Should Australia become a republic?

[Rorschach]

What, you talking the handful of constitutional amendments? Commonwealth Act? That silly ass Statute of Westminster Adoption Act?

Fact is, I've read most anything I can find on how your government works mechanically. Fuck, I understand how your system of government works than any of you do probably. Your executive branch itself is almost entirely de facto in nature, with the Governor-General specifically listed, but no mention of a PM under your constitution. You do not have any say in who your PM or who gets to play a living anachronism as General-Governor, as the PM is just whoever the majority party decides on with the Governor-General's approval (Yes, your G-G can refuse the PM appointee or just summarily dismiss a sitting PM at will).

The entire problem is the dumb fucks that wrote your constitution took a look at our constitution, took a look at every edition of the Magna Carta there is, and decided to try and create this bastard hybrid that got little of the good and sane parts of either. Very little in the way of defining powers, and more importantly, defining limitations on government powers. No bill of rights specifically listing the rights of the citizens. One of the few things your constitution's writers got right was things like setting a hard coded freedom of religion by forbidding your government form establishing a state religion.I'm honestly surprised you guys managed to not fuck up right to trial by jury up.

It's like you guys couldn't decide if you wanted to actually be an independent nation, if you wanted to impress England, or if you wanted to be just like America (again), and somehow managed to navigate the exact course to fuck up doing all three.

But yeah, go ahead and try arguing how your government actually works with me and I look forward to you both dragging out incredibly retarded No-True-Scot fallacies like "Oh, you don't understand our system cause you're an American". By all means, point out what I've said that is specifically wrong and then cite your Constitution, the various acts, and the Statute of Westminster to show how I am wrong, otherwise shut the fuck up. Facts kids, what you can prove. And I can prove conclusively that a black guy from America knows more about how your country works than either of you.

Obviously you are clueless on this.
Do you know what a Commonwealth is?
Do you know what Federation is?
Do you actually know anything about our history?
Seems to me the answer is always no so far.

[Chard]

Obviously you are clueless on this.
Do you know what a Commonwealth is?
Do you know what Federation is?
Do you actually know anything about our history?
Seems to me the answer is always no so far.

Ahem...

But yeah, go ahead and try arguing how your government actually works with me and I look forward to you both dragging out incredibly retarded No-True-Scot fallacies like "Oh, you don't understand our system cause you're an American". By all means, point out what I've said that is specifically wrong and then cite your Constitution, the various acts, and the Statute of Westminster to show how I am wrong, otherwise shut the fuck up. Facts kids, what you can prove. And I can prove conclusively that a black guy from America knows more about how your country works than either of you.

Someone better pick up the phone, because I fucking called it! Nothing concrete, no actual specific arguments against anything I've said, and I quite frankly doubt you even read my post. Yet here's Rorsch, just as predicted, posting damned near the exact response I predicted.

Try again, only this time make a cognizant argument based on what I'm actually posting, you egregious faggot.

[Super Nova]

Chard,

My view is:

- the current Westminster system we inherited from the POMs work pretty well with some notable exceptions.
- we see no benefit in a president or a popularly elected head of state and only down sides. We only have one elected body that rules and another as the balance, our lower and upper house. (congress and senate)
- The GG currently does not execute the powers they have by convention. so we have no interference by a head of state in the politics of the nation.

We are concerned that an elected head of state will just screw up a system that we view is and has worked well for a long time.

We fear a US type president and the problems that may cause.

We accept the risks associated with a GG having some constitutional powers that were never exercised until the Whitlam debacle.

[Chard]

- the current Westminster system we inherited from the POMs work pretty well with some notable exceptions.

It still makes your national policy vulnerable to a foreign power usurping leadership from your citizens. There's nothing other than convention (i.e. no one's done it yet) preventing this.

- we see no benefit in a president or a popularly elected head of state and only down sides. We only have one elected body that rules and another as the balance, our lower and upper house. (congress and senate)

Yes, you're essentially a Republic already. Might as well go whole hog and call it what it is. There is no meaningful distinction between "constitutional monarchy" and "constitutional republic". The only thing that would change is direct election of your highest government office and removing the ability of a foreign power's to circumvent the will of your electorate.

- The GG currently does not execute the powers they have by convention. so we have no interference by a head of state in the politics of the nation.

As I said before, no one has done it yet. That does not mean that no one can do it.

We are concerned that an elected head of state will just screw up a system that we view is and has worked well for a long time.

Can't do any more harm than your current system, and having your PM stay for a set term would add quite a bit of stability. Kind of hard for anyone to really make meaningful policy decisions when you replace them before they've even been in office for a year (most recent example would be Mr. Rudd's short term in office. Almost 1/3rd of your PMs serve less than two years).

We fear a US type president and the problems that may cause.

Ok, I'm curious. Name some of these fears specifically. Maybe what we have here is a simple misunderstanding of how the office of president works. If you have questions ask and I'll do my best to explain our ways to you, outlander.

We accept the risks associated with a GG having some constitutional powers that were never exercised until the Whitlam debacle.

I'd rather completely defang the position and relegate it to a ceremonial position of just being the Queen's representitive as a figurehead instead of a full fledged vice royal position with real political executive power.

[Rorschach]

Obviously you are clueless on this.
Do you know what a Commonwealth is?
Do you know what Federation is?
Do you actually know anything about our history?
Seems to me the answer is always no so far.

Ahem...

But yeah, go ahead and try arguing how your government actually works with me and I look forward to you both dragging out incredibly retarded No-True-Scot fallacies like "Oh, you don't understand our system cause you're an American". By all means, point out what I've said that is specifically wrong and then cite your Constitution, the various acts, and the Statute of Westminster to show how I am wrong, otherwise shut the fuck up. Facts kids, what you can prove. And I can prove conclusively that a black guy from America knows more about how your country works than either of you.

Someone better pick up the phone, because I fucking called it! Nothing concrete, no actual specific arguments against anything I've said, and I quite frankly doubt you even read my post. Yet here's Rorsch, just as predicted, posting damned near the exact response I predicted.

Try again, only this time make a cognizant argument based on what I'm actually posting, you egregious faggot.

Actually I keep calling it... all we get from you is testosterone loaded crap.
If you don't understand the points I was making then you've proved my point yet again.
No answers just insults.

[Chard]

No answers just insults.

That's because you're not actually asking any questions. You're not even making specific counter-points. All you're doing is going "Well, you're an American, so there's no possible way you could understand the workings of our government", you terminally dishonest hatfucking retard.

[Rorschach]

No answers just insults.

That's because you're not actually asking any questions. You're not even making specific counter-points. All you're doing is going "Well, you're an American, so there's no possible way you could understand the workings of our government", you terminally dishonest hatfucking retard.

Actually I keep calling it... all we get from you is testosterone loaded crap.
If you don't understand the points I was making then you've proved my point yet again.
No answers just insults.

[Neferti]

I actually voted YES in the Referendum for Australia to become a Republic. I know all the crap about "if it ain't broke" and so forth but I really think we should cease ties with the UK (especially once QE2 is gone) .... and stop following the Yanks as well. Australia is big enough to do our own thing. We are a large island continent with an extremely small population and we should be using our collective intelligence to make our mark on the World instead of following the crowd.

[Chard]

I actually voted YES in the Referendum for Australia to become a Republic. I know all the crap about "if it ain't broke" and so forth but I really think we should cease ties with the UK (especially once QE2 is gone) .... and stop following the Yanks as well. Australia is big enough to do our own thing. We are a large island continent with an extremely small population and we should be using our collective intelligence to make our mark on the World instead of following the crowd.

You're a small population on a large continent, which means you lack the population to have a large enough workforce to support an industrial base that can utilize the resources on your continent to make much of a mark. At best, you're the Southern Hemisphere's answer to Canada.

[Super Nova]

You're a small population on a large continent, which means you lack the population to have a large enough workforce to support an industrial base that can utilize the resources on your continent to make much of a mark. At best, you're the Southern Hemisphere's answer to Canada.

Ha ha ha. As much as I hate to say it, I have said this in the past.

I do not know too much about the presidential powers in detail so I would like to know what your view on these fears.

I feel we are concerned about who is in charge. Is it a PM or a popularly elected president. Today it is clear. It is parliament that has evolved roles like the PM that maintains his power over parliament through the alignment of the majority of the members to his party and a whip that gets them to vote the way he/she mandate. Technically we don't vote in a PM he is selected by the party so he/she can be turned over if they do not perform. However in modern times we tend to vote for a party based on the popularity of the PM in waiting.

How does the US deal with the conflict, if there is one, between the expectation of the policies that a popularly elected president has been elected to implement vs congress and the leader of congress who would be (I could be wrong) the equivalent to our PM.

Who is the boss. Why not have one boss. Why two?