Australia Why is Australia still part of the British monarchy?

.Australia letter Our Australia is the weekly newsletter of the Australia Bureau. Sign up To receive it by email. This week’s issue is written by Yan Zhuang, a journalist with the Australia Bureau.

Former Australian Prime Minister Bob Hake never called the Queen a “pig dressed” “pair set and never wore pearls.” There is no evidence that Princess Diana ever called Uluru “A’s Dock.” And no, Brisbane does not look like Spain.

These are just a few of the things Austral Australians saw as “crowns” after six episodes of the wild-popular series, centered around Charles and Diana’s visit to Australia in 1983 to counter the country’s growing republican movement. Led by Mr. Hawk. The most complicated question to remember in the visit is: Why did the country decide to maintain a formal alliance with the British monarchy when it prides itself on equality and gives a “just round” to everyone?

Speaking formally, Australia Australia is a constitutional monarchy, which means the queen is the head of state. According to the royal family’s website, when the Queen visits Australia, she speaks and acts as the Queen of Australia, not as the Queen of the United Kingdom.

Other former English colonies have a similar setup (e.g. Jamaica), but Australia is the largest and most distant in the territory of the Queen of Australia, and for some reason, wants to keep it that way.

Australia The last major push to make Australia a republic was 20 years ago. 1999 A referendum in the Australian Parliament to elect the head of state of Australia was defeated in a 1999 referendum in which one percent of Austral Australians voted in favor and 55 percent against.

“Australia is a country that is a republic by spirit,” said Mark McKenna, a historian and scholar of republicanism at the University of Sydney. “He is an egalitarian, a democrat, he believes in merit before background, status, class. But its constitutional system has been unable to reflect the tenets and values ​​of its society. ”

So what is he stopping?

In an actual interview Based on one of the “crowns”, Hawk says: “I think we’ll be better off as a republic, but I don’t think that’s very important.”

He was more concerned with the questions facing ordinary Austral Australians, “and if we become a republic tomorrow, it will not improve their situation.”

And that seems to be the attitude of most proponents of republicanism in Australia: let’s put it behind us when we deal with more urgent issues.

Whenever I was a member of the Republican Club at my university (rather than the desire to pursue any kind of objective rather than the desire for absolute pizza) there was a feeling: why should we talk about republicanism, when we can talk about student, welfare or inequality?

The former president of our club, Louis Devine, who now sits on the Victorian committee of the Australian Australian Republic Movement, agrees with being part of it – although he argues that people can multitask, and that the symbols still carry weight.

“Because there’s interest in it but not passion, because most people think it’s inevitable,” he says. And inevitability leads to inactivity.

The lack of passion may also be that the question of republicanism has historically been framed as an external one, a question that we No To be, said Professor McKenna. That’s not a particularly inspiring message.

“Republic should mean more than just division,” he said. “There needs to be a big question about our relationship with the country, the land, one another and the status of the indigenous Austral Australians.”

He added that the conversation should have constitutional recognition for the indigenous Austral Australians.

Another challenge is that the people of Austral Australia are now more convinced of the importance of the Constitution than they are. In the United States, the Constitution and its language are central to national identity and phrases such as “Second Amendment” and “Constitutional Rights” are regularly thrown around.

“Australia is Australia,” said Professor McKenna. “Australia Australia is a country that does not in any way link its composition to its constitution.”

Sandy Bear, national director of the Australian Australian Republic Movement, also noted a more personal reason why many Australs prefer to hold on to the Australian monarchy. They maintain a fondness for Queen Elizabeth.

“For many, it’s been there for their entire lives,” he said. “They have a strong sense of personal attachment and largely feel that she has taken office with pride and can arrange the kinship of the qualities of the head of state that they wish to see.”

In “Crown”, Bob Hawke expresses the hope that Charles and Diana’s trip to Australia, which is going badly, needs to remove the monarchy. Now the hope is that when Charles takes over this position, he will start another flashpoint that will remind people that we are not as constitutionally independent as we think we are, ”Mr Beer said.

How do you feel about the Australian Republic? Let us know at [email protected].