Australian Republic or Monarchy for 2005+beyond (1 Viewer)

[line_backer]

Australian Republic or Monarchy for 2005+beyond?

 

[ohne]

I suppose you could describe me as a pragmatic monarchist. I don't mind the Queen, Charles, Wills etc. I also like the idea of having someone who is not a politician as head of state.

I have problems with the way different models of republic might work. If you read the Australian constitution the Queen has an enormous amount of power, except through convention this power is (thankfully) exercised by parliament. This may not be the case if we became a Republic and one man or woman would have far too much power for my liking.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

I fucking hate the monarchy, it's a bunch of bullshit. We should declare war on those morons for fucking up so bad at gallipoli and causing so many aussies to be killed.

 

[Xayma]

I fucking hate the monarchy, it's a bunch of bullshit. We should declare war on those morons for fucking up so bad at gallipoli and causing so many aussies to be killed.

Alot of dead were due to navigation and co-ordination efforts on part of the ANZACS.

Also the British lost alot more men in the Gallipoli campaign.

 

[malkin86]

Would becoming a republic change/solve anything?

 

[ohne]

I fucking hate the monarchy, it's a bunch of bullshit. We should declare war on those morons for fucking up so bad at gallipoli and causing so many aussies to be killed.

You are wrong. But even if you were right it would have nothing to do with the Queen - she was born in 1926. :uhhuh:

 

[Iron]

Pending system offered.

 

[Generator]

Would the politicians merely repeat the 'mistake' of the past, or would they actually ask whether we would like a republic and then go from there? I know that both (the latter in particular) would be quite costly, but I for one would like to know whether a republic is on the agenda or not before discussing its probable form at the level of a referendum.

 

[grag balbrady]

I fucking hate the monarchy, it's a bunch of bullshit. We should declare war on those morons for fucking up so bad at gallipoli and causing so many aussies to be killed.

This conflict was only one year older than Grag himself, and yet I FOUGHT in Gallipolli. The other diggers called me little boots and carried me upon their shoulders, while I, sticking out above the trench, dodged a hail of diego bullets.

It was no fault of the monarchy that so many of our troops fell valliantly, it was those crafty Turks. I remember how they'd twirl their moustaches as they manned the spinning wheels of death.

 

[nickyroony]

Jebus, it's time to really move away from England and become our own country. Still having the Queen as head of the state, and yet she does nothing and whatever is just totally pointless.

I mean, Charles is in Australia right now, and do people care? The newspaper is only plastered with pictures of Mary Donaldson. No one gives a shit about if the Queen visits or whatever anymore. Definitely time to move on.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Perhaps we should ask if we can become a part of denmark so that mary can be our queen?

 

[line_backer]

Perhaps we should ask if we can become a part of denmark so that mary can be our queen?

that would present legal problems

 

[braindrainedAsh]

I think that it is a sign of the times that Australians are far more interested in what Princess Mary is doing than what Prince Charles is. Why are we interested in Mary? Because she is Australian.

I think that the monarchy is antiquated and serves no real purpose in contemporary life and politics. The only purpose it serves is to fill up pages in gossip magazines.

Why should a nation which believes in democracy (because isn't that what we are apparenlty fighting for in Iraq) place itself under the rule of a system which is based on autocratic systems of power built upon financial and social priviledge.... shouldn't the idea of aristocratic rule be dead by now?

There is no need for Australia to maintain it's ties to the monarchy. What purpose does this relationship currently serve?

 

[waterfowl]

Whilst the monarchy does not have much of a role in day to day politics, it is a good safeguard against having a leader with too much power. Think about it, if we were a republic at the moment there would be no one to stop Howard from going crazy and creating all kinds of horrible laws. In our current system we have two people, the GG and the Queen to stop him if he went too far.

Personally I would like to keep the monarchy, basically because I love history and keeping our ties to monarchy and Europe allows some sort of connection to a grander history. Also I love royalty.

Although I might support a new governmental system with an Aussie head of state, if it was a new, fresh idea and structure that was not based on the USA system (which I fear it would be if we were to become independent).

 

[Korn]

I fucking hate the monarchy, it's a bunch of bullshit. We should declare war on those morons for fucking up so bad at gallipoli and causing so many aussies to be killed.

It was the fault of the military officers, not directly the monarch, as the monarch hasnt been the field marshall for some time

 

[Korn]

I think that it is a sign of the times that Australians are far more interested in what Princess Mary is doing than what Prince Charles is. Why are we interested in Mary? Because she is Australian.

I think that the monarchy is antiquated and serves no real purpose in contemporary life and politics. The only purpose it serves is to fill up pages in gossip magazines.

Why should a nation which believes in democracy (because isn't that what we are apparenlty fighting for in Iraq) place itself under the rule of a system which is based on autocratic systems of power built upon financial and social priviledge.... shouldn't the idea of aristocratic rule be dead by now?

There is no need for Australia to maintain it's ties to the monarchy. What purpose does this relationship currently serve?

Fool, the rich and powerful, will never give up their power and class system, even if we change to a republic, what real difference will there be, look at America, who become presidents who are the powerful, always the rich, as they can afford to campaign better

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Well really me not liking the monarch and wanting to declare war because of gallipoli are 2 seperate issues. I just don't like that Australia is really controlled by someone who isn't Australia.

 

[Korn]

Well really me not liking the monarch and wanting to declare war because of gallipoli are 2 seperate issues. I just don't like that Australia is really controlled by someone who isn't Australia.

As i directly quoted what you said i would say that u consider them related issues

 

[leetom]

Why should a nation which believes in democracy (because isn't that what we are apparenlty fighting for in Iraq) place itself under the rule of a system which is based on autocratic systems of power built upon financial and social priviledge.... shouldn't the idea of aristocratic rule be dead by now?

Constitutional monarchy. You make out that being a vassel state of England is like being under some sort of oppresive feudal rule. The monarchy has no political role, though I personally would like to see it returned some political power. Of course, when the right king comes around, it's sad to see our princes of such a low standard.

Again, constitutional monarchy. It doesn't rule. It permits democracy.

 

[Xayma]

Whilst the monarchy does not have much of a role in day to day politics, it is a good safeguard against having a leader with too much power. Think about it, if we were a republic at the moment there would be no one to stop Howard from going crazy and creating all kinds of horrible laws. In our current system we have two people, the GG and the Queen to stop him if he went too far.

Except in the presented system, the President was to take the position of the Governor General and not be directly elected by the people but by a 2/3 majority of the House of Representatives (I think it was just the Reps). This is far away from the US style of Presidency.