Two inbred drongoes in Britain decided to get married and Australia thinks the Republican debate is revived? The truth is the Republican debate has been a permanent part of the Australian political landscape. The real story has been how the existing political class has managed to keep Australia from being a Republic. The reason the Republic debate has persisted through Australian history is because it is a superior form of government that is based on merit and popular will rather than hereditary blood lines and implied arbitrary power.

The Polls Are In! - The Woman's Weekly Loves It

Our good old anglospheric Liberal government, founded by a royalist sycophant , was quick to chime in;

The Australian Government has offered its best wishes to Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles on their plans to marry.

Anti-royalism is a valid Republican sentiment. For many years it was only sentiment keeping the republican debate alive. All the pee-cee and be nice to people doesn't stand with an institution that avoids the accountability of merit. The monarchy is a repugnant institution to its very core. No equitable and egalitarian society or culture can support a hereditary political class that is above the democratic will of the people.

The "Bearded Men" screwed up. Big time. They left us with a Constitution that is a fiction - a wet noodle. Other than a popularly elected Senate, it carries none of the innovations of the American Constitution which was ratified one hundred and twenty years before the Australian Constitution. Our constitution carries none of the political advances of the enlightenment. It is a caricature of a sixteenth century constitution, rather than a post-enlightenment aspirational political document.

The Rickety Old Bridge

The Australian Constitution is a fiction. We all close our eyes, cover our ears and speak softly of it to maintain that fiction. We pretend our formal constitution matters and proclaim that Whitlam and Lang were aberrations, that the entropy of power toward an anti-federalist Canberra is "natural". We are as complicit in the fiction as the politicians. We swallow the triumphalism of Federation and the obstructionism of our current political masters as they covet more and more power to themselves.

A good analogy for the Australian Constitution is an old bridge. The only bridge that exists. One that has traffic - that was unthought of when it was designed and built - streaming across it in ever larger numbers. The bridge has deep design flaws, physical weaknesses and construction faults. Partly through the design/build companies own ignorance and partly by their own limiting choice.

Think of the Harbour Bridge, without any of the grace, architecture, engineering or construction quality. Even though the constitutional bridge was built in 1901, it skipped the innovations of 1787 and instead used the materials, knowledge and technology from the 1600's. This bridge would be like an old rickety country bridge in great danger of being washed away by a flash flood of tyranny. An old rickety bridge trying to carry the volume of high speed traffic the coathanger does. Where the only way people can use the bridge is by closing their eyes and repeating over and over, "the bridge doesn't matter, the bridge doesn't matter, the bridge doesn't matter."

A new bridge needs to be built. One which incorporates the constitutional innovations of the enlightenment and post-modern society. One that reflects the aspirations and progressive values of the people. One that defines an unwavering framework for freedom, liberty and equity.

The Debate Never Left Us

With the inbreeds getting engaged, John Warhurst of ARM made the point;

The national chairman of the Australian Republican Movement, John Warhurst, says the news should prompt Australians to again consider pursuing the idea of becoming a republic.

Republicans have been a permanent part of the landscape. They have been thwarted by obstructionists like William Wentworth, Henry Parkes, Samuel Griffiths, Alfred Deakin, Edmund Barton through to 1999's John Howard. The Westminster system allows undue power to reside with the Executive. This is informally the Prime Minister. The poor separation of powers means the Executive not only makes the laws, but also funds those same laws and then implements them. With faction discipline the notion of impugned dictator - or a government based on the arbitrary will of an individual - is a very close description.

The Westminster system and party discipline combine to replicate the role of the King in the Prime Minister. A position capable of taking the country to war without Parliamentary approval. A position capable of enforcing indefinite detention and leaving an individual at the whim and mercy of a minister. A position capable of abusing the public purse to entrench their power, position and glory.

The politicians of the current major factions do not really want a Republic. If they are for a Republic, they merely want the Queen of England removed from the constitution. Paul Keating and John Howard both feared their power as Prime Minister being challenged or reduced with a popularly elected Governor-General. With the absolute power the Prime Minister fields there is little reason for politicians in the major parties to support any Republic other than a minimal one which leaves the current system intact.

This is the form that obstructionism has taken, once those in power see the unadultered access to the vehicle of state that exists, they see little reason to diffuse that near absolute power. Republicanism has been obstructed in this country by those that betray the rational for the passions of absolute greed and unencumbered power.

The Republican debate will always be on, it is a superior form of government - unfortunately, the debate has too often been defined by the time of day the obstructionists are willing to give it.

cam