Prince Charles and the future of the Monarchy in the Commonwealth

[holy king]

i dont want your queen on our euros!

 

[Winner]

Having a thoroughly egalitarian and democratic political system free of hereditary, elitist, hierarchical guff. Having an Australian elected head of state, so anyone in this country can grow up knowing they can be head of state.

How would this influence the everyday life of average Australians? In my opinion, an entirely egalitarian and democratic system free of elitist and hierarchical "guff" is an utopian idea, and if you believe that you can create one just by abolishing monarchy, you'Re more naive than I thought.

Eliminating the situation where an unelected appointee can remove a democratically elected parliament at a stroke.

How many times did this happen?

No longer having the rather embarrassing situation of to explain to foreigners that yes, we are an independent country even if the head of state owes her first loyalty to another state, and lives halfway around the world.

What's wrong with keeping a historical and symbolic ties with the mother country?

Making it clear to the armed forces who they are loyal to (a surprising amount think the Governor General or Queen).

Again, that's nothing but a petty issue with no real impact in the real world. Unless you plan to invade Britain, it's entirely irrelevant.

Keeping Charles the hell off our coins.

How mature.

Getting the freaking Union Jack off our flag (a slightly unrelated issue, but in practise probably to be resolved at the same time).

Did I say I think you're being childish?

 

[holy king]

Maybe it's you who's doing it wrong.

My point was, that if you want a Head of State with largely ceremonial and representative role, then it makes more sense to put a monarch in this position.

If you see the Head of State simply as a "first clerk", which is the case in Germany and Austria I believe, then you can do it without all the pomp.

In my country, it seems ridiculous to have a President which is not elected directly only to act as a monarch. It would be much easier to simply reinstate a monarchy. And we could finally get rid of the crazy official name of the country we stick to.

i understand that a strong, widely accepted father figure is nice way to rally people behind whatever system or idea utilizes such a figure.
i just dont think it's an overall good idea.

 

[Winner]

i understand that a strong, widely accepted father figure is nice way to rally people behind whatever system or idea utilizes such a figure.
i just dont think it's an overall good idea.

When I look at Klaus, I am inclined to agree with you, however he's an exception from the rule.The funny thing is that even the communists didn't have the guts to abolish the presidency because they felt it would upset their loyal revolutionary comrades too much.

Our Presidents are supposed to be highly moral people with many virtues, people like Masaryk or Beneš ( ). It would be so much easier to train them properly, if they didn't have to be chosen from a bunch of candidates appointed by major political parties.

 

[Arwon]

How would this influence the everyday life of average Australians? In my opinion, an entirely egalitarian and democratic system free of elitist and hierarchical "guff" is an utopian idea, and if you believe that you can create one just by abolishing monarchy, you'Re more naive than I thought.

Symbolism is important, and the symbolism of monarchy, particularly our monarchy, is that some people are "born to rule". In this case, it's not even people from our own country. Or continent. Or hemisphere. I want my state's structure to reflect values of equality and of no person having an inherent right to dominate or rule over others.

The symbolism of monarchy is deeply unegalitarian, regardless of whether it has any practical consequences. Hell, the only way monarchies are even remotely acceptable is if they're neutered into being basically republics anyway. Might as well finish the job of ending this anachronism.

How many times did this happen?

One dismissal was enough. The constitutional arrangements are flawed and need to be codified and fixed.

What's wrong with keeping a historical and symbolic ties with the mother country?

Again, that's nothing but a petty issue with no real impact in the real world. Unless you plan to invade Britain, it's entirely irrelevant.

We can stay in the commonwealth, as have done India, Pakistan, Ireland and South Africa, all of which are republics. That's a false dichotomy.

Moreover, for a lot of us, it just ain't the freaking "mother country" and that's something of an exclusionary and discriminating notion to entrench into the state and its symbols. Hell, I'm white and anglo, but my family has been here for five generations and I feel about as British as you do. Then there's the whole fact that these links and symbols also represent an imperialist, racist and violent past that many of us want to put behind us, not glorify.

To put this in language you can understand: How can we expect to integrate newcomers into a national identity and identification with the state, when that state symbolically privileges a culture and ethnicity they don't identify with? An Australian system with an Australian head of state would be far better for establishing a clear and strong, non ethnically based, national identity.

The thing you clearly don't understand is that Australia, while becoming de jure independent in 1901, took until the 1940s to bother running its own foreign policy or issuing its own passports. We had a prime minister as late as the 1960s who thought of himself as "British to the bootstraps" and nurtured a strong but never fulfilled desire to become Prime Minister of England. It took until the 1980s to remove the ability of people to appeal to Britain's Privy Council above and beyond our own courts.

We were a deeply naive and politically immature country for a long long time - just look at World War 1 and the way this country charged into a war it had no business being in, or the pathetic way we spent the first 70 years of nationhood utterly ignoring the Asian geographic reality we exist in, in favour of racist delusions of a fraternity of "white nations".

Independence has been a gradual process with both a juridical and cultural component, and it's both desirable and historically inevitable that we reach the final stage of political maturity. Sure, this stuff is all symbolic, but that's only recent. Those links are symbolic because of cultural political change in this country reducing their power. It's time the legal situation caught up with cultural and political realities.

 

[Winner]

To put this in language you can understand: How can we expect to integrate newcomers into a national identity and identification with the state, when that state symbolically privileges a culture and ethnicity they don't identify with? An Australian system with an Australian head of state would be far better for establishing a clear and strong, non ethnically based, national identity.

The thing you clearly don't understand is that Australia, while becoming de jure independent in 1901, took until the 1940s to bother running its own foreign policy or issuing its own passports. We had a prime minister as late as the 1960s who thought of himself as "British to the bootstraps" and nurtured a strong but never fulfilled desire to become Prime Minister of England. It took until the 1980s to remove the ability of people to appeal to Britain's Privy Council above and beyond our own courts.

We were a deeply naive and politically immature country for a long long time - just look at World War 1 and the way this country charged into a war it had no business being in, or the pathetic way we spent the first 70 years of nationhood utterly ignoring the Asian geographic reality we exist in, in favour of racist delusions of a fraternity of "white nations".

Independence has been a gradual process with both a juridical and cultural component, and it's both desirable and historically inevitable that we reach the final stage of political maturity. Sure, this stuff is all symbolic, but that's only because of political change in this country reducing those links to the symbolic. It's time the legal situation caught up with cultural and political realities.

I see... you're one of those people Huntington mentioned in the chapter dealing with Australian tendencies to redefine its Western cultural identity. I am not really surprised, however.

 

[Arwon]

Yes, because Asians are scary and threatening and should GO HOEM.

But that's ok, the Queen will save us.

PS that Huntington chapter was utter horsehockey even by his standards.

 

[Winner]

Yes, because Asians are scary and threatening and should GO HOEM.

That's exactly what I said... obviously

In fact, I thought that characterizing Australia as a torn country was one of the weakest parts of Clash of Civilizations, but I see Huntington had a point. Out of curiosity, how many people in Australia share your views - try to guesstimate.

 

[Sharwood]

That's exactly what I said... obviously

In fact, I thought that characterizing Australia as a torn country was one of the weakest parts of Clash of Civilizations, but I see Huntington had a point. Out of curiosity, how many people in Australia share your views - try to guesstimate.

Probably all of them who aren't White, and most of the intelligent ones who are, at least about the redefining our cultural identity part. I could care less if Australia becomes 75% Asian, and no-one else should either.

 

[Arwon]

That's exactly what I said... obviously

In fact, I thought that characterizing Australia as a torn country was one of the weakest parts of Clash of Civilizations, but I see Huntington had a point. Out of curiosity, how many people in Australia share your views - try to guesstimate.

My views on what? Republicanism? Scary Azns? The fact that we're not freaking British?

Huntington had no idea what he was talking about. He generalised from a few freaking newspaper articles and framed everything in terms like DEFECTION and expressed the frankly absurd view that close economic association need "commonality of civilisations". Utter rot.

 

[Winner]

My views on what? Republicanism? Scary Azns? The fact that we're not freaking British?

On the future of Australia, its place in the world, its ties with Europe and so on.

Huntington had no idea what he was talking about. He generalised from a few freaking newspaper articles and framed everything in terms like DEFECTION and expressed the frankly absurd view that close economic association need "commonality of civilisations". Utter rot.

You probably read something else than I did, then. If you're as good in reinterpretaion of his words as you're with mine, it is entirely understandable. Never mind...

 

[Arwon]

Hahaha, ties with Europe? We get shunted to the "other" line at British airports. You guys are a minor component of our trade relationships, I'm fairly certain that we trade more with Singapore than the UK or any other European country.

Here's how it works: we have ties with the United States and ties with the Asia-Pacific and the trick is managing both of these and avoiding the flack when one side does a stupid thing (I can guarantee we wouldn't help defend Taiwan, nor should we). You guys are a distant curiosity we send backpackers, bar workers and rugby players to.

 

[Winner]

Probably all of them who aren't White, and most of the intelligent ones who are, at least about the redefining our cultural identity part. I could care less if Australia becomes 75% Asian, and no-one else should either.

I'd definitely be worried if my country became 75% Vietnamese, even though I personally like them as immigrants. But hey, it's your country.

How do you say "Australia" in Indonesian, BTW?

 

[Winner]

Hahaha, ties with Europe? We get shunted to the "other" line at British airports. You guys are a minor component of our trade relationships. We have ties with the United States and ties with the Asia-Pacific. You guys are a distant curiosity we send backpackers, bar workers and rugby players to.

Is that why you studied in Spain?

(anyway, care to answer my question, please?)

 

[Arwon]

Like I said, distant curiosity. Plus, the only way to get further from my hometown would have been the Azores. And that's a nice thing for a boy from a place like Nowra.

 

[jessiecat]

Hahaha, ties with Europe? We get shunted to the "other" line at British airports. You guys are a minor component of our trade relationships, I'm fairly certain that we trade more with Singapore than the UK or any other European country.

Here's how it works: we have ties with the United States and ties with the Asia-Pacific and the trick is managing both of these and avoiding the flack when one side does a stupid thing (I can guarantee we wouldn't help defend Taiwan, nor should we). You guys are a distant curiosity we send backpackers, bar workers and rugby players to.

Don't forget the dentists. Why is it that half the bloody dentists in London are Aussie or Kiwi?

 

[Arwon]

On the future of Australia, its place in the world, its ties with Europe and so on:

(Bear in mind, "Asian" means east-Asian here, especially Chinese from both China and other countries. People from South Asia tend to be referred to as being from the subcontinent)

Here's how it works: we have ties with the United States and ties with the Asia-Pacific. These are the two relevant poles of Australian geopolitical life. Japan, China and the United States are our biggest trading parters, plus New Zealand for obvious reasons. The other important relationships are with countries like South Korea, Singapore and any other Asian country with stuff to sell or an interest in buying our stuff. Geopolitically, the American alliance has firm bipartisan backing, but I doubt we'd intervene in a conflict between the US and China. That'd be dumb.

Ideally, our future would involve this country becoming a lot more Asia-literate and comfortable with its place in the world. Thanks to proximity, immigration, education ties and business, we're almost certainly already the most knowledgable, closely linked and comfortable-with-Asia country in the western world. I mean, our Prime Minister is fluent in Mandarin and has made a career in diplomatic and business circles in China. I think the majority of Australians find American fear and paranoia about China hilarious and kinda sad.

People used to get pretty antsy about AZNS SWAMPING US but that's abated, partly because everyone hates muslims now, partly because their foods are delicious, and partly because the Asian communities are strongly established enough that there's many many Asian kids in elite schools and universities and prominent in all sorts of business and political fields. The exact same thing happened when all the racists and idiots were scared of the Italians and Greeks back in the 50s and 60s. Italian is actually still the 2nd most spoken language after English in Australia (3rd is Greek, then Cantonese, Arabic, Mandarin, Vietnamese, Spanish, Filipino, German)

The migrant and expat communities are a really important factor here, because there's signficant Asian-Australian populations at virtually every level of "Australianisation" currently. At a personal level, I think about a third or half of my close friends at uni are Asian, which roughly reflects the demographics of my uni as a whole.

However there's till problems which tend to hamper things like relations with ASEAN, though they're decreasing. Hell, percieved arrogance and imperialism was part of what kept Australian football out of the AFC for so long. We have embarrassingly low language education statistics (like, 11% of high school graduates), for example.

But there's no contradiction between close ties and associations with many Asian countries and close ties and associations with other countries like the US. That's just ******ed.

Europe? Doesn't really rate a mention outside the aforementioned 'distant curiosity' factor. Even the UK is increasingly irrelevant in every conceivable measure except sport. Obviously there's a lot of British-born people here, but that doesn't mean there's strong links with those countries in any meaningful sense.

 

[Sharwood]

I'd definitely be worried if my country became 75% Vietnamese, even though I personally like them as immigrants. But hey, it's your country.

That's because you're a racist White imperialist pig. All those Vietnamese immigrants you like are clearly running dogs.

How do you say "Australia" in Indonesian, BTW?

Australia. You're also supposed to pronounce Indonesia; In-doh-nees-ee-uh, even in English, as opposed to; In-doh-neesh-uh.

Don't forget the dentists. Why is it that half the bloody dentists in London are Aussie or Kiwi?

Because you all have terrible bloody teeth. Supply and demand, we have the supply (dentists) and you have the demand. Feel free to send what few attractive women you have over here backpacking though.

 

[Sharwood]

On the future of Australia, its place in the world, its ties with Europe and so on:

(Bear in mind, "Asian" means east-Asian here, especially Chinese from both China and other countries. People from South Asia tend to be referred to as being from the subcontinent)

Here's how it works: we have ties with the United States and ties with the Asia-Pacific. These are the two relevant poles of Australian geopolitical life. Japan, China and the United States are our biggest trading parters, plus New Zealand for obvious reasons. The other important relationships are with countries like South Korea, Singapore and any other Asian country with stuff to sell or an interest in buying our stuff. Geopolitically, the American alliance has firm bipartisan backing, but I doubt we'd intervene in a conflict between the US and China. That'd be dumb.

Ideally, our future would involve this country becoming a lot more Asia-literate and comfortable with its place in the world. Thanks to proximity, immigration, education ties and business, we're almost certainly already the most knowledgable, closely linked and comfortable-with-Asia country in the western world. I mean, our Prime Minister is fluent in Mandarin and has made a career in diplomatic and business circles in China. I think the majority of Australians find American fear and paranoia about China hilarious and kinda sad.

People used to get pretty antsy about AZNS SWAMPING US but that's abated, partly because everyone hates muslims now, partly because their foods are delicious, and partly because the Asian communities are strongly established enough that there's many many Asian kids in elite schools and universities and prominent in all sorts of business and political fields. The exact same thing happened when all the racists and idiots were scared of the Italians and Greeks back in the 50s and 60s. Italian is actually still the 2nd most spoken language after English in Australia (3rd is Greek, then Cantonese, Arabic, Mandarin, Vietnamese, Spanish, Filipino, German)

The migrant and expat communities are a really important factor here, because there's signficant Asian-Australian populations at virtually every level of "Australianisation" currently. At a personal level, I think about a third or half of my close friends at uni are Asian, which roughly reflects the demographics of my uni as a whole.

However there's till problems which tend to hamper things like relations with ASEAN, though they're decreasing. Hell, percieved arrogance and imperialism was part of what kept Australian football out of the AFC for so long. We have embarrassingly low language education statistics (like, 11% of high school graduates), for example.

But there's no contradiction between close ties and associations with many Asian countries and close ties and associations with other countries like the US. That's just ******ed.

Europe? Doesn't really rate a mention outside the aforementioned 'distant curiosity' factor. Even the UK is increasingly irrelevant in every conceivable measure except sport. Obviously there's a lot of British-born people here, but that doesn't mean there's strong links with those countries.

Just wanted to quote this, as it's an excellent post, and sums up my own views precisely. Even down to the amount of Asian friends part.

 

[Winner]

That's because you're a racist White imperialist pig.

Sure I am - preserving your country's cultural identity is so racist these days...

Australia. You're also supposed to pronounce Indonesia; In-doh-nees-ee-uh, even in English, as opposed to; In-doh-neesh-uh.

That's a shame. Well, surely the Chinese have some good name for Australia, don't they? "Southern Barbarian Continent" or something along those lines...