is because (a) the current flag conveys an impression in many parts of the world that we're still a British colony, (b) we're now a multiculural society in which a diminishing proportion of the population has British roots.

As for the Commonwealth, it has so little effect on anything that nobody really cares.

Personally, my roots are predominantly English, with a little Irish and Welsh thrown in. I think we should move to a republican model ASAP, change the flag and ditch the Commonwealth. However, I am in against repudiating or watering down the positive aspects of our British heritage (parliamentary democracy, judicial independence, a largely corruption-free public service etc). These things lie the root of why so many people from diverse cultures make their home here.

Amen.