The Republic is garbage

The arguments for an Australian Republic are very underwhelming:

The steady stream of dramas and scandals emanating from the royal family continues apace. Prince Andrew’s friendship with the notorious Jeffrey Epstein, the Sussexes’ endless soap opera, and now a “cash for honours” affair right under Prince Charles’s nose.

As the next generation of Windsors supplants the older generation, many Australians will conclude that it’s no longer appropriate for this issues-rich family to rule over us. They will say it’s time to take control of our own destiny.

…Let’s start with the Labor Party’s proposed three-step process. Step one is a referendum (or call it a plebiscite) on whether people want a republic in principle. If step one gets up, step two is deciding on a model, a highly contested process. Step three is a constitutional referendum: voting yes or no on the chosen model.

The Australian Republic Movement has just released its model for a republic, in which state and federal governments nominate candidates, with the head of state to be decided by an election. This also sounds like a model that will be too complex to succeed.

There are three reasons that I object to this.

First, the Windsor’s are positively glowing versus our own rape-sodden parliament. How can the Canberra snake pit possibly be put up against Buckingham Palace as some kind of moral superior? This is pure jingoism.

Second, ANYTHING that weakens Australian commitment to the Anglosphere in the period ahead is a very bad idea. We’re going to struggle against the Chinese communist tide enough as it is.  The Republic will be used by interests to argue Australia must break away from the past to form an “independent” (that is, Chinese) foreign policy.

Third, embarking on such a large culture war project amid a plague of symbolism over substance politics will only snow the real issues all the more. What we need is a bullet to the head to culture wars so we can focus on the real issues of class equity, economic structure, social advancement and national interest.

Another debate about identity is another nail in the coffin of any plan for the future on this basis.

Forget the Republic. It’s just another bullshit distraction as the carpet baggers pillage Australia.

Houses and Holes
Latest posts by Houses and Holes (see all)

Comments

  1. Totes BeWokeMEMBER

    I laugh when the elites tell us we shouldn’t have a born to rule head of state.

    Queens motto is “born to serve”

    Our elites motto is “born to take”

    99% of Australians despise that condescending leftist Fitzsimons.

    • Stan Grant’s take down of the red hanki wearing wvnker was epic. If you ever wanted a movement to fail, he’s the right cvnt to lead it.

        • Who knew? I googled for him, and the first pic that comes up is him in a red bandanna. I must pay closer attention to him.

          • He is bad news…

            I think when you have a President, it will become more tribal, the Head of State will be a political appointment eventually, maybe not the first couple of times, but from some point onwards. It’s more down to the weakness or goodness of the individual, rather than the strength of the system.

      • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

        Ha. Who knows? Mid-life crisis.

        A good way for me to run my life is think the exact opposite to him. And his horrible wife.

        Now we’ve got to put up with their kids coming through having been given favours in the media.

        They’re the most obnoxious family in Australia.

      • I personally don’t like him that much from interviews I’ve seen of him on TV, like when he berated a young fella for body building. Seemed off kilter, but is there a particular reason why people hate him? Peter Fitzsimons – is there something he’s done or said? Or some kind of summary of those things?

    • Those pesky elites! They seem to know everything that is wrong, and who is to blame, and if only we’d all listen to them without questioning their elite ideas, they’d fix things as all Australians really want! Darned elitist elites! Thank you for your service your majesty.

    • Does Fitzsimmons wear the red bandana to bed?
      Quite happy with the existing system of a representative Head of State.

  2. Albo should get on the front foot and oppose the Republic. It would add an unexpected twist to heighten his broader appeal whilst losing nothing worth mentioning from the die-hard rusted on types.

    In a World rife with de-platforming, pronoun proliferation and culture wars the libs have some powerful weapons to smash Labor where it hurts. Labor feels like it is edging ahead but that can change in a blink. Spiking the libs’ guns by wrapping himself in the monarchy would be a smart move for Albo.

    • whilst losing nothing worth mentioning from the die-hard rusted on types

      It’s hard to say, there are still too many of the traitor vote split between the Greens and the ALP.

      The ALP’s own civil war is either;

      Go further left, as to stop bleeding primary votes to the Greens which would require a coalition with them…. or…
      Resist going further to the left as to make sure they get a primary vote above 35%, and hope there is enough of the vote to govern outright,.

      I would assert the ALP’s best strategy would be to head towards a Joel Fitzgibbon type of ALP. I think with a LNP revolt looking likely, there will be enough protest votes heading their way, thus being able to jettison the Greens.

      This will allow the greens to sit in the corner and be children governing the nations facebook likes.

    • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

      Labor run on emotions. They have to have a referendum because of everything Australia has attached to England for 200 years….I can hear how they and their Greens, ABC and The Project coalition would phrase it.

      They have already said when they win…(lol), they’ll give us a referendum.

      More of Labor completely misunderstanding what Australians want.

      They’re not winning the election for many reasons.

      1. They’re a micro issues party, eg. Referendum.
      2. They’re a sht opposition.
      3. Australians distrust them with borders, and other leftist issues.
      4. Plibersek and Wong.
      5. They don’t deserve to govern Australia.
      6. They don’t understand why they lost
      7. Immigration

  3. Has the Republic movement spent any time on making their new system properly democratic (Citizen-Initiated legislation, recall elections, etc), or is all their effort spent on working out a way to designate the country’s figurehead ?

    (Genuine question, I’ve not followed it at all.)

    • They are only trying to get rid of the Head of the British Royal Family as our Head of State which will have no impact on how we are governed.

      • That would be the best possible outcome, however it would be pretty much guaranteed giving the state governments the possibility to get their man/women into the role would lead to even more corruption than now as each states pyschos battled it out.

    • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

      Yes. Parliament nominate 11 candidates for us to choose from.

      By elites for elites.

      That’s the least of it though. How could we trust our Parliament to present changes to the constitution we understand?

      I just can’t see Australia going with this.

      Messing with our constitution stinks. Fitzsimons stinks. Australia’s elite stink. Labor and Greens stink.

      I rate a Republic getting up zero chance.

      https://www.smh.com.au/national/people-don-t-want-trump-or-shane-warne-hybrid-model-proposed-for-australian-republic-20220112-p59no0.html

      • Currently we have the Prime Minister directly appointing an “elite” as the GG to be the representative of the ultra elite in the Queen.

        If you want an alternative to the head of the British Royal Family being our Head of State, then this model can work.

        • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

          There’s far more to it than that.

          Any Australian that’s watched LNP and Labor for 5 minutes would have to have rocks in their head to let those FWs touch our constitution.

          Never ever should Australia vote to give these grubs any more power.

          Queens motto is to serve. As opposed to our elites, eg. Fitzsimons.

          • This model isn’t giving them more power, it’s giving them less power.

            Currently, there is nothing stopping Morrison appointing Howard or Abbott to the the GG and there is nothing stopping that person having to make a call on who forms government in the event of a hung Parliament.

            The ARM model at least puts some power into the hands of the electorate and puts actual limits on the powers of the Head of State.

          • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

            “stopping that person having to make a call on who forms government in the event of a hung Parliament”

            It’s never happened and it won’t happen. We understand what we’ve got.

            “The ARM model at least puts some power into the hands of the electorate and puts actual limits on the powers of the Head of State”

            It requires changes to the constitution. Who are you going to trust to proofread what we’re signing? Penny Wong? Tony Abbott? Both of them? Harry Trigobof?

            I say, jam it.

          • As noted, they won’t be getting more power (or at least the current power to appoint the GG will be diluted).

            One change the ARM model could advocate for is that anyone who has served in any Parliament in the preceding [10] years in ineligible to be nominated for the HoS Election.

          • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

            Who does that leave?

            Same people they make Australian of the year? Media or sports personalities? No thanks.

            I’d much prefer what we’ve got, that brings all the benefits it does.

            I reckon there is zero chance of coming up with a model the Australian public agree on, trust or want.

            Why waste the time on it? Why is it so important? What’s wrong with what we’ve got?

            Labor need to get it through their thick heads. Australia doesn’t want to become Asia.

  4. Uncle WattleberryMEMBER

    Well, if they want a popularly elected president, then Boonie gets my vote. Boonie is a legend. Amen.

    • Cricket scoresMEMBER

      Surely the Cricket teams should be the only source of nominees – all proven leaders on the field,
      with no knowledge of economy or politics to bias them.
      The prime minister is either in or out, no half measures..

      a Taylor, Waugh,
      Or for more colourful characters –
      Merv, Chappeli and the Warnie wildcard.

        • Cricket scoresMEMBER

          Or Perhaps if the PM wants to stay in after losing in parliament he must survive his wicket for 6 overs of Mitchell Starc or another bowler selected by the GG.

      • This is by far the best option suggested so far, though we’d extend it to all national level sports teams & the ladies too of course. These sort of people far more likely to put country first & actually take advice from department mandarins or those expert panels we tax payers keep paying for! And they can hardly do worse even if they do ignore advice than the current gubbermint.

  5. If Barbados can do it in a few short months, we can too.

    The ARM model isn’t perfect but it’s designed to be as broadly acceptable as possible, particularly following the clear message from 1999 that Australians would like a say in their Head of State.

  6. “First, the Windsor’s are positively glowing versus our own raper-sodden parliament.”
    Maybe, maybe not. Prince Andrew is hardly the first to have strayed within the privliges of the Royal Family. What is the relevance of this comment? Let’s at least elect our own fallguy/girl. Is the Queen really morally superior? Not if history is any guide. Besides the Queen only steps in when the conservative side asks. Maybe she should probably be stepping in now but of course won’t. What is it about us being independent that you really dislike?
    “so we can focus on the real issues of class equity, economic structure, social advancement”
    This raises a smile for me when you liken keeping the Royal Family to focusing on issues such as these. Surely you jest. They would be the exact opposite of how you would structure society to achieve these objectives. Who would start off a constitution by including a clause that states we will have as our head of state a foreigner chosen by sperm counts and racial heritage!!!!
    As to this issue snowing other more immediate issues then lets get it out of the road. Government is not only about addressing the immediate “BAD” issues but also in bringing your people along with you.

  7. Four of our last six PMs (Howard, Gillard, Abbott, Morrison) have been anglophile royal grovellers. Instead of COVID or the economy, Morrison’s main fixations at present are christian religious persecution and the queen’s 70th jubilee.

    Even tiny Barbados ditched the queen, without the sky falling in. When you align with her, David, you align with a thousand years of belligerent super-wealth, tax avoidance, corruption, murder, racism and pedophilia. You are saying that the only person eligible to be our head of state is the lily-white hereditary chief of the Church of England. Forgetting our first nations, you are embracing a repellent family that, just three years ago, didn’t want any dark-skinned babies polluting their pristine gene pool.

    Having said that, the ARM model will never fly. It’s direction election, and requires many changes to the constitution. Minimal change, ditch the queen and keep the G-G, is the only possible model in this right wing backwater we call home.

    • When you align with her, David, you align with a thousand years of belligerent super-wealth, tax avoidance, corruption, murder, racism and pedophilia…

      a repellent family that, just three years ago, didn’t want any dark-skinned babies polluting their pristine gene pool.

      And the same thought process here, is allowed to vote….

    • Minimal change, ditch the queen and keep the G-G, is the only possible model in this right wing backwater we call home.

      Tried that, didn’t work.

    • Frank DrebinMEMBER

      Despite being a staunch Republican, your characterisation of the Windsors has now turned me the other way.

      It aligns so neatly with modern Australia that you couldn’t get a better fit !:

      “you align with belligerent super-wealth, tax avoidance, corruption, murder, racism and pedophilia.”

  8. True!
    If they used that system of voting for a republic it would just create division which would make it even more likely the head of state would only very come from NSW or Victoria! The whole system sounds like a scam to increase the hold of a bunch of corrupt old men by further corrupting the whole system.

    I could only support a “republic” If we are going to do this we should set up a whole new system from the ground up, get the politics & corruption out of the system using something like direct democracy or or even just giving the leaders roles to people who had devoted their lives to good work, anything would be better than the corrupt pyschos that are normally elected in our current system!

    So forget republicanism we should invent a new system fit for the modern age!

  9. Sturgeon’s law: “Ninety percent of everything is crap”.
    HnH’s lemma: “The Republic is garbage”.
    Hence the corollary: “Australia is to remain a pear-shape monarchy”

  10. The BystanderMEMBER

    “Embarking on such a large culture war project amid a plague of symbolism over substance politics will only snow the real issues all the more”

    Hallelujah, my thoughts exactly on just about every ‘issue’ or ‘controversy’ being discussed in our media, politics and boardrooms. Nobody wants to tackle the hard problems, or even acknowledge their existence – so much easier to craft a new policy, or announce some mandatory training, or set an ‘aspirational’ target. Anything to avoid actually dealing with the serious long term problems at hand, to which there’s no solution that offers an immediate or clean fix.

  11. Totes BeWokeMEMBER

    How about a vote on immigration, family wealth, trusts, MSM nepotism, MSM power, MSM amalgamations , $1m MSM salaries first?

    • How about a vote on immigration,

      Much needed

      family wealth,

      Which families’ wealth should society be intervening with?

      trusts,

      What about them?

      MSM nepotism, MSM power, MSM amalgamations , $1m MSM salaries first?

      If these are non-government institutes, what place does the government have?

      If you digress digress against things like MSM nepotism and MSM power,.. there is a benign form of governance which tends to override this….so much so, the current infestation of left-wing types in media was predictable…

      it was called cross-ownership laws, which is a byproduct of diverse ownership.

      When cross-ownership laws were being diluted, these outcomes were predicted. If you make a prediction of what will occur if you make a certain law, or unwind a certain law, and then that prediction comes true… I would suggest the solution is to go back to the old rule settings.

      There a ‘barriers to entry’ thing too.

      Big business loves red tape for this reason.

      • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

        “Which families’ wealth should society be intervening with?”

        The levels of wealth that results in them interfering with the rest of us via donations, influence in media, lobbying etc. Like the family wealth of Fitzsimons for example.

        “If these are non-government institutes, what place does the government have?”

        Vote to reform the entire thing. We should have that power as voters. We don’t like it, fix it.

        “I would suggest the solution is to go back to the old rule settings”

        I don’t know enough about it, but I do know I don’t like it, and it’s acting against the interests of Australia. It should be 1 of 5 or 6 core election issues…..but it’s not, because they’re (the elite) instead proposing a republic referendum.

        It’s always the same thing. Labor have to be wiped out to begin fixing Australia.

        • The levels of wealth that results in them interfering with the rest of us via donations, influence in media, lobbying etc. Like the family wealth of Fitzsimons for example.

          Well I’d think the answer to that is reform of donations thus ‘get out of family wealth’, rather than creating a bureaucracy to police this.

          Vote to reform the entire thing. We should have that power as voters. We don’t like it, fix it.

          “I would suggest the solution is to go back to the old rule settings”

          I don’t know enough about it, but I do know I don’t like it, and it’s acting against the interests of Australia. It should be 1 of 5 or 6 core election issues…..but it’s not, because they’re (the elite) instead proposing a republic referendum.

          It’s theatre and an LNP strategy, they know the ALP and hangers on won’t be able to resist their anti-White racism when referring to the monarchy, and it will agitate votes further to the LNP.

          it’s not a meaningful policy in the slightest, just something which will shows the colours off the ALP and Greens.

          It’s always the same thing. Labor have to be wiped out to begin fixing Australia.

          or Australia has to be destroyed, then those who vote labor will perish.

          “It’s the ‘hard times creates strong men’ thing.

          • Totes BeWokeMEMBER

            Agree with all that. Labor don’t even know it’s a problem for them. That’s how dumb they are.

            “weak men create hard times”

            Yep, but we’ll all be dragged down with these idiots. I can’t stand watching what they’re doing.

  12. I love the idea of a Republic. Until i think, who might be President. Then the idea sickens me to my stomach. Can you imagine what utter piece of human exrement would be promoted to that role? And without the anchor of the Queen the country would take yet another lurch away from our North Atlantic friends.

    • II don’t know if you’re taking the p1ss (if so very good!) but geez, look at the garbage we have now. Where’s the queen been all these years. We’re screwed either way you look at it.

      Anyway nothing will change, it’s all a distraction

    • Charles MartinMEMBER

      First and foremost, no politician currently sitting or any member of their family and extended family is allowed to to be the President. Actually, no politician that has ever served or their family and extended family can apply. That’ll get rid of a lot of the insufferable excrement.

      Bureaucrats, Demographers, Property Developers, CEOs, Celebrities and the Top 10 richest are next.

  13. Tennis sideshow over – Cue Republic sideshow.
    Keep those dishes spinning on sticks while they take even the seat out from under your arse…..

  14. Disagree. It is broke. Fix it. At least we can then have total responsibilty over who leads us. Removing born to rule foreigners as head of state is so darned sensible.

    • It’s the “Fixing” that’s the problem now & probably then too…… It’s an ornamental figurehead position. No systemic changes that address any systemic problems we have within the system, that I’m aware of?

      • If you’re worried about consequences, why not just replace it with a President appointed in exactly the same way as the GG? If it’s only ornamental, there is zero problem. Easy!

        • OK. Maybe I’m seeing different broken things? I’d be curious what the general population think of when they see Republic being thrown around? I’m more concerned about lack of consequences from a dysfunctional political system than some pointless sinecure. I’d rather this clown start raising awareness of a Federal ICAC than trying to be just another sideshow Bob.

    • It’s broke, but “how the national figurehead is selected” is probably the part of it least in need of fixing.

  15. I don’t know if you’re taking the p1ss (if so very good!) but geez, look at the garbage we have now. Where’s the queen been all these years. We’re screwed either way you look at it.

    Anyway nothing will change, it’s all a distraction.

  16. blindjusticeMEMBER

    You can also have a figurehead mostly powerless president. Just like the Queen except we elect them. No other changes necessary. Republic of Ireland did that as opposed to following the American system.

    The era of kings and queens belongs in the middle ages. Are we all comfortable with our armed forces swearing allegiance to the royal family ? I’d be fine with it if it meant we could drag the British armed forces into defence of Australia. But their capability to do so in this part of the world was shown up in ww2.

    We probably should have ditched the British monarch shortly after they failed to share the nuclear technology they were supposed to after testing same here.

    • You can also have a figurehead mostly powerless president. Just like the Queen except we elect them.

      That is pretty much what the ARM are proposing, with a restriction on who gets on the electoral ticket.

      • Foolish your statement. ‘Mosltly powerless president. The Pres has the power to abolish the Government just like what happened to Whitlam et al ! The GG saccked him, and a Pres would have to too. Some future loose cannon like Whilam!
        So, he/she is not just for decoration !

    • Blind Justice You should see my comment to Jason. It applies to you too; kings and queens are just the title, like President and Fuherer ! The point is the executive power, not the title, and the current GG is a man of impecable character who was chosen, appointed, by the parliament, not popularly, fashionably, trendily elected by the ‘mob’ i e the ‘people’ who are easliy swayed and influenced by fashion and style over substance!

      • blindjusticeMEMBER

        Calling democracy a mob has decidely fascist overtones. Do you want elite rule or the potential to put in a contrarian as President?

        • Lin Mal is obviously thirsty for someone to lord over him and the other serfs, and can’t understand why others don’t feel the same way.

  17. Need to ditch the monarchy. It’s our cesspit and we should have the right to vote on it. Second, I don’t believe it would weaken our commitment to the Anglosphere. Sure some will try but we have too much history plus we love Uncle Sam too much who had the royals booted out eons ago. Thirdly, we can have this identify debate and still fix the other stuff. However, as I said yesterday agreeing with Jason, we have no hope with the bandanna fool leasing the movement! So there is nothing to worry about! lol

  18. TailorTrashMEMBER

    Imagine the angst over who is allowed on the list to be voted for ….SBS and ABC STAND TO !

  19. TailorTrashMEMBER

    Nothing wrong with an Australian republic …just need the right sort of chap in the job as president ……you know the type
    …..Afghanistan had one for a short while …..until he loaded up the helicopter with the dosh and took off …..
    Australia has boundless numbers of eligible candidates ….

    As someone with Irish leanings I have little time for the royal family and the requested bowing and scraping but I do have some respect for the institution ( enhanced greatly by the present queen ) that at least tries to stay somewhat above grubby politicians .

    The current role of the monarchy plays such a trivial part in the running of the country and the lives of the people that it would be better to sort out a lot of more important issues of inequity and unfairness first . Then we could from a position of greater confidence look to making what is a small symbolic change .

    Like David I fear the nuts and bolts of Straya are too loose ( and corroded) at the moment to be engaging in such a distraction

    Let’s get a decent government in and get the country back on track . Let’s keep our eye on China and be prepared .
    Then we can devote clearer energy to the question .

    ….and replace the red bandana with someone with gravitas

  20. The monarchy is paid for by the British taxpayer. It is cheaper than another overpaid, undeserving member of the Australian “elite” and no less effective.

    • There would t be “another” one as we’ll lose the GG as well. In fact, it would be cheaper because the GG would have to spend half their time writing to Buckingham Palace.

      • Wrong. It would not be cheaper as Presidential candidates would have to raise money for their election coffers, leading to deals, influence, bias. Currently our Governor General is apolitical, or mostly is, and can afford to be impartial as he/she is NOT ELECTED.!

    • Yes, you do have a point, and we do have a Governer-General who does all the ceremonial stuff and oversees the Govt. with advice and recommendations. So we have a ‘ Virtual President’, above the swirl of politics mostly, and beholden only to the country’s wellbeing. He/She is mostly Apointed/Recomended by the parliament so we have it now, just not in name! Not called Pres ! But just the same, more or less like a presidential system but without the lunatic voting hoopla that would encompass an insane Republic ! Anyone for Crocodile Dundee for Pres? Or Peter Fitzsimons ?You might just get him by popular choice!

  21. David WilsonMEMBER

    The Red Bandanna Man is at it again pushing his lefty views.
    We already have a crowned republic which serves us well and ties us into the commonwealth.
    The crown represents the foundation of our western society, it’s religious ideals, laws, community values ( until we got rocks in our heads and voted for ssm) and this is why so many want to come to our wonderful country.
    Red Bandanna Man and wifey a luvly lefty couple want to destroy our way of life , want us to become socialist anti Christian fools all under the control of green/ labor central …or brain dead and brainwashed by the big government ideals that actually destroy the freedoms we now enjoy.

  22. UpperWestsideMEMBER

    I was thinking of coming back to AUS for a few years, so I will happily sub in as GG, better yet hereditary King!
    Quals?
    I think both sides, Lib and Labor, are dopy dropkicks.
    I have three gorgeous daughters which will keep the media and public happily distracted.
    Superbly qualified ‘eh!