We're all familiar with the American "holy trinity" of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". The Dominion of Canada was founded in 1867 on principles of "peace, order and good government". To what extent do these visions differ from each other? Or are they overlapping / complementary?
(It's worth noting to start with that POGG was intent to define the limits of legislation by statute).
Originally posted by Teinosuke We're all familiar with the American "holy trinity" of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". The Dominion of Canada was founded in 1867 on principles of "peace, order and good government". To what extent do these visions differ from each other? Or are they overlapping / complementary?
(It's worth noting to start with that POGG was intent to define the limits of legislation by statute).
You can have peace, order and good gummint in jail.
Originally posted by Wajoma You can have peace, order and good gummint in jail.
Which suggests that peace, order and good government don't in themselves guarantee freedom. But perhaps you can't have meaningful freedom in the absence of at least a degree of peace, order and good government.
Originally posted by Teinosuke We're all familiar with the American "holy trinity" of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". The Dominion of Canada was founded in 1867 on principles of "peace, order and good government". To what extent do these visions differ from each other? Or are they overlapping / complementary?
(It's worth noting to start with that POGG was intent to define the limits of legislation by statute).
In my opinion, "peace, order, and good government" sounds much more attractive than the principles of the american trinity. Equally, I have found Brazil's motto of "order and progress" to be just as euphonious.
Originally posted by Teinosuke We're all familiar with the American "holy trinity" of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". The Dominion of Canada was founded in 1867 on principles of "peace, order and good government". To what extent do these visions differ from each other? Or are they overlapping / complementary?
(It's worth noting to start with that POGG was intent to define the limits of legislation by statute).
I think they are generally complementary, (but it was Canada that walked away with 2 Gold medals in Hockey!) 😀
Originally posted by Teinosuke We're all familiar with the American "holy trinity" of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". The Dominion of Canada was founded in 1867 on principles of "peace, order and good government". To what extent do these visions differ from each other? Or are they overlapping / complementary?
(It's worth noting to start with that POGG was intent to define the limits of legislation by statute).
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness reinforce the importance of the individual: "I live. I am free. I pursue happiness."
Peace, order, and good government reinforce the importance of the social group: "We have peace. We have order. We have good government."
Originally posted by spruce112358 Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness reinforce the importance of the individual: "I live. I am free. I pursue happiness."
Peace, order, and good government reinforce the importance of the social group: "We have peace. We have order. We have good government."
Are we a band of individuals all running amok -- or are we an individual band all marching in lockstep?
Originally posted by Melanerpes Are we a band of individuals all running amok -- or are we an individual band all marching in lockstep?
It's funny for all that America was founded on very individualistic ideas -- how rapidly one can suddenly find everyone pulling together in a single direction.
It can happen quite quickly under the right leader.
Originally posted by spruce112358 Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness reinforce the importance of the individual: "I live. I am free. I pursue happiness."
Peace, order, and good government reinforce the importance of the social group: "We have peace. We have order. We have good government."
Nice distinction, but I think it's worth stressing, as I tried to do in the original post, that the Canadian motto is intended to set limits on the power of the state, to identify and delimit the role of the federal government in relation to the provinces.
Section 91 of the Constitution Act, 1867 states that "It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to make laws for the Peace, Order and good Government of Canada, in relation to all Matters not coming within the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures..." As Professor Lysyk points out, the power conferred to the Parliament is not a sweeping power to legislate in relation to peace, order and good government. The power contained in the opening paragraph of s. 91 is only to legislate for the peace, order, and good government of Canada in matters not exclusively assigned to the provinces.
In other words, this is a limited government clause and one which delegates quite considerable powers from the federal authorities to the separate provinces.
Originally posted by Teinosuke Nice distinction, but I think it's worth stressing, as I tried to do in the original post, that the Canadian motto is intended to set limits on the power of the state, to identify and delimit the role of the federal government in relation to the provinces.
[i]Section 91 of the Constitution Act, 1867 ...[text shortened]... h delegates quite considerable powers from the federal authorities to the separate provinces.
That's the problem with a motto. Invariably, it is taken out of context as Canada's is sometimes by outsiders; evident by the posts previous.
The pogg points out the limitations on the feds in that any legislation coming out of parliament should limited to those 3 areas.
Peace, order and good government
24 Nov '10 13:12
Back to Top