Aussies Salute New King!

Fah Kiew Tu

Curmudgeon, First Rank
10,420
3,503
Tasmania, Australia
I will never forget how quickly the UK ditched the Commonwealth to get into the EU, and then used the Commonwealth as one of the reasons for Brexit. Imperial arrogance.

This. I don't give a fuck about the UK or the monarchy. Not the slightest. I'm never going to forget how they fucked Australia over to join the EU though.

The only thing is that our current system has a brake on any PM who has an attack of overweening ambition. He can be sacked.

They hate that. For me it's a sufficient reason to preserve it. I'd be equally happy to see that power transferred to a President or whatever as their ONLY power that they only ever got to use ONCE following which they retired immediately and were forever barred from public office.

But as that has no chance, I'm OK with the monarchy right up to the point where they actually think they can interfere without consent. That point - off with their heads.

FKT
 

SloopJonB

Super Anarchist
70,130
13,296
Great Wet North
This is the thing, Billy..... The Ozzies, and the Kiwis and the Brits all have a common language. It's called "Cockney".
It's damned near impossible for a normal person with half decent teeth to understand, much less pronounce.
You have to watch "Mary Poppins" and listen to Dick Van Dyke to get the initial gist of it, then tune in to Eliza Doolittle in any one af a million versions of "My Fair Lady" to get the second lesson.... For your final test, listen to that idiot TV chef..... The Hell's Kitchen guy....
Then you'll have a basic understanding of why these blokes stand shoulder to shoulder against the world.
Watch Coronation Street until you can understand them. I lived there for 2 1/2 years long ago and have difficulty with it but my wife, who has never been there, watches The Street religiously and understands every word.
 

nimbus

Member
169
80
Australia
Thanks for the reply!! And what exactly does that entail?
.
Broadly, it requires amendments to the Australian Constitution which can only be instituted after a referendum (the electorate votes on this) on the proposed amendments. Amendments to the Constitution are notoriously difficult to get up. Generally you need bipartisan support for any referendum to get up. There was a referendum in 1999 on a republic and it was defeated. Interestingly the current government has a Assistant Minister for the Republic. However, I think the government was indicated that there will be no referendum in its first term. As somebody pointed out many Australians were very fond of the queen and it remains to be seen whether that affection extends to KCIII. A lot of pundits are saying that becoming a republic will be an easier task with the passing of the Queen.
 

Mrleft8

Super Anarchist
27,424
4,051
Suwanee River
Watch Coronation Street until you can understand them. I lived there for 2 1/2 years long ago and have difficulty with it but my wife, who has never been there, watches The Street religiously and understands every word.
I lived there long ago. I even went to school there. My best mates were all the kids of Carfax workers. Couldn't understand a word they said for the first few weeks. Finally caught it, and found out that I wasn't going to a "fight" on Saturday afternoon, (which I dreaded, because I'd already been beaten to a pulp twice just for being a "Yank" in 1971) but rather to a "Fete" or fair.... But it was pronounced "Fight" or "Foight", by my mates.... None the less I prepared to have to box my way out, because I was assured that there'd be "Boxing a plenty!"... Grin grin, nudge nudge, wink wink! Know what I mean!? (No I didn't!)
 

mccroc

Anarchist
642
425
Sydney
Serious question, I'm not trolling here...

Why do Aussies want or need a "Monarch"?
.
Okay I will bite, with a hopefully reasonable reply. TL:DR: I don't think we need a Monarch, and only a percentage want a Monarch.

I don't think that the "average" Australian thinks much about the monarchy from day to day. Australia is (finally) starting to recognise that our history actually started with Indigenous settlement, not 1788. We therefore see the treatment of our Indigenous people as abhorrent.

Up until after WW2, Australians had British rather than Australian passports - the UK was still looked upon as the "old country". There was no Australian High Court - legal matters had their final hearing with the Privy Council in England. The High Court of Australia started in the 1970s, and now there is really no involvement of England or the Royals in Australian life, politically or legally.

On the other side Australia had a very British majority of ancestry, that has changed radically particularly with European migrants after WW2, the Vietnamese migrants after that war, and more recently Chinese, and for those recent migrants, the Queen meant nothing.

The Queen was the first Monarch to visit Australia in 1954, and 1 million people went out to see her. She was young, and a woman. Charles spent some time at school in Australia, and they have visited often, and we when he came here with Diana, it was a great occasion. We used to sing God Save the Queen at cinemas, now we only sing Advance Australia Fair at big occasions. Very few of us fly the flag. Most of us do not have rabid nationalist tendencies - we are far more easy going, and knock everyone, including ourselves.

Our Governor General is her representative in Australia, and fulfils pretty much all the duties that the Monarch does in Great Britain. The Monarch does "sign off" on things, but they can't actually oppose things. For example, when the Governor General sacked our Prime Minister in 1975, he did speak to the Queen but not to get approval. The Governor General is appointed by the Parliament.

The future for Australia is a republic - Charles a few years ago actually encouraged us to do so. The main issue to working out the model - does our head of state get publicly elected, or are they appointed by a majority of Parliament. Most Australians support a republic, but don't want a US style President. We will most likely change our flag to remove the Union Jack once we become a Republic.

Unlike what has been written in posts above, the type of Australian that supports the monarchy are mostly older people of English descent, that still think of the times we went into battle with them. They are not rabid Trump supporters at all. They are also probably mostly Church of England.

The Queen represented a good thing, perhaps not unlike people respect the Dalai Lama or sensible foreign leaders. Being part of the Commonwealth has helped us in various ways, such as trade and international relations. Australia would most likely remain a member of the Commonwealth once a republic. We win most of the medals the Commonwealth Games...

So I don't think we need a Monarch, and only a percentage want a Monarch.
 

Se7en

Super Anarchist
1,474
592
Melbourne
Alternately;
Someone has to be head of state.
Ideally that head of state should have no real power, other than to tell the politicians to pull their heads in or they will be sent home.

Most Aussies don't really favour the monarchy, but when we looked around at world heads of state, we figured Lizzie was as good as any, and better than most.

When we look at most of the Presidential models, when the President is a polititian, mostly we go 'fuck that'.

So bottom line is: Lizzie was as good as any other idea anyone seems to have come up with. So why be arsed changing?
 

charisma94

Fucking Legend
1,370
378
Palma de Mallorca
1662963817435.png
 

billy backstay

Backstay, never bought a suit, never went to Vegas
Okay I will bite, with a hopefully reasonable reply. TL:DR: I don't think we need a Monarch, and only a percentage want a Monarch.

I don't think that the "average" Australian thinks much about the monarchy from day to day. Australia is (finally) starting to recognise that our history actually started with Indigenous settlement, not 1788. We therefore see the treatment of our Indigenous people as abhorrent.

Up until after WW2, Australians had British rather than Australian passports - the UK was still looked upon as the "old country". There was no Australian High Court - legal matters had their final hearing with the Privy Council in England. The High Court of Australia started in the 1970s, and now there is really no involvement of England or the Royals in Australian life, politically or legally.

On the other side Australia had a very British majority of ancestry, that has changed radically particularly with European migrants after WW2, the Vietnamese migrants after that war, and more recently Chinese, and for those recent migrants, the Queen meant nothing.

The Queen was the first Monarch to visit Australia in 1954, and 1 million people went out to see her. She was young, and a woman. Charles spent some time at school in Australia, and they have visited often, and we when he came here with Diana, it was a great occasion. We used to sing God Save the Queen at cinemas, now we only sing Advance Australia Fair at big occasions. Very few of us fly the flag. Most of us do not have rabid nationalist tendencies - we are far more easy going, and knock everyone, including ourselves.

Our Governor General is her representative in Australia, and fulfils pretty much all the duties that the Monarch does in Great Britain. The Monarch does "sign off" on things, but they can't actually oppose things. For example, when the Governor General sacked our Prime Minister in 1975, he did speak to the Queen but not to get approval. The Governor General is appointed by the Parliament.

The future for Australia is a republic - Charles a few years ago actually encouraged us to do so. The main issue to working out the model - does our head of state get publicly elected, or are they appointed by a majority of Parliament. Most Australians support a republic, but don't want a US style President. We will most likely change our flag to remove the Union Jack once we become a Republic.

Unlike what has been written in posts above, the type of Australian that supports the monarchy are mostly older people of English descent, that still think of the times we went into battle with them. They are not rabid Trump supporters at all. They are also probably mostly Church of England.

The Queen represented a good thing, perhaps not unlike people respect the Dalai Lama or sensible foreign leaders. Being part of the Commonwealth has helped us in various ways, such as trade and international relations. Australia would most likely remain a member of the Commonwealth once a republic. We win most of the medals the Commonwealth Games...

So I don't think we need a Monarch, and only a percentage want a Monarch.

Thanks for your serious well thought reply amongst all the lovable chuckleads here!!! :giggle:

So, if you ditch the Monarchy and become a Republic, then not much changes, correct?
.
 

The Main Man

Super Anarchist
1,492
310
Blighty
Alternately;
Someone has to be head of state.
Ideally that head of state should have no real power, other than to tell the politicians to pull their heads in or they will be sent home.

Most Aussies don't really favour the monarchy, but when we looked around at world heads of state, we figured Lizzie was as good as any, and better than most.

When we look at most of the Presidential models, when the President is a polititian, mostly we go 'fuck that'.

So bottom line is: Lizzie was as good as any other idea anyone seems to have come up with. So why be arsed changing?
To be honest, many of us here in GB think the same way and at least we get to have a bit of fun every so often watching some pomp and circumstance along the way.
 
Quite honestly I think the reason that the Brits still have a monarch is the same reason that USAens voted for Trump.

Most people's lives are so impoverished both emotionally and financially and they can't find any solution to that vexing situation. So in order to feel good about themselves, they ally themselves with a monarch, a execrable politician, a sports team or figure, a celebrity or whatever. They alleviate their misery by identifying with somebody they perceive as successful. They go whole hog in this identification by wearing team colors, MAGA hats, sporting national flags etc., so they can feel as close as possible to whomever they identify with. The more fanatic they are, the closer they feel to the object of their affection (or affliction if you prefer), thereby giving some meaning to their otherwise pitiful existence.

Back in the day when kings and queens held tremendous power, people pretty much had to be loyal to their liege. Nowadays there is no requirement for that but because we live in a big, frightening, confusing world with 7.8 billion others, people need to feel they belong to something and somebody, the more important the better, to alleviate their anxiety and feelings of insignificance.

I haven't seen any studies, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if the people who are the most vociferous in support of the British monarchy share many of the same views as supporters of Trump. Or the Kardashians. Or the Dallas Cowboys, etc.

The vast majority of people in the world are followers, not leaders. They crave security, acceptance and a need to belong. Idolizing people in positions of power goes a long way to meeting these needs and is relatively easy to do.
What complete and utter crap
 

mccroc

Anarchist
642
425
Sydney
So, if you ditch the Monarchy and become a Republic, then not much changes, correct?
.
Exactly, and that's what most people don't understand - that the monarchy has no day to day involvement in our lives. In a way we could simply call the Governor General something else - Grand Poobah perhaps, and keep going exactly the same - except people would stop calling us stupid for still having a monarch!(y)
 

Alhadder

Super Anarchist
3,769
388
Left coast of Oz
Thanks for your serious well thought reply amongst all the lovable chuckleads here!!! :giggle:

So, if you ditch the Monarchy and become a Republic, then not much changes, correct?
.
Correct, in effect not much changes however we need to agree a method as to how a Head of State is elected or appointed. And that was part of the problem with the Republic referendum back in the 90's. There was fairly broad support for a referendum but not the model that was proposed hence why it was defeated.
 

billy backstay

Backstay, never bought a suit, never went to Vegas
Correct, in effect not much changes however we need to agree a method as to how a Head of State is elected or appointed. And that was part of the problem with the Republic referendum back in the 90's. There was fairly broad support for a referendum but not the model that was proposed hence why it was defeated.

Don't you already have a so-called "Head of State", by another name, who is the senior executive of your government, similar to our POTUS?
.
 


Latest posts



Top