Society/Culture Monarchy vs Republic for Australia, and what is your main reasoning?

DaRick

Premiership Player
Joined
Jan 12, 2008
Posts
3,412
Likes
1,960
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
Other Teams
(See avatar)
I think Queen Elizabeth is a respectable enough monarch, but I still think that the notion of being ruled by an aristocratic monarchy (especially a foreign monarchy when we're meant to be an independent nation) is somewhat outdated in a supposedly egalitarian and progressive Australia.

For those reasons, I've always been a republican, even in my more right-wing days.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

kickazz

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Posts
7,361
Likes
9,161
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Republic.

It's embarrassing on the world stage to have the Union Jack defacing our flag.

Lining up at Heathrow with all the other scumbags whilst EU citizens walk straight through. Where is the benefit of being in the Commonwealth?

I'd consider staying with the monarchy but I'd like to see some more benefit from it. Now with the Brexit shemozzle they are all like "strengthen the Commonwealth" etc. Hmmm we better bargain hard on this.
 

JoondalupJ

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Posts
11,618
Likes
3,954
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Perth Wildcats basketball
... because, if nothing else, it'd be the best means to renegotiate the relationships by law between the states and the federal government, and to properly federalise this country to make it a) more efficient, and b) to declutter the shit out of several different legislative areas, due to the limits of the constitution.

In an ideal world (at least, if I was willing to forgo my anarchism and create a system that is more efficient than the current arrangement whilst still resembling it in form) you'd have sized up local governments covering roughly 4 times the territory they do, obtaining funding for local services via federal funding based on population not revenue raising, state independent representatives (not party affiliated) sitting in a greatly expanded Senate (replacing the state legislative assemblies) with the House of Representatives being the house of government, with the Prime Minister position being dissolved for the President/HOS, or completely separating the HOS position from the legislative process, only providing for them a veto akin to the current governor-general's role, that if they fail to sign a piece of legislation it cannot pass into law.

Doing so would dismantle the patently ridiculous state distinctions/politics which cause just so, so much legislative overlap and clutter which isn't reformed due to extreme difficulty (you'd have to get agreement from both/all states and federal governments at the same time. Most governments don't have the stomach for reform over their own areas of responsibility!) and due to the greatest straitjacket of all, the constitution's limitation over the powers of the federal government. It was the only way to get all of the states to agree; surely, we're past that now.

It would also disenfranchise revenue raising as a governmental hobby. Why this should be considered a good thing should go relatively unsaid; there's something to be said as to the merits or lack thereof with regards to speed cameras when, during the last police pay dispute in Victoria, the police placed a car with lights ahead of their unmarked cars to encourage people to slow down, hitting the government where it hurts them the most. I also do not see parking fines as a manifestation of anything other than poor infrastructure planning.

And, finally, you've got the distinct advantage that we would finally no longer hold a foreign ruler as our ultimate head of state. I get that we're lazy, but that we're still being ruled over by a country we held the Ashes against for the better part of 25 years at a game they invented is a mite ridiculous, as far as I'm concerned.

Obviously, throw in a federal ICAC to go with it, just after the second election, to allow for a smoother transition.
Nah.
 

JoondalupJ

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Posts
11,618
Likes
3,954
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Perth Wildcats basketball
Republic.

It's embarrassing on the world stage to have the Union Jack defacing our flag.

Lining up at Heathrow with all the other scumbags whilst EU citizens walk straight through. Where is the benefit of being in the Commonwealth?

I'd consider staying with the monarchy but I'd like to see some more benefit from it. Now with the Brexit shemozzle they are all like "strengthen the Commonwealth" etc. Hmmm we better bargain hard on this.
What is wrong with the Union Jack? Our system here is a safe one, we don't need to change , we just need to grow enough brains to realise we are already a sovereign nation and those who can't sort of understand that need to study a bit closer. There is no more to say, the usual republican day dreamers thinking of revolution and hating a figure head ceremonial person like Elizabeth 2nd, is quite hilarious actually.
You really believe she tells Australia what to do? Don't bring up Gough I've answered that a million times, the GG and another Australian pollie did that, the rest was ceremonial courtesy! Got it.
 

BobbyMorri

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 4, 2009
Posts
6,278
Likes
4,495
Location
Tasmania
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Scunny, Furth
Republic.

It's embarrassing on the world stage to have the Union Jack defacing our flag.

Lining up at Heathrow with all the other scumbags whilst EU citizens walk straight through. Where is the benefit of being in the Commonwealth?
These are 3 separate issues. If we become a republic, neither of the other 2 things actually change.

We would still be part of the Commonwealth, like India and Pakistan and South Africa, who are all republics. Unless we change the name of our country in the same referendum, we would still be known on the world stage as the Commonwealth of Australia officially. The Commonwealth in our name is older than the UK Commonwealth. It was based on the fact that our states united into one nation, similar to the Poland-Lithuania Commonwealth. The UK Commonwealth has no real power as well. It is nice and something we should be a part of, but I think one pollie mention that the CHOGM is just a holiday.

We would still have the Union Jack on our flag as well. Hawaii still has Jack on its flag.

People think it would be a huge change, that we would not play in the Commonwealth Games or that it would be super expensive. I feel there is little change and though there will be a cost, I can't see it being much more than a normal election.

I am in the "It aren't broke, don't fix it" camp. Personally, would not like having an Australian President. Sounds so Yankee and boring. If you just decide to cut out the Queen and still have the GG, I would be more inclined to vote it for change. But I think the issue is overblown and prefer to do things which actually matter. And I like things having the Royal prefix in it(Etc Royal Australian Air force).....The fact that the biggest issue I have is the name of things showcases how little I think will actually change.
 

kickazz

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Posts
7,361
Likes
9,161
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
These are 3 separate issues. If we become a republic, neither of the other 2 things actually change.

We would still be part of the Commonwealth, like India and Pakistan and South Africa, who are all republics. Unless we change the name of our country in the same referendum, we would still be known on the world stage as the Commonwealth of Australia officially. The Commonwealth in our name is older than the UK Commonwealth. It was based on the fact that our states united into one nation, similar to the Poland-Lithuania Commonwealth. The UK Commonwealth has no real power as well. It is nice and something we should be a part of, but I think one pollie mention that the CHOGM is just a holiday.

We would still have the Union Jack on our flag as well. Hawaii still has Jack on its flag.

People think it would be a huge change, that we would not play in the Commonwealth Games or that it would be super expensive. I feel there is little change and though there will be a cost, I can't see it being much more than a normal election.

I am in the "It aren't broke, don't fix it" camp. Personally, would not like having an Australian President. Sounds so Yankee and boring. If you just decide to cut out the Queen and still have the GG, I would be more inclined to vote it for change. But I think the issue is overblown and prefer to do things which actually matter. And I like things having the Royal prefix in it(Etc Royal Australian Air force).....The fact that the biggest issue I have is the name of things showcases how little I think will actually change.
Yeah i get that these things are separate. Just think we are getting ripped off in the whole deal so why not bail on the Queen or ask for a better deal.
 

Father Jack

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Posts
17,415
Likes
9,696
Location
between hope and reality
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur FC
What is wrong with the Union Jack? Our system here is a safe one, we don't need to change , we just need to grow enough brains to realise we are already a sovereign nation and those who can't sort of understand that need to study a bit closer. There is no more to say, the usual republican day dreamers thinking of revolution and hating a figure head ceremonial person like Elizabeth 2nd, is quite hilarious actually.
You really believe she tells Australia what to do? Don't bring up Gough I've answered that a million times, the GG and another Australian pollie did that, the rest was ceremonial courtesy! Got it.
I don't hate the Queen, I just don't like the idea of a ridiculous foreign institution providing our head of state. And if we're a sovereign state then there should be absolutely no issues with having an Australian as head of state. Why should we be dependent on another country for that?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bomberboyokay

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 27, 2014
Posts
24,332
Likes
21,187
Location
The Temple, Boyle Heights
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
West Ham, Roosters
Where is the benefit of being in the Commonwealth?
Got a feeling Sri Lankan asylum seekers have asked themselves the same question.

The Commonwealth of Nations is good only for sycophantic anglophiles and hack sports journalists getting a free trip every 4 years.
 

Richard Pryor

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Posts
6,908
Likes
8,671
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I am against a Republic for the time being for the simple reason being that I have no Faith in any of the muppets in Parliament to write a new Constitution without leaving massive holes for abuse of power and dictatorial actions to take place.

Would anyone trust George Brandis to be the father of our nations political institutional structure?
 

medusala

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Posts
34,805
Likes
6,124
Location
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I don't hate the Queen, I just don't like the idea of a ridiculous foreign institution providing our head of state. And if we're a sovereign state then there should be absolutely no issues with having an Australian as head of state. Why should we be dependent on another country for that?
The problem was that the morons in charge of the republican movement tried to sneak through a bunch of constitutional change at the same time. If they had just gone for minimalist change ie the McGarvie model then there would have been far less objection.
 

Bomberboyokay

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 27, 2014
Posts
24,332
Likes
21,187
Location
The Temple, Boyle Heights
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
West Ham, Roosters
It's even worse, the UK is forced to fly the EU flag on public buildings.
Nobody's forcing them to do shit. The UK is a voluntary member of the Council of Europe and the European Union.

Would you be happy if the Union Jack was flown outside public buildings in Oz?
If we were British and part of the UK, I guess so? Apples with apples please.
 

medusala

Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Posts
34,805
Likes
6,124
Location
Loftus Road
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Nobody's forcing them to do shit. The UK is a voluntary member of the Council of Europe and the European Union.
Incorrect, the EU forces it with threats of fines for non compliance.

.
Apples with apples please.
The flag wont change anytime soon for the simple reason that there will never be agreement on a new design. Many of the ones mooted remind me of that disgraceful Hawthorn pre season jumper.
 

Bomberboyokay

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 27, 2014
Posts
24,332
Likes
21,187
Location
The Temple, Boyle Heights
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
West Ham, Roosters
I think Queen Elizabeth is a respectable enough monarch
Elizabeth refuses to release her communications with Governor-General John Kerr, probably because her directions were anything but respectable for the head of a state of a democracy.

She also ruined her only sibling's life by refusing to let her marry the man she loved.

Elizabeth was lucky. Born while her grandfather and uncle were still around. Didn't become Queen-designate until she was 10. 25 in 1952 when she became Queen. This means people don't and can't know much about her.

Her idiot son and hopefully less idiotic grandson and great-grandson aren't lucky. They'll be grey-haired when they become kings after a lifetime of ridicule in the media and on the internet.

The aura dies with her.
 

__Nantes__

Team Captain
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Posts
487
Likes
657
AFL Club
Richmond
Incorrect, the EU forces it with threats of fines for non compliance.

.

The flag wont change anytime soon for the simple reason that there will never be agreement on a new design. Many of the ones mooted remind me of that disgraceful Hawthorn pre season jumper.
Yeah, agreeing on a flag that represented everyone and was clean would be difficult, but surely a design could be created that at least nobody loathed.
 
Top Bottom