The UK, Canada, Australia: Poseur Democracy

Post Reply New Topic

So-called parliamentary-style democracy, at least in the case of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth nations that recognize Queen Elizabeth II as their sovereign, are not democratic states. They are monarchies most impotent. In a democratic state, the people are sovereign. In a democratic constitution, no man—no woman—lords it over another. That is, a democracy is a republic (in the modern rather than the Platonic sense). In a democracy, all rank, title, and other privilege of birth are abolished. Princes of the Church (any church) do not sit in the great bodies of deliberation in a democratic state. In all these sense, the United Kingdom lacks standing as a democracy. The nations of the Commonwealth fail this test insofar as they recognize Elizabeth II as their queen.

But! But! But! Parliament, you cry! Non fait. Your parliaments are cancerous sores on the body of the Monarch; they serve at the whim of the Crown. Although this cancer has near consumed its host, the monarch yet reigns, bald and impotent, bound by centuries of custom and precedent. Yea, the Crown gives its assent here, names a government there, but it is all symbolic, and it is an abomination. In a healthy monarchy, a parliament would truly serve at the whim of the Crown and would serve an advisory role only. A wise and noble monarch asserts his or her will to power absolutely; a constitutionally bound monarch only makes a mockery of what is pure, mighty, and human.

The United States is a true democratic nation, a republic. We recognize the Rousseauvian need for a prince or magistrate, though, so we have the President. The President must prove his or her might to the electorate to become prince and so is not the aftershock that is the hereditary lord. Nor are the president's powers made impotent by a high and mighty Congress. Congress and the President are two separate functions, balancing power off each other; one is not a cancer of the other. In the United States, any native-born citizen who is at least thirty-five years old has the possibility to become President; rank and privilege are not accidents of birth; they are earned. We democratically elect our representatives. Here in America, We the People are sovereign.

So United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the rest, which is it: democracy or monarchy? Pick one, but don't prevaricate down the middle!

Every government is really a coprocracy because they're full of shid.

Parliament cant serve at the whim of the crown whilst simultaneously the crown is a token of symbolism and nothing more. Its one or the other. For parliament to serve the whim of the crown, the crown must have more than just symbolic power.

And does a democratic nation imprison people without charge for several years? Yours apparently does. Was that a democratic decision on the part of the voters then? Imprisonment without trial or charge. Democracy in action.

We the people are sovereign? Florida says otherwise. You are no more democratically free than anywhere else. You just delude yourself you are.

Typo corrected.


+1

One's a mere metaphor; the other is fact. The metaphor's existence means it's still a monarchy, even if the monarchy has been hobbled.

I'm happy enough with the status quo, that I really do not care what you call it NeantHuman.

Say what you like about ol' Lizzy, she at least refrains from starting wars over non-existent programs to produce WMD.

Off the top of my head, the last time her authority was exercised in any meaningful sense was in Aussie a couple of decades back, and that was actually her representative, Lizzy herself, as she most often is, was busy at her usual duties, looking royal.

Ah yes Florida. If there is a dispute in the Election somewhere, Florida is involved. Always

Australia is officially a Constitutional Monarchy.

Constitutional is the adjective, Monarchy is the noun, so in terms of your original dichotomous choice, it is officially a (type of) Monarchy.

I don't believe any amount of debate will make it anything else.

The english royal family basically don't have any power apart from being very rich. They are really just a bit of a side show.

Do you really think the US is a better democracy than Australia, NZ, Canada and the United Kindom.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moutUEfqUQ4&feature=related[/youtube]

Good point, now the next one.

Queen Elizabeth II has no real power, she is only a figure-head for tradition. We only keep royalty around these days for the facade of what power used to be. These yokels have ropes tethered around their necks for display purposes only and very rarely, they use their influence to change international affairs, like the late Princess Diana, who was maimed when going out of her bounds. Yikes! Though I can't wait to see what her sons will do.

The US isnt a democracy. Its a representative republic. That is, you dont get a say on every one of the issues, you merely elect someone to speak for you.

The Queen has her chosen representative to New Zealand, the Governor General. The Governor General has less power than any member of parliament, only when parliament is unable to fulfill it's duties does the Crown step in. This has not happened since the fifties when New Zealand ceased being a colony of the UK.

We didnt like it when the Motherland said we had to make it all on our own.

As for the lack of a hereditary aristocracy in America... yeah, right. Money = power, and money is inherited. The Kennedies, the Bushes... and there are probably others, who avoid the lime-light.

People need to go and study what the Royal Family actually does, how much it earns, and how much it costs. Most simply assume its a bunch of fat aristos sat on their asses drinking tea out of posh cups paid for by peasants. It is not. One flew helicopters in the Falklands.. one of them Fought in Afghanistan. The Queen knows how to strip the gearbox from a Bedford lorry. How many of us can say the same? She lives in a council house and cant find the spare cash to make vital repairs that breach every kind of health and safety protocol. She has socks darned. I could go on, but I weary of repeating these things. Google is your friend.

I believe the term for Canada's government is a 'Multi-party Parliamentary Constitutional Monarchy'. I don't see how it is any less democratic then the US government. The President has less power then the Prime Minister (unless he doesn't hold a majority), thus your statement on the 'impotence' of Westminster democracy is false, considering the broader powers the government has here to make decisions. Additionally, enough people here have already mentioned Florida, but I mean, come on, if your democracy was so 'strong' why is it that the guy who gets the most votes still doesn't win? Really, the US is just glamorized and white washed to the point that non of you can see the oligarchical nature of it. 'The Autobiography of George W. Bush- By Paul Wolfowitz'

Here in Australia we see the US presidential elections as the world's most expensive popularity contest.

well whatever the usa its closests to the next best thing as you can get. nothings perfect and it usually isnt, in the past i hated living here and i dont know why but now i really love living here. i wouldnt live anywhere else, the trick is too find your place in america, i like mountains and scenery. no thanks big citys or swamps. your not for me, i need cold high altitudes with scary animals