Dear Editor,
It is indeed ironic that although the island of Jamaica was granted freedom from slavery on August 1, 1838 and was declared independent on August 06, 1962, the island is still tied to the apron-strings of the mother country, Great Britain.
I am deeply dismayed that all applicants for Jamaican citizenship have to swear allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, along with her heirs and successors.
In my opinion, the oath of allegiance to the Queen of Great Britain is extremely demeaning for would-be Jamaicans. It should be understood that Jamaica is a free and independent country with its own laws and institutions, albeit derived from Britain. But this is not to say that the country should pay slavish homage to a foreign head of State.
If applicants for Jamaican citizenship are willing to affirm allegiance to Jamaican laws and institutions that should be sufficient to qualify for citizenship.
It makes more sense to affirm allegiance to one's country, rather than swear allegiance to a person. Swearing allegiance to an individual is tantamount to swearing allegiance to the cult of personality.
There is no doubt that swearing allegiance to the British Monarch is a vestige of feudalism that should be dispensed with in modern day society.
It is worth noting that applicants for Australian citizenship are not required to swear allegiance to Queen Elizabeth II, and her heirs and successors. A simple affirmation of the Australian Pledge of allegiance is enough. The Pledge reads: "From this time forward, under God, I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey."
Jamaica can definitely learn from Australia.
Rupert Johnson
Toronto, Ontario
r.b.johnson@sympatico.ca
Is swearing allegiance to the Queen a vestige of Feudalism?
-->
It is indeed ironic that although the island of Jamaica was granted freedom from slavery on August 1, 1838 and was declared independent on August 06, 1962, the island is still tied to the apron-strings of the mother country, Great Britain.
I am deeply dismayed that all applicants for Jamaican citizenship have to swear allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, along with her heirs and successors.
In my opinion, the oath of allegiance to the Queen of Great Britain is extremely demeaning for would-be Jamaicans. It should be understood that Jamaica is a free and independent country with its own laws and institutions, albeit derived from Britain. But this is not to say that the country should pay slavish homage to a foreign head of State.
If applicants for Jamaican citizenship are willing to affirm allegiance to Jamaican laws and institutions that should be sufficient to qualify for citizenship.
It makes more sense to affirm allegiance to one's country, rather than swear allegiance to a person. Swearing allegiance to an individual is tantamount to swearing allegiance to the cult of personality.
There is no doubt that swearing allegiance to the British Monarch is a vestige of feudalism that should be dispensed with in modern day society.
It is worth noting that applicants for Australian citizenship are not required to swear allegiance to Queen Elizabeth II, and her heirs and successors. A simple affirmation of the Australian Pledge of allegiance is enough. The Pledge reads: "From this time forward, under God, I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey."
Jamaica can definitely learn from Australia.
Rupert Johnson
Toronto, Ontario
r.b.johnson@sympatico.ca
Is swearing allegiance to the Queen a vestige of Feudalism?
-->