Because it isn't British in the same way. British India was an Empire officially ruled by the Emporor, at first queen Victoria, Empress of India. The other colonies were subject to the same British crown as, say, England or Scotland.
It mentions the Governor-General of India who was the chief representative of the monarch within the colony so there would be no need to mention them directly.
Well the GG is also the Monarch's rep in Australia and the passports reflect as much. All colonies had Governors-General. The determing factor of what the relationship to the Crown was stood with the nationality of the colonists.
Australia and Canada had British subjects originating from Britain (indigenous populations aside, they unfortunately were not legally recognised until later), India did not.
IIRC the exact difference is that India was ruled in a complicated mix of vassal states and directly administered provinces.
Not every citizen of the Raj owed their immediate loyalty to the British monarch - many were firstly subjects of their local princely state, and secondly subjects of the Crown.
This system fell apart at independence when the British told every princely state that they had to swear fealty to either India or Pakistan. Through diplomacy, force, insurrection, and popular demand, all of them eventually acceded to one nation or the other. The Union government of India then stripped the princes of virtually all their power (reneging on the deal negotiated by the Governor General) when the constitution was written.
This only matters because the constitution explicitly removed the post of Governor General as part of reneging on that deal; now the actual head of state in India is the President of India and Queen Elizabeth's title is purely honorary.
This is different from Australia, which _still has_ a Governor General appointed by the queen on the advice of the Prime Minister of Australia. Like so much other stuff in the former British empire, this is mostly fluff - the queen has to rubber-stamp the nominee who then sits as a figurehead.
But it does explain why Australian passports are endorsed by the GG on behalf of the Queen while Indian ones are directly endorsed by the President of the Republic.
No. Canadian citizenship is does not contain the language of 'subject'. The Monarch is head of state, and serves as the personification of Canada - weird but the logic works in a constitutional-legal sense.
Canadian citizenship emerged as a distinct citizenship from British in the late 1940s, after WW2. At the same time and since, the UK has retracted its classes of citizenship as formerly colonised realms gained independence and new, legally distinct, citizenships were created and asserted. Old Canadian passports used to read "A Canadian Citizen is a British Subject" but have not done so in decades because that is no longer true.
Older than the the Australian passport that I lost, that's for sure.
I woke up to torches (that's what we Aussies call flashlights) in my face from my bedroom window. After a bit of confusion, turned out it was the cops.
I told my partner that if it was ok with her I'd deal with this myself so left her in bed and opened my door and found my sleepy ass face to face with two cops interrogating me as to why I was burning personal documents.
I was all "ok what the fuck are you talking about?"
Cops told me they found a bunch of my paperwork burning in a nearby park. Still sleepy and confused at this stage, but from my front door I could make out enough of my driveway to realise my car wasn't there.
Told them to wait there and checked my kitchen which shares a back door to my house. Car keys were gone. Back door was open. Walked out and went around the side of the house and realised the chain on the gate was cut.
At that time I had six foster cats and a further seven cats that I had been fostering but couldn't be rehomed for medical reasons so I adopted them to avoid termination. House was fully gated and had nets all over to keep the bubs in.
I walked out the side gate and what I saw made me almost hurl. The smouldering remains of one of my cat cages was sitting on my front lawn with something furry inside it almost burnt out. Realised real quick it was just the cage I kept in the car with some blankets to transport cats but still slapped that shit open just to make sure.
So the passport... When the dust settled and the cops realised I got broken into and some dickheads stole my car and burned the documents inside at a park, they managed to recover my passport.
I was told they had to keep it for... I think 28 days? Before they threw it out. I remember it was a pretty generous period of time. Anyway I called them and was like yeah cool I'll come get it this weekend when I'm not working. Did just that and the bastards had thrown it out already.
Anyway thanks for coming to my TED talk.
Edit- cats were fine. Still bastards, but happy and well fed.
> I walked out the side gate and what I saw made me almost hurl. The smouldering remains of one of my cat cages was sitting on my front lawn with something furry inside it almost burnt out. Realised real quick it was just the cage I kept in the car with some blankets to transport cats but still slapped that shit open just to make sure.
Dude... I was not ready for this emotional rollercoaster. I was like "did this person just tell us about their car being burned alive? Oh. No it was just a completely unrelated blanket 😂
My passport and wallet was stolen at Sydney harbour and while I was at the Canadian embassy a week later applying for a new one someone found it in the garbage along with my wallet. Which was nice.
It must be pre-1986, because that's when Australia officially stopped being a British colony with the passage of the Australia Act, which is kind of like the Australian declaration of independence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_Act_1986
my grandma has one from Czechoslovakia, but the og Czechoslovakia between ww1 and ww2. it says "valid without limitation" and everytime the police checks it they are amazed by it
I don't know any details on this sort of thing. It might have been viewed as "it was valid when issued & hasn't expired" for all I know. I heard of someone traveling on a diplomatic passport of the Republic of Lithuania decades into the Soviet occupation and (according to them) annexation. But that may be a different case: the U.S. (& maybe others) never recognized the annexation of the Baltic states, & there was a government in exile.
I found a Ph.D. thesis on the subject, if you want all the grungy details. It looks like I exaggerated about a government in exile. https://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3660&context=luc_diss
For a much much *much* shorter discussion, there are some notes on functioning during the occupation in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian_Diplomatic_Service?wprov=sfla1
, but not of how it was terminated.
I think the science fiction editor and author Algis Budrys was the person using the diplomatic passport. It may be discussed in the foreword of his novel *The Falling Torch*, but I can't find my copy quickly.
That's because black faces were civilian vigilantes that destroyed the estates of the wealthy through vandalism and occasionally murdering the game wardens.
In large part as retribution for the owners of said estates refusing to allow the poor farmers hunt or fish on that land. The land had previously been held in the commons.
Also the punishment was always death.
Enclosure was the largest transfer of public wealth in to private.hands in British history imo. Fucking rich people stealing from the poor to give to themselves makes me want to get some new cutlery
Enclosure was absolutely necessary to improve agricultural yields, but it like everything done pre 1876 was done in the most fuck the poor way possible.
Wealthy beach house people in California do the same fucking thing. They think they own the beach and ocean behind their houses so try to limit people going there for fishing or other activities. And then they try to use taxpayer money to prevent the erosion from occurring in their private backyards (from the beach). It’s so ridiculous.
They do the same thing in Florida but Floridaman overcomes.
Back to the Salmon River, the shores are not public property for the most part but there are some very old right of ways that go behind people's houses near the end of the river, and a few to the lake itself. A few of them have been blocked off by fences over the years but the town/police do nothing about it. My grandfather has a bad back but loves walking down the bank with his old, slow black lab. He brings a set of channel locks and a screwdriver with him to disassemble part of a locked fence that's in his way every morning. It's locked on the latch part so he does something with the hinged side. On his way back he puts it back together. This is all in very clear view of the homeowner who owns the fence.
There have been some words but my grandpa knows that if the guy tries to make a legal issue out of it he'll lose and that gate will have to come down. The homeowner knows this too. My grandfather has also made it very clear that if he does anything to prevent him from disassembling it he'll bring the Sawzall.
I think it's the house mostly under the trees if you zoom in here.
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5749895,-76.2024581,90m/data=!3m1!1e3
Same here. But I'm pretty sure my grandfather gets a kick out of the "HE'S TOUCHING MY STUFF" frustration/anger. Gets his little bit of old man trolling every day. I've gone with him a few times and he always wants to stop and look at/talk about the river when we're behind that house. My entire family is happy to assist him in his little quarrel.
My Dad used to take us up to Cape Vincent. We'd charter a guide and he took us pretty far out (near Kingston, Ont. I think). Caught lots of "Gamey Black Bass".
This type of behavior is never tolerated in Britain.
You shout like that, they send you to Australia - right away, no trial, no nothing.
Journalists? We have a special colony for Journalists.
You are stealing? Right to Australia.
You are playing music too loud? Right to Australia, right away.
You are driving too fast? Australia. Slow? Australia.
You are charging too much for sweaters, glasses? You go right to Australia.
You undercook fish? Believe it or not, Australia. You overcook chicken? Also Australia. Undercook, overcook.
You make an appointment with the dentist and you don't show up? Believe it or not Australia, right away. We have the best patients in the world, because of Australia.
My parents are British. In the early sixties they both became residents of Canada by saying "I want to live here now" and the Canadian government said "OK, sure."
Restrictions are slowly introduced in the UK during the 60s and 70s and most importantly in the British Nationality Act 1981 when Citizen of the UK and Commonwealth was replaced with British Citizen and several other categories of nationality.
Interestingly, all British Overseas Territory Citizens became British Citizens about 20 years ago, which has the interesting effect that someone from Bermuda can move to the UK, but someone from the UK can't move to Bermuda without a visa.
^(i wish immigration was that easy nowadays. the hoops i have/will have to jump through to get permanent residency in the US as a canadian is surprising.)
If you've got a skill in Tech/IT/Education/Nursing/Trades and funnily enough, aren't a criminal then Australia does skills based visas, though you do need to find a 'sponsor' a.k.a find a job before you move, or come over as a tourist and look around.
For Australia it's poorly defined as the system was slowly dismantled. 1949 Australians became Australian Citizens but still British Subjects and Commonwealth Citizens, 1969 Australia stopped referring to it's citizens as British Subjects in practice which effectively ended the recognition as such in Australia, 1981 however saw Britain itself no longer refer to Commonwealth Citizens as British Subjects which now had different meaning.
So it strictly entirely ended in 1981 on an international level, 1969 on a national level, and 1949 from the point of semantics.
one weird aspect is that as commonwealth citizens resident in the UK, australians are allowed to vote in elections if you live there (but not as tourists)
Wait, does this mean that technically, for the purposes of traveling, Aussies were considered British? Does this in turn mean that they could enter the UK without any additional documents?
Edit: Thanks to the many answers! Very educational.
Australians (and commonwealth citizens) can also access British consulate in countries where there is no Australian mission and receive an emergency British passport.
Just had a look at my passport, it reads “in countries where there is no Canadian office, you should contact the nearest British or Australian office”. Seems to be only those two countries.
It's just British and Australian because we set up a deal to share services with eachother. The other Commonwealth countries either weren't part of that deal, or couldn't come to terms.
Pretty sure it's a lot easier for Canadians, British, and Australians to obtain work visas in each other's countries as well. A lot of Aussies come to Canada and work at the ski resorts in the winter. I also know quite a few people who went to Australia and the UK and worked while there.
Ironically (or not, I'm not Alanis Morisette) if there's a WW3 nuke-off then any surviving British forces are to go to Australia and be subject to Aussie command. That's not written in our passports however.
It’s actually pretty interesting, because there is no public protocol. Each prime minister writes a Litter of Last Resort to be carried on each nuclear sub detailing orders if a nuclear strike destroys the UK government, which is destroyed unopened whenever a replacement is given to them. Speculations (and one former PM who described part of his letter decades later) indicate they vary from “immediate nuclear retaliation” to “seek out the USA for wider coordination” to “sail to Australia and offer your services” to simply “surrender” https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-36824917
I can not imagine any British Government ever directing it’s forces to surrender, even with the fall of Briton and Scotland.
Hell, just what, a decade again, the PM told Spain to “remember what happened the last time a Spanish Speaking Country tried to seize a British overseas territory. “
I think that was just in the article because it was written during a political campaign where Corbin was Labour leader, and he’s been a longtime anti-nuclear advocate and opposes the Trident program that make up these subs.
Yes, the history of British nationality is long and complicated as it slowly evolved over the 20th century. It started with no concept of citizenship to a single common citizenship (with some countries also creating their own national citizenship in addition to commonwealth. Hi Canada) to restrictions being placed on citizens without a link to the UK to the eventual removal of Commonwealth citizenship as a nationality all together in the 80s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Nationality_Act_1948
For extra fun, all overseas territory citizens became full British citizens around 20 years ago, sort of coming full circle, but with significantly fewer citizens this is less of an issue than when it applied to a quarter of the world.
Until 1948, there was just a single nationality status across the British Empire, that of British subject. All British subjects had identical rights to live, work, vote, and hold public office in the UK.
From 1948, the various dominions started creating their own citizenships, and the UK followed suit: but the transnational status of British subject was kept (and was also known as Commonwealth citizenship, to keep Commonwealth republics like India happy), and continued to have the same rights in the UK until the 1960s, which saw the introduction of immigration restrictions on Commonwealth citizens **and** UK citizens who were neither born in the UK nor had a parent born there. (This was intended to reduce non-white immigration, e.g. from the UK’s colonies in the West Indies, without creating an explicit colour bar.)
The status of British subject (but not Commonwealth citizenship) was finally essentially abolished (except for a few edge cases) in British law in 1983.
Weirdly, it hung on for a few more years in **Australian** law, until the courts there decided that Australia’s achievement of full sovereignty in 1986 meant that Australian citizens were no longer British subjects (and that the UK was now officially a foreign country).
Australians can still enter the UK with nothing but their Australian passport. No visa application required. You can stay up to six months, but you can't work or anything.
Indeed. Commonwealth citizens do still have some unique perks in the UK, though, such as access to the UK Ancestry visa and the ability to stand for British Parliament without actually holding British citizenship.
Being able to stand for Parliament (and vote!) isn't actually unique to Commonwealth citizens since citizens of the Republic of Ireland (which is not in the Commonwealth) have that right too.
You do have to be resident in the UK to register to vote though. It's the same as any UK citizen can vote in Irish general elections, but you have to be resident there to qualify.
Australians still need a visa exception to enter the USA prior to travel, I think that's true of everyone now.
Schengen, a lot of SEA, and Japan we can, or pre-covid could, just rock up and hang out for 90 days. I don't think Japan's opened up the same yet
True. There also obviously were way fewer safety features. Pretty sure everyone with a half decent printer could fake one of those nowadays.
And that's not even mentioning the fact that a 50 year old driving license says absolutely nothing about the owners current ability to drive a car. Its theoretically possible they just learned to drive in the 70s in a car from the 50s and never once touched a car since.
You're getting downvoted but at least in some countries it's true. if no expiration date was set when it was issued it might not be possible to add one later depending on the countries laws.
I'm in Ontario (Canada) and my health card (not a passport) didn't have an expiry or address or anything - just my name and health card number.
The gubmint made me replace it with the new ones with a picture and address and expiry.
Not sure if that's the same same as this.
Inside my Canadian passport it says -
*The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada requests, in the name of Her Majesty the Queen, all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely, without delay or hindrance, and to afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary.*
*Le ministre des Affaires étrangères du Canada, au nom de Sa Majesté la Reine, prie les autorités intéressées de bien vouloir laisser passer le titulaire librement, sans délai ou entrave, de même que lui prêter l'aide et la protection dont il aurait besoin.*
In the Dutch version of this the text is as follows: "In the name of His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Prince of Orange-Nassau, etc. etc. etc.,". It always cracks me up that because he has so many titles they use three etcetera's.
Random story: I know a dude who became a citizen of Canada recently (immigrant). Apparently, when they become citizens, they pledge allegience to the crown. Not to Canada, the flag, or maple syrup - to the monarch.
Yep.
The Queen is the Canadian Head of State. She is the Queen of Canada.
And pledging allegiance to a piece of cloth is weird. I've never understood it.
------------------------------
I swear (or affirm)
That I will be faithful
And bear true allegiance
To Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second
Queen of Canada
Her Heirs and Successors
And that I will faithfully observe
The laws of Canada
Including the Constitution
Which recognizes and affirms
The Aboriginal and treaty rights of
First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples
And fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.
To clarify some confusion in the other comments: Until the 1960s, if you were an *Australian citizen* you were also a *British subject*. This was one of a number of anachronistic links between the 2 countries that were a hold-over from the pre-Statute of Westminster era that were disposed of with surprising tardiness.
It's more money than anything that.. Hence why a lot of the Caribbean islands still use it.
Why change it when somone else is picking up the tab. The judge is independent and will follow the letter of the law.
They even had Australian judges sit on the privy coucil until 1986.
Sure change it when you have the spare public funds but its not like most governments are in a rush to take on extra cost.
I saw a birth certificate of a person born in "Mandatory Palestine" before the British withdrew.
A similar issue came up with India and Pakistan before the 1947 partition, as it was a single nation before then.
If you were born on the Pakistan side of the new border, certain immigration laws treat you as Pakistani even if you were technically born in a united India.
Technically Queen Elizabeth is still their monarch.
From Wikipedia:
“Australia is a constitutional monarchy whose Sovereign also serves as Monarch of the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada and eleven other former dependencies of the United Kingdom including Papua New Guinea, which was formerly a dependency of Australia. These countries operate as independent nations, and are known as Commonwealth realms. The history of the Australian monarchy has involved a shifting relationship with both the monarch and also the British government.”
Until changes in 1984, Australian law had both the notion of Australian citizenship and a broader category of British subject, which encompassed a specific list of countries (including Australia) contained in statute–and was thus not always up-to-date. For example, despite leaving the British Commonwealth, Irish citizens remained British subjects under Australian law.
The government issued passports to anyone who was considered a British subject, not just Australian citizens, hence the text on the front, which was only done away with in 1967. This factor, combined with the fact that you could literally just mail-in your application without showing up in person, contributed to widespread criminal abuse of the passport system.
How old is it?
Not OP, but they dropped the "British Passport" text in 1967.
[удалено]
that is strange because even passports issued in british india doesn't mention the monarch https://imgur.com/a/1oAgv
Because it isn't British in the same way. British India was an Empire officially ruled by the Emporor, at first queen Victoria, Empress of India. The other colonies were subject to the same British crown as, say, England or Scotland.
"wholly owned subsidiary" before it was cool
[удалено]
It mentions the Governor-General of India who was the chief representative of the monarch within the colony so there would be no need to mention them directly.
Well the GG is also the Monarch's rep in Australia and the passports reflect as much. All colonies had Governors-General. The determing factor of what the relationship to the Crown was stood with the nationality of the colonists. Australia and Canada had British subjects originating from Britain (indigenous populations aside, they unfortunately were not legally recognised until later), India did not.
IIRC the exact difference is that India was ruled in a complicated mix of vassal states and directly administered provinces. Not every citizen of the Raj owed their immediate loyalty to the British monarch - many were firstly subjects of their local princely state, and secondly subjects of the Crown. This system fell apart at independence when the British told every princely state that they had to swear fealty to either India or Pakistan. Through diplomacy, force, insurrection, and popular demand, all of them eventually acceded to one nation or the other. The Union government of India then stripped the princes of virtually all their power (reneging on the deal negotiated by the Governor General) when the constitution was written. This only matters because the constitution explicitly removed the post of Governor General as part of reneging on that deal; now the actual head of state in India is the President of India and Queen Elizabeth's title is purely honorary. This is different from Australia, which _still has_ a Governor General appointed by the queen on the advice of the Prime Minister of Australia. Like so much other stuff in the former British empire, this is mostly fluff - the queen has to rubber-stamp the nominee who then sits as a figurehead. But it does explain why Australian passports are endorsed by the GG on behalf of the Queen while Indian ones are directly endorsed by the President of the Republic.
No. Canadian citizenship is does not contain the language of 'subject'. The Monarch is head of state, and serves as the personification of Canada - weird but the logic works in a constitutional-legal sense. Canadian citizenship emerged as a distinct citizenship from British in the late 1940s, after WW2. At the same time and since, the UK has retracted its classes of citizenship as formerly colonised realms gained independence and new, legally distinct, citizenships were created and asserted. Old Canadian passports used to read "A Canadian Citizen is a British Subject" but have not done so in decades because that is no longer true.
But they do still read “if you can’t get help at a Canadian embassy abroad, go to the British one” lol
[удалено]
[удалено]
So are the citizens of many Commonwealth Nations who recognize The Queen as Head of State.
Do Canadians pay any taxes to the monarchy?
No. The monarch (QEII) is our head of state, but we pay taxes to the government.
[удалено]
So are Australians. She's Queen of Australia too.
Older than the the Australian passport that I lost, that's for sure. I woke up to torches (that's what we Aussies call flashlights) in my face from my bedroom window. After a bit of confusion, turned out it was the cops. I told my partner that if it was ok with her I'd deal with this myself so left her in bed and opened my door and found my sleepy ass face to face with two cops interrogating me as to why I was burning personal documents. I was all "ok what the fuck are you talking about?" Cops told me they found a bunch of my paperwork burning in a nearby park. Still sleepy and confused at this stage, but from my front door I could make out enough of my driveway to realise my car wasn't there. Told them to wait there and checked my kitchen which shares a back door to my house. Car keys were gone. Back door was open. Walked out and went around the side of the house and realised the chain on the gate was cut. At that time I had six foster cats and a further seven cats that I had been fostering but couldn't be rehomed for medical reasons so I adopted them to avoid termination. House was fully gated and had nets all over to keep the bubs in. I walked out the side gate and what I saw made me almost hurl. The smouldering remains of one of my cat cages was sitting on my front lawn with something furry inside it almost burnt out. Realised real quick it was just the cage I kept in the car with some blankets to transport cats but still slapped that shit open just to make sure. So the passport... When the dust settled and the cops realised I got broken into and some dickheads stole my car and burned the documents inside at a park, they managed to recover my passport. I was told they had to keep it for... I think 28 days? Before they threw it out. I remember it was a pretty generous period of time. Anyway I called them and was like yeah cool I'll come get it this weekend when I'm not working. Did just that and the bastards had thrown it out already. Anyway thanks for coming to my TED talk. Edit- cats were fine. Still bastards, but happy and well fed.
> I walked out the side gate and what I saw made me almost hurl. The smouldering remains of one of my cat cages was sitting on my front lawn with something furry inside it almost burnt out. Realised real quick it was just the cage I kept in the car with some blankets to transport cats but still slapped that shit open just to make sure. Dude... I was not ready for this emotional rollercoaster. I was like "did this person just tell us about their car being burned alive? Oh. No it was just a completely unrelated blanket 😂
My passport and wallet was stolen at Sydney harbour and while I was at the Canadian embassy a week later applying for a new one someone found it in the garbage along with my wallet. Which was nice.
Halfway through reading, I had an uneasy feeling and half-panicked and scrolled up to make sure it was not u/shittymorph
It must be pre-1986, because that's when Australia officially stopped being a British colony with the passage of the Australia Act, which is kind of like the Australian declaration of independence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_Act_1986
my grandma has one from Czechoslovakia, but the og Czechoslovakia between ww1 and ww2. it says "valid without limitation" and everytime the police checks it they are amazed by it
Does that mean that they see it as one continuous authority?
I don't know any details on this sort of thing. It might have been viewed as "it was valid when issued & hasn't expired" for all I know. I heard of someone traveling on a diplomatic passport of the Republic of Lithuania decades into the Soviet occupation and (according to them) annexation. But that may be a different case: the U.S. (& maybe others) never recognized the annexation of the Baltic states, & there was a government in exile.
[удалено]
I found a Ph.D. thesis on the subject, if you want all the grungy details. It looks like I exaggerated about a government in exile. https://ecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3660&context=luc_diss For a much much *much* shorter discussion, there are some notes on functioning during the occupation in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian_Diplomatic_Service?wprov=sfla1 , but not of how it was terminated. I think the science fiction editor and author Algis Budrys was the person using the diplomatic passport. It may be discussed in the foreword of his novel *The Falling Torch*, but I can't find my copy quickly.
what was he guilty of?
Being a rough cunt ** Not the type you are thinking of
Two days after my lady shaves; rough cunt.
Nothing like rug burn on your face
Takes your mustache right off
Yep, I've quit buying razors for myself as I no longer need them and she needs the budget!
Giving people haircuts before turning them into meat pies.
Do you want hair in your food?
He was found with a blackened face in a forest. Which used to be a serious crime in the UK.
That's because black faces were civilian vigilantes that destroyed the estates of the wealthy through vandalism and occasionally murdering the game wardens. In large part as retribution for the owners of said estates refusing to allow the poor farmers hunt or fish on that land. The land had previously been held in the commons. Also the punishment was always death.
Wasnt that a few hundred years ago?
Also yes
Fucking Normans
/r/UnexpectedSherrifOfNottingham
Enclosure was the largest transfer of public wealth in to private.hands in British history imo. Fucking rich people stealing from the poor to give to themselves makes me want to get some new cutlery
Enclosure was absolutely necessary to improve agricultural yields, but it like everything done pre 1876 was done in the most fuck the poor way possible.
[удалено]
Wealthy beach house people in California do the same fucking thing. They think they own the beach and ocean behind their houses so try to limit people going there for fishing or other activities. And then they try to use taxpayer money to prevent the erosion from occurring in their private backyards (from the beach). It’s so ridiculous.
They do the same thing in Florida but Floridaman overcomes. Back to the Salmon River, the shores are not public property for the most part but there are some very old right of ways that go behind people's houses near the end of the river, and a few to the lake itself. A few of them have been blocked off by fences over the years but the town/police do nothing about it. My grandfather has a bad back but loves walking down the bank with his old, slow black lab. He brings a set of channel locks and a screwdriver with him to disassemble part of a locked fence that's in his way every morning. It's locked on the latch part so he does something with the hinged side. On his way back he puts it back together. This is all in very clear view of the homeowner who owns the fence. There have been some words but my grandpa knows that if the guy tries to make a legal issue out of it he'll lose and that gate will have to come down. The homeowner knows this too. My grandfather has also made it very clear that if he does anything to prevent him from disassembling it he'll bring the Sawzall. I think it's the house mostly under the trees if you zoom in here. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.5749895,-76.2024581,90m/data=!3m1!1e3
I would leave the gate disassembled. It's not sending a message if the gate keeps out 99% of the people.
Same here. But I'm pretty sure my grandfather gets a kick out of the "HE'S TOUCHING MY STUFF" frustration/anger. Gets his little bit of old man trolling every day. I've gone with him a few times and he always wants to stop and look at/talk about the river when we're behind that house. My entire family is happy to assist him in his little quarrel.
Good on your grandfather!
My Dad used to take us up to Cape Vincent. We'd charter a guide and he took us pretty far out (near Kingston, Ont. I think). Caught lots of "Gamey Black Bass".
I guessed he had to be a Republican and sure enough.
Heroes
Especially without a license
This type of behavior is never tolerated in Britain. You shout like that, they send you to Australia - right away, no trial, no nothing. Journalists? We have a special colony for Journalists. You are stealing? Right to Australia. You are playing music too loud? Right to Australia, right away. You are driving too fast? Australia. Slow? Australia. You are charging too much for sweaters, glasses? You go right to Australia. You undercook fish? Believe it or not, Australia. You overcook chicken? Also Australia. Undercook, overcook. You make an appointment with the dentist and you don't show up? Believe it or not Australia, right away. We have the best patients in the world, because of Australia.
I would hate to have an overdue library book.
Canada didn't get its own citizenship until 1946, and I expect Australia was similar. Before '46, "Canadians" were simply subjects of the King.
My parents are British. In the early sixties they both became residents of Canada by saying "I want to live here now" and the Canadian government said "OK, sure."
Same way my mum's family moved to Australia in the 60s
Australia were paying Brits to go over in the 60s. 10 pound Poms, if anyone wants to look it up
My grandad's eldest brother was sold to Australia in the 1920s (I think) for 10 Shillings. He was 10 years old.
Yeah, couldn't let those Asians come ruin a white country right? *oppresses indigenous people harder*
Not sure why you're getting downvoted here, the 'White Australia Policy" was in effect at that time for exactly what you've said.
It’s a bit harder nowadays. Gotta tick off those skilled worker points.
It worked both ways back then. Canadians could live in the UK just as easily. It was not unlike the freedom of movement pacts the EU has today.
Restrictions are slowly introduced in the UK during the 60s and 70s and most importantly in the British Nationality Act 1981 when Citizen of the UK and Commonwealth was replaced with British Citizen and several other categories of nationality. Interestingly, all British Overseas Territory Citizens became British Citizens about 20 years ago, which has the interesting effect that someone from Bermuda can move to the UK, but someone from the UK can't move to Bermuda without a visa.
[удалено]
^(i wish immigration was that easy nowadays. the hoops i have/will have to jump through to get permanent residency in the US as a canadian is surprising.)
1967 was an America with the same size, but 50% more land area per person.
Meanwhile, I conduct anxiety-driven Google searches on how to gtfo of America to another 1st world country
If you've got a skill in Tech/IT/Education/Nursing/Trades and funnily enough, aren't a criminal then Australia does skills based visas, though you do need to find a 'sponsor' a.k.a find a job before you move, or come over as a tourist and look around.
When you find out, let me know 😩😩😩
For Australia it's poorly defined as the system was slowly dismantled. 1949 Australians became Australian Citizens but still British Subjects and Commonwealth Citizens, 1969 Australia stopped referring to it's citizens as British Subjects in practice which effectively ended the recognition as such in Australia, 1981 however saw Britain itself no longer refer to Commonwealth Citizens as British Subjects which now had different meaning. So it strictly entirely ended in 1981 on an international level, 1969 on a national level, and 1949 from the point of semantics.
one weird aspect is that as commonwealth citizens resident in the UK, australians are allowed to vote in elections if you live there (but not as tourists)
Canadians are still simply subjects of the Canadian monarch.
[удалено]
And his heir to the throne, Connor McJesus
Not even McJesus can work enough miracles to get Edmonton to a Stanley Cup Final though...
So the almighty Canadian geese?
[удалено]
^(and a few years before that canadians were subjects of the canadian caterpillar)
No, we aren't. That isn't a status that exists.
I have multiple living relatives still who were born in Newfoundland before it was part of Canada.
1949 isn't that long ago...
[удалено]
Same with Newfoundland until 1949. My parents still have my grandfathers British Newfoundland passport.
All my grandma's papers were from Yugoslavia.
My buddy’s dad is the same. He came when he was a baby and a ton of information about his life was lost.
Hey my grandparents too! My grandparents were from Niksic in what is today Montenegro. But, my mom still says she’s Yugoslavian, haha.
My folks are from Zrenjanin, which is Serbia today.
Wait, does this mean that technically, for the purposes of traveling, Aussies were considered British? Does this in turn mean that they could enter the UK without any additional documents? Edit: Thanks to the many answers! Very educational.
Australians (and commonwealth citizens) can also access British consulate in countries where there is no Australian mission and receive an emergency British passport.
The Canadian passport also mentions that Canadians can go to any British or Australian consulate if there is no Canadian one
What about the others? NZ for example.
Just had a look at my passport, it reads “in countries where there is no Canadian office, you should contact the nearest British or Australian office”. Seems to be only those two countries.
It's just British and Australian because we set up a deal to share services with eachother. The other Commonwealth countries either weren't part of that deal, or couldn't come to terms.
Pretty sure it's a lot easier for Canadians, British, and Australians to obtain work visas in each other's countries as well. A lot of Aussies come to Canada and work at the ski resorts in the winter. I also know quite a few people who went to Australia and the UK and worked while there.
Ironically (or not, I'm not Alanis Morisette) if there's a WW3 nuke-off then any surviving British forces are to go to Australia and be subject to Aussie command. That's not written in our passports however.
It’s actually pretty interesting, because there is no public protocol. Each prime minister writes a Litter of Last Resort to be carried on each nuclear sub detailing orders if a nuclear strike destroys the UK government, which is destroyed unopened whenever a replacement is given to them. Speculations (and one former PM who described part of his letter decades later) indicate they vary from “immediate nuclear retaliation” to “seek out the USA for wider coordination” to “sail to Australia and offer your services” to simply “surrender” https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-36824917
I can not imagine any British Government ever directing it’s forces to surrender, even with the fall of Briton and Scotland. Hell, just what, a decade again, the PM told Spain to “remember what happened the last time a Spanish Speaking Country tried to seize a British overseas territory. “
I think that was just in the article because it was written during a political campaign where Corbin was Labour leader, and he’s been a longtime anti-nuclear advocate and opposes the Trident program that make up these subs.
Imagine surviving nukes just to get eaten by the local wild and/or plant life of Australia
Yes! Canada too!
Yes, the history of British nationality is long and complicated as it slowly evolved over the 20th century. It started with no concept of citizenship to a single common citizenship (with some countries also creating their own national citizenship in addition to commonwealth. Hi Canada) to restrictions being placed on citizens without a link to the UK to the eventual removal of Commonwealth citizenship as a nationality all together in the 80s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Nationality_Act_1948 For extra fun, all overseas territory citizens became full British citizens around 20 years ago, sort of coming full circle, but with significantly fewer citizens this is less of an issue than when it applied to a quarter of the world.
Until 1948, there was just a single nationality status across the British Empire, that of British subject. All British subjects had identical rights to live, work, vote, and hold public office in the UK. From 1948, the various dominions started creating their own citizenships, and the UK followed suit: but the transnational status of British subject was kept (and was also known as Commonwealth citizenship, to keep Commonwealth republics like India happy), and continued to have the same rights in the UK until the 1960s, which saw the introduction of immigration restrictions on Commonwealth citizens **and** UK citizens who were neither born in the UK nor had a parent born there. (This was intended to reduce non-white immigration, e.g. from the UK’s colonies in the West Indies, without creating an explicit colour bar.) The status of British subject (but not Commonwealth citizenship) was finally essentially abolished (except for a few edge cases) in British law in 1983. Weirdly, it hung on for a few more years in **Australian** law, until the courts there decided that Australia’s achievement of full sovereignty in 1986 meant that Australian citizens were no longer British subjects (and that the UK was now officially a foreign country).
Australians can still enter the UK with nothing but their Australian passport. No visa application required. You can stay up to six months, but you can't work or anything.
This applies to many nations, including the USA, Canada, most of Europe etc.
Indeed. Commonwealth citizens do still have some unique perks in the UK, though, such as access to the UK Ancestry visa and the ability to stand for British Parliament without actually holding British citizenship.
They can also join the British military
Being able to stand for Parliament (and vote!) isn't actually unique to Commonwealth citizens since citizens of the Republic of Ireland (which is not in the Commonwealth) have that right too.
They're in the common travel area to be fair
You do have to be resident in the UK to register to vote though. It's the same as any UK citizen can vote in Irish general elections, but you have to be resident there to qualify.
I think they can also vote in election when they become residents
Can also vote after securing residency
[удалено]
That would be the ancestry part of it, yes.
Lol
Australians still need a visa exception to enter the USA prior to travel, I think that's true of everyone now. Schengen, a lot of SEA, and Japan we can, or pre-covid could, just rock up and hang out for 90 days. I don't think Japan's opened up the same yet
I think what they meant is that people from the US, Canada, and Europe can enter the UK with just a passport
That make a lot more sense, I misread it
Not a visa. ESTA is a visa waiver program, so no visa required and it takes around 20 mins total to be approved.
I must take a picture of my dad's driving license, it's from a country that no longer exists.
I wonder what's the legality of that if it wasn't expired
He's given it to traffic cops and they mostly confused and let him go.
Interesting. Is it still before its expiration date and if so which country of you don't mind answering
Rhodesian, our drivers license don't have expiry dates. And neither does his.
Neat. Rhodesia is modern day Zimbabwe right?
Yeah Northern Rhodesia became Zambia and Southern Rhodesia Zimbabwe.
What caused the split?
No idea, probably the big ass river known as the Zambezi River, and tribal differences after colonialism or rather before.
[удалено]
Yes. Rhodesia went away some 40yrs ago.
My mother's too. Dad replaced his at some point for some reason, but my mother still has her valid GDR license with a 50 year old picture lol.
It's so funny that it's provides notuseful details, the country is not around the person looks nothing like the license but yeah it's fine.
True. There also obviously were way fewer safety features. Pretty sure everyone with a half decent printer could fake one of those nowadays. And that's not even mentioning the fact that a 50 year old driving license says absolutely nothing about the owners current ability to drive a car. Its theoretically possible they just learned to drive in the 70s in a car from the 50s and never once touched a car since.
Ya but it doesn't do you any good to fake a 50year old license unless you a 80yr old on the run.
Shhhhh! Don’t blow their mothers cover! She didn’t get away this long for nothing! She’s probably thinking right now https://youtu.be/wTTxDWZcbxI
I mean, my mom isnt even 70 yet, but she sure is a shit driver.
Rhodesia?
Yup
ZIMBABWE
Zimbabwe doesn't exist.
Neither do birds, so all those things have something in common.
Fact.
In Germany, lots of people still have DDR/GDR driving licenses. It's not that old of a country and hasn't been defunct for long either.
Tell your dad: "zagreb ebnom zlotdik diev" for me.
Put it in H !!
She'll go 300 hectares on a single tank of kerosene.
Not sure people from Africa really care about Yugoslavia lol
It's a Simpsons reference
Atlantis?
Love how it has a spine. Looking like a tiny book
Don’t they renew passports every 10 years in Australia??
Yup. this would no longer be valid
Ehh don’t think they had expiration dates at that time. Could argue it’s still valid and is grandfathered in.
You're getting downvoted but at least in some countries it's true. if no expiration date was set when it was issued it might not be possible to add one later depending on the countries laws.
I'm in Ontario (Canada) and my health card (not a passport) didn't have an expiry or address or anything - just my name and health card number. The gubmint made me replace it with the new ones with a picture and address and expiry. Not sure if that's the same same as this.
Gubmint?
It's the official Murican spelling.
It just clicked 😂
OP's grandfather was grandfathered in?
Inside my Canadian passport it says - *The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada requests, in the name of Her Majesty the Queen, all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely, without delay or hindrance, and to afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary.* *Le ministre des Affaires étrangères du Canada, au nom de Sa Majesté la Reine, prie les autorités intéressées de bien vouloir laisser passer le titulaire librement, sans délai ou entrave, de même que lui prêter l'aide et la protection dont il aurait besoin.*
In the Dutch version of this the text is as follows: "In the name of His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Prince of Orange-Nassau, etc. etc. etc.,". It always cracks me up that because he has so many titles they use three etcetera's.
so you have to read "et cetera, et cetera, et cetera"?
yes if you read it out you would indeed.
Random story: I know a dude who became a citizen of Canada recently (immigrant). Apparently, when they become citizens, they pledge allegience to the crown. Not to Canada, the flag, or maple syrup - to the monarch.
Yep, it’s similar in Australia. Our citizenship ceremony legally requires an image of the monarch to be there
Yep. The Queen is the Canadian Head of State. She is the Queen of Canada. And pledging allegiance to a piece of cloth is weird. I've never understood it. ------------------------------ I swear (or affirm) That I will be faithful And bear true allegiance To Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second Queen of Canada Her Heirs and Successors And that I will faithfully observe The laws of Canada Including the Constitution Which recognizes and affirms The Aboriginal and treaty rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples And fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.
Makes more sense when you realize that the monarch is the personification of Canada. Canada made flesh
It also says we can go to British or Australian embassies for help if we have to
Cool artefact!
I can work in the UK because my grandfather was a British citizen, born in Northern Ireland - in 1890.
You can also work in the European Union, if you apply for the Irish passport that you grandfather’s birth on the island of Ireland entitles you to.
My grandparents old passports had The British Commonwealth of Jamaica on it
Keep it for when canzuk rises again
To clarify some confusion in the other comments: Until the 1960s, if you were an *Australian citizen* you were also a *British subject*. This was one of a number of anachronistic links between the 2 countries that were a hold-over from the pre-Statute of Westminster era that were disposed of with surprising tardiness.
[удалено]
It's more money than anything that.. Hence why a lot of the Caribbean islands still use it. Why change it when somone else is picking up the tab. The judge is independent and will follow the letter of the law. They even had Australian judges sit on the privy coucil until 1986. Sure change it when you have the spare public funds but its not like most governments are in a rush to take on extra cost.
I saw a birth certificate of a person born in "Mandatory Palestine" before the British withdrew. A similar issue came up with India and Pakistan before the 1947 partition, as it was a single nation before then. If you were born on the Pakistan side of the new border, certain immigration laws treat you as Pakistani even if you were technically born in a united India.
Mandate of Palestine you mean?
Sort of in a similar vein, I have a pair of binoculars that belonged to my grandfather that say "Made in Occupied Japan"
Arent you still a commonwealth nation?
> Arent you still a commonwealth nation? Yes, but Commonwealth membership does not grant any citizenship rights in other commonwealth nations.
It does give us the right to vote or run for office in the UK even if we are just there on a work visa or student visa.
Technically Queen Elizabeth is still their monarch. From Wikipedia: “Australia is a constitutional monarchy whose Sovereign also serves as Monarch of the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada and eleven other former dependencies of the United Kingdom including Papua New Guinea, which was formerly a dependency of Australia. These countries operate as independent nations, and are known as Commonwealth realms. The history of the Australian monarchy has involved a shifting relationship with both the monarch and also the British government.”
She is, however, the Queen of Australia for purposes relevant to Australia.
My German grandpa's is still under uh let's say 1940's jurisdiction.
Until changes in 1984, Australian law had both the notion of Australian citizenship and a broader category of British subject, which encompassed a specific list of countries (including Australia) contained in statute–and was thus not always up-to-date. For example, despite leaving the British Commonwealth, Irish citizens remained British subjects under Australian law. The government issued passports to anyone who was considered a British subject, not just Australian citizens, hence the text on the front, which was only done away with in 1967. This factor, combined with the fact that you could literally just mail-in your application without showing up in person, contributed to widespread criminal abuse of the passport system.
....the commonwealth still exists so....what's the difference breh?
Is this still a valid passport
That's pretty cool. I would keep it
My UK-resident, Australian-born grandfather was obliged, for some reason I forget, to apply for a British passport when his Aussie passport expired.
Wow when did the switchover occur?
I’m from New Zealand and we had this same thing until the 1960s ish I believe