If you will be eligible to vote, who do you intend to vote for? (2 Viewers)

[Lentern]

Lol Britain won't be a power in 2030.

 

[kaz1]

The way a move to a republic would work best is with as little cost and effort involved as possible. What, in essence, should happen is we basically just switch the title of "Governor General" to "President" and don't afford the position with any new power. The issue with this is how that President is put into their position. I suppose it could be a similar situation to the role of Speaker of the House or President of the Senate. The key issue is that we maintain an extremely limited position above that of the Legislative.

I don't think Australia will ever move to a Republic. The public that would be required to vote in a referendum in order for it to occur doesn't care, really. It will also cost a fair bit of money considering we'd have to change our flags and a whole heap of government branding.

I reckon more of the population would want a republic when Charles is King and that is most likely the next time a referendum on this would occur and I believe it will only happen when both the leaders of the major parties are republican.

And we don't have to change our flag, the flag of Hawaii still has the Union Jack on it.

 

[funkshen]

well who else would it be? a kraut? a mick?

 

[Lentern]

I reckon more of the population would want a republic when Charles is King and that is most likely the next time a referendum on this would occur and I believe it will only happen when both the leaders of the major parties are republican.

And we don't have to change our flag, the flag of Hawaii still has the Union Jack on it.

Yeah but there will be groups who insist on a model that includes a new flag. Part of the problem with the 1999 campaign was that while there was a slim majority popular support for a republic in the electorate (judging by polling) there was absolutely no consensus on a model so a lot of republicans voted no because they supported a different model.

 

[Lentern]

well who else would it be? a kraut? a mick?

You want me to tell you who would comprise a triumvirate government of Australia when it inevitably forms in response to the inevitable annexation of Indonesia by the PRC? (who despite talking tough have barely fired a starting pistol at Taiwan in 40 years.)

 

[funkshen]

You want me to tell you who would comprise a triumvirate government of Australia when it inevitably forms in response to the inevitable annexation of Indonesia by the PRC? (who despite talking tough have barely fired a starting pistol at Taiwan in 40 years.)

taiwan was the first to fall my friend. the US lost the ability to defend taiwan by conventional means in 2009.

 

[Lentern]

taiwan was the first to fall my friend. the US lost the ability to defend taiwan by conventional means in 2009.

I think at the point where Indonesia falls we will consider our options and negotiate an alliance with the our benevolent overlords.

 

[funkshen]

I think at the point where Indonesia falls we will consider our options and negotiate an alliance with the our benevolent overlords.

or we fight the yellow menace. far more likely.

 

[Lentern]

or we fight the yellow menace. far more likely.

I will defect, those who surrender first will be shown mercy and welcomed into the new society, those who resist will be crushed.

 

[funkshen]

I will defect, those who surrender first will be shown mercy and welcomed into the new society, those who resist will be crushed.

the white man's burdens does not fall on the shoulders of cowards

 

[Lolsmith]

I was talking to some mates about the republican movement the other day and we decided Australia had gone the wrong way about it with PR campaigns and referenda etc. Instead of trying to become a republic from within, we declare war on England and get ourselves kicked out of the Commonwealth. With the monarch having disowned us we'd have no choice but to either appoint our own or become a republic.

For the record from a constitutional standpoint there is no need for a head of state per se. The executive and the legislature already is effectively the same thing with cabinet being comprised entirely of parliamentarians bar one member and the governor general doesn't even review legislation anymore, how many times have they rejected an act of parliament since 1975? None, how many times have acts of parliament been found to be unconstitutional upon high court challenges? Fucking millions. Many people have suggested fusing the roles of head of government and head of state, I for one see no negative consequences in simply not creating a head of state, it is an entirely nominal office made to accommodate old historical relics like the British royal family.

Interesting stuff

 

[Lolsmith]

the next government will be something akin to a triumvirate (one australian triumvir, one american, one british) following the chinese annexation of indonesia (circa 2030)

discuss

replace Britain with Israel

 

[Annihilist]

I will defect, those who surrender first will be shown mercy and welcomed into the new society, those who resist will be crushed.

But what sort of society would we be welcomed into? Maybe the military justification "Fighting For Our Freedom" actually makes sense here.

 

[Lentern]

But what sort of society would we be welcomed into? Maybe the military justification "Fighting For Our Freedom" actually makes sense here.

A peoples society.

 

[Annihilist]

A peoples society.

Necessarily, though? It depends on who we surrender to.

 

[Debauchee]

A peoples society.

Twenty million people does not a community make.

 

[Jack the Red]

Most likely Greens.