Discussion in 'Politics' started by boyo, Mar 11, 2014.
The flag and the republic are separate issues.
Vote 1 Khe Sanh?
Better than a ditty about a suicidal unemployed trespassing sheep rustler.
But they didn't fight and die for a flag....
Lots of diggers would view it as a symbol representing the many things they fought for in the various conflicts.
... and if one of those symbols is replaced because it is viewed as outdated and not representative of the country in this day and age then that new symbol becomes representative of what those diggers fought for.
The flag, like our anthem are just a couple of the many things that represent Australia.
The current Australian anthem was introduced after WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, etc.
"‘Advance Australia Fair’ is the national anthem of Australia. A revised version of a late nineteenth century patriotic song, it was officially declared the national anthem on 19 April 1984."
Prior to that date (with some exceptions) the English anthem was used:-
"The official anthem was ‘God Save the Queen’ (or ‘King’) from 1788 to 1974, although numerous commercial and official competitions were held over the years to find a substitute. The first was held in 1840."
Canada changed its flag in 1965 and its losses in WW1 and WW2 were slightly more than Australia's. Their diggers seemed to have moved on.
I think it's also worth pointing out that this argument is generally one that is being raised by those that don't want the change to happen as a potential reason for there not to be change.
Dead soldiers who can't say whether they care or not if the flag changes are a great fallback option.
I don't get the 'I fought under that flag' argument at all. They fought for our country and change the flag doesn't change or belittle that at all.
I've actually thought of a reason to change the flag. It's nearly exactly the same as New Zealand. Nothing against my Kiwi brothers but they are just too close.
the flag or them??
Nice one! The flags
You are incorrect, see post #10.
To branch out as our own identity and truly realise the significance of our geographical location and forge a genuine sense of belonging in the region we do our business. To clear out a constitution that represents the thoughts and manners of a way of life that isn't consistent with a modern day Australia so we can forge a new one relevent to modern society and pave our way forward.
That is my view but I think it is a question every Australian needs to answer for himself.
Keating got into hot water over this but I agree with his view. Think of things like the fall of Singapore and how Churchill was unwilling to release our troops to defend ourselves.
Will changing the legal definition of what the State of Australia is achieve that?
If establishing an Australian identity is so important, then we need to do away with the States. Internal political reconfiguration is more relevant to establishing a true Australian identity than whether the Commonwealth of Australia is a Constitutional Monarchy or a Democratic Republic.
I reckon that the Players in our region that we trade and socialise with don't really give a flying fig what status our country is. Does your judgement of a country or its people get coloured by the status of said country?
True and they paid a heavy price as we now look to the USA.
I think a country that can't recognize and acknowledge it's past and come to terms with it is still immature. So I say to my fellow contributors, if we think a new flag or a Republic will make all that go away to suit some political ideology dream on.
It isn't a political ideology though. It is a social nationalist one.
My reply was more about the troops serving the flag notion. under the flag yes but serving the nation without doubt.
We are an immature nation as a result that we are young and still forging our identity. We have to develop that for ourselves as we do not have a heritage based on a vast history.
How do you do away with the states under the constitution?
We have more than one constitution to deal with. The States came together as a Federation of States with their own rights and responsibilities. Hence a Governor in each state with a Governors General in Canberra.
So if the Fed's went to a Republic each state would have to change or you would have the Queen as head of each state but not the Federal constitution.
Stick to changing something simple like a flag before moving onto more complex areas.
Very difficult to remove the states as is shown by fact that we still have Tasmania as a State but all know it is a mendican state and always will be.
Separate names with a comma.