Re: Kevin Rudd: Australia will become a republic (Telegraph article)

On Apr 13, 2:27 pm, David <ds...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 13, 12:05 am, CJ Buyers <susuha...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Apr 13, 4:48 am, David <ds...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Apr 12, 8:21 pm, Don Aitken <don-ait...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 15:57:29 -0700 (PDT), Donald4564

<dbi...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 8, 3:21 am, "Dag T. Hoelseth" <dh...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
*Kevin Rudd: Australia will become a republic*

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/07/woz20...

(The Daily Telegraph 7 April 2008)

A republican writing an article in Melbourne's "The Age" quoted a
figure of 60% of Australians being in favour of a republic. Today on
the Seven Network's morning show, they quoted a figure of 60% of
Australians being in favour of retaining the monarchy at least during
the reign of the current sovereign. I wonder who collates these
figures? To my mind the only reliable figure was that from the 1999
referendum where the overwhelming percentage was for the "No" vote.

A constitutional amendment has to put forward a *specific* proposal
and find a majority for that proposal. To say that a majority are in
favor of a republic in the abstract is meaningless, even if true -
there are lots of different kinds of republic. It reminds me of France
in the 1870s (although in that case the decision was made by the
legislature). There was a majority in favor of a monarchy, but no
agreement as to who should be the monarch. In the end they had to
settle for the status quo, which was a republic. The onus is on those
who want a change.

As I understand it, there was (eventually) a consensus in favor of the
Count of Chambord, but the chosen candidate proved recalcitrant; he
basically wanted a return to the kingdom of Charles X, as symbolized
by the white banner of the Bourbons.  Even the monarchists didn't want
to surrender the basic gains of the revolutions.  France had grown for
forty years under the tricolor (in one form or other), and seemed
pretty happy with it.  Allowing "Henry V" back on the throne, on his
own conditions, looked like a recipe for yet another revolution in a
few years time.  135 years later, this still looks like a sound
political calculation.- Hide quoted text -

For my part, 135 years on, I cannot quite see what was gained. If it
was revolution that they wanted to avert, they had two more of those
under the tricolor anyway.

Well yes, but the Third Republic lasted for nearly 70 years, which is
still a record for French forms of government

I have an idea that the form of government until Louis XVI had lasted
a good deal longer than 70 years. In a country with as long a history
as France, 70 years is a mere blink of an eyelid. As Premier Chou said
when asked for his thoughts on the French Revolution "it is too early
to say". When a revolutionary thinks that, who are we to say that 70
years is a long time?

(the Fifth will turn 50
later this year), and managed to survive the strains of the World War,
which is overall not too bad a show.  

I am not quite sure why you think surviving the Great War is such an
achievement, unless you think the republic actually was unstable. How
many other allied regimes collapsed under the strain? Serbia and most
of Belgium and Rumania were overrun, but their monarchies survived.

That it collapsed in 1940 is not
a decisive critique; monarchy was no more likely to have saved France
from Pétainisme than it saved Italy from Fascism or Japan from
militarist statism.

One suspects that it may have saved the country of some degree of
ignomy, much like the allied monarchs of Holland, Luxembourg or
Norway, or even in occupied Denmark.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: On the French Revolution
    ... Later I thought of the English overthrow of their Monarchy in the 17th century as another example. ... Theoretically the Revolution created a classless society. ... While US society has evolved towards a classless society at the beginning property owners, landed 'gentry' etc. ran the whole show. ... I've always heard that the French Revolution was a pivotal point in western history. ...
    (soc.motss)
  • Re: French Revolution
    ... Russian revolution, the Chinese and Cuban and Hatien and Jamaican ... The French replacement for the monarchy was much more humane than that, ... Democracy is a natural reaction to improper government and problems in ... The goal of this government was clearly ...
    (soc.history)
  • Re: Kevin Rudd: Australia will become a republic (Telegraph article)
    ... Australians being in favour of retaining the monarchy at least during ... and find a majority for that proposal. ... was revolution that they wanted to avert, they had two more of those ...
    (alt.talk.royalty)
  • Re: French Revolution
    ... repressive monarchy, much that same as that of the US revolution, the ... The French replacement for the monarchy was much more humane than that, ... Democracy is a natural reaction to improper government and problems in ... The goal of this government was clearly ...
    (soc.history)
  • Re: Kevin Rudd: Australia will become a republic (Telegraph article)
    ... Australians being in favour of retaining the monarchy at least during ... It reminds me of France ... was revolution that they wanted to avert, they had two more of those ...
    (alt.talk.royalty)