Re: Time for an Australia Republic is never!
Louis Epstein
: The ouster of Howard is a good sign. Now that there are two party
: leaders who champion the cause of a Republic, it should be incumbent
: to further this cause: More than 60% of Australians, and more than 90%
: of young Australian citizens, back the removal of this "peculiar
: institution" that has no place in a modern, egalitarian society, and
Then "modern,egalitarian society" needs to be abandoned,
and a society more firmly founded on loyalty to the Monarchy
built.
: switch back into a Republican mode. (By Republican I do NOT mean a
: George-Bush-Republican by any way!).
:
: Howard botched the majority's will by deviously undermining the
: Republican campaign. It should be noted that it should be learned from
: the mistakes made and either:
:
: 1. Kevin Rudd go two stages - first "Yes" or "No" to the Republic
: concept.
:
: OR
:
: 2. Primary ballot question in that regard, followed by sub-questions
: in order to determine:
: a. Do you want a symbolic head of state elected by Parliament.
: b. Do you want to switch to a Republican executive mode as in the USA.
: c. Do you want to popularly elect a figurehead president like in
: Ireland?
: OR
: d. Do you want Parliament to elect an executive president (as in
: Italy)?
:
: This time, with an avowed Republican at the helm, do not repeat past
: mistakes.
To have an avowed Republican at a helm IS a mistake.
: David Huang
:
: P.S. With Turnbull possibly winning the Liberal Party's ensuing
: primaries, maybe it's going to turn out for the best. Two Republican
: party leaders.
There's nothing good about republics.
-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
Louis Epstein
: On 27 Nov, 18:08, "AGw. (Usenet)" <freder...@southernskies.co.uk>
: wrote:
:> On Nov 27, 4:00 pm, david_huang2...@hotmail.com wrote:
:>
:>
:> > Howard botched the majority's will by deviously undermining the
:> > Republican campaign. It should be noted that it should be learned from
:> > the mistakes made and either:
:>
:> > 1. Kevin Rudd go two stages - first "Yes" or "No" to the Republic
:> > concept.
:>
:> > OR
:>
:> > 2. Primary ballot question in that regard, followed by sub-questions
:> > in order to determine:
:> > a. Do you want a symbolic head of state elected by Parliament.
:> > b. Do you want to switch to a Republican executive mode as in the USA.
:> > c. Do you want to popularly elect a figurehead president like in
:> > Ireland?
:> > OR
:> > d. Do you want Parliament to elect an executive president (as in
:> > Italy)?
:>
:> referendum that would comply with the requirements set out in the
:> constitution. Unless there was an enormous level of support for one
:> of the alternative models you've listed, the pro-republican vote would
:> almost certainly be split between at least two of them, with the
:> almost inevitable result that the entire vote would fail due to an
:> insufficient majority... especially when taking into account that pro-
:> monarchists would almost certainly engage in co-ordinated tactical
:> voting!
:>
:> Having accused Howard of scuppering the last referendum, what you've
:> suggested here seems likely to scupper a new one.
:>
:> Unfortunate as it might be, the only realistic option in my view is
:> for the vote to be a straight choice between a particular model and
:> the status quo.
:
: I don't think that it is unfortunate at all. The form of government is
: a far too serious business to be decided on the basis of what people
: are dead against. And most Australien republicans aren't republicans
: in thre true sense, just anti-monarchists.
:
: However, there is no form of government called anti-monarchy. As soon
: as the Australian people have found a specific form of government that
: they like better than the current one, they of course should adopt it.
The idea that people should feel entitled to choose their form of
government is a republican one,and as an ideological Monarchist I
must reject it...every nation should ideally be a Monarchy.
: But scrapping the monarchy because a a majority of the Australians
: are in favour of something else, although none of the mutually very
: exclusive "something elses" is even remotely as popular as the status
: quo, is a travesty of democracy.
Not that democracy is necessarily a virtue.
: Jan B0hme
Louis Epstein
: On Nov 28, 3:00 am, david_huang2...@hotmail.com wrote:
:> The ouster of Howard is a good sign. Now that there are two party
:> leaders who champion the cause of a Republic, it should be incumbent
:> to further this cause: More than 60% of Australians, and more than 90%
:> of young Australian citizens, back the removal of this "peculiar
:> institution" that has no place in a modern, egalitarian society, and
:> George-Bush-Republican by any way!).
:>
:> Howard botched the majority's will by deviously undermining the
:> Republican campaign. It should be noted that it should be learned from
:> the mistakes made and either:
:>
:> 1. Kevin Rudd go two stages - first "Yes" or "No" to the Republic
:> concept.
:>
:> OR
:>
:> 2. Primary ballot question in that regard, followed by sub-questions
:> in order to determine:
:> a. Do you want a symbolic head of state elected by Parliament.
:> b. Do you want to switch to a Republican executive mode as in the USA.
:> c. Do you want to popularly elect a figurehead president like in
:> Ireland?
:> OR
:> d. Do you want Parliament to elect an executive president (as in
:> Italy)?
:>
:> mistakes.
:>
:> David Huang
:>
:> P.S. With Turnbull possibly winning the Liberal Party's ensuing
:> primaries, maybe it's going to turn out for the best. Two Republican
:> party leaders.
:
: Hopefully Prime Minister-elect, Mr. Rudd will have more important
: matters on his mind rather than bring up this old warhorse again.
:
: Mr. Huang, I don't know where you get this figure of 60% in favour of
: a republic when the question was overwhelmingly voted "No" in a
: majority of the states in 1999.
:
: I presume also that you and your republican cohorts are to fund the
: cost of putting the vote again? Last time it cost over $5 million. Why
: waste the taxpayers money putting this question over and over until
: you may think you will get the result you want?
That's the republican way...vote on it as many times as
necessary to get a "Yes" and then treat that "Yes" as
settling the matter for all eternity with no possibility
of reversal.
: In Australia we have a healthy disrepect of politicians and the "No"
: vote in the 1999 referendum clearly indicated that Australians were
: not prepared to vote in more politicising in the highest office in the
: land. Whilst some Australians might not be too keen on the monarchy,
: they certainly would prefer something that they know works rather than
: try something they are not too sure about.
:
: In closing I think there is something unique about Australia, Canada
: and New Zealand in the way our systems work and we should be proud of
: it rather than wanting to abolish it.
Ideally,the various "modernizations" of recent decades should
be rolled back as well.
A GG should preferably come from anywhere in the Commonwealth
BUT the Dominion over which he presides,in order to be truly
impartial.
: Regards
: Donald Binks
: