Monarchy Forum
Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 5 of 6     «   Prev   2   3   4   5   6   Next
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,268
Reply with quote  #61 
That Chavez was an authoritarian, at the least, I think is obviously true - he certainly did take plenty of action to intimidate his opponents, control the press, etc., but I can't be bothered to go endlessly over that with you. This is all very tedious. To accuse me of using neocon lines is hilarious, given my outspoken criticisms of interventionism here

Personally, I think the Good Friday Agreement was shameful, but even if I didn't, I don't accept your rather silly point. Sinn Fein was a terrorist front group with blood on its hands, and remains so. The same goes Adams, McGuiness, etc. Neither Sinn Fein nor its leaders has ever done much to show regret or remorse. But at least with them we're actually talking of Ulstermen. Corbyn wasn't an Ulstermen, and was a British MP no less. He should continue to be held to account for his despicable words and actions here, and in his other expressions of support for terrorism and authoritarianism (his friends in Hamas, etc.). The idea that it would be okay for a British opposition leader to be prp-IRA because if the Good Friday Agreement is just ridiculous. Stop trying to whitewash such a despicable person. I doubt Theodore would appreciate it.
azadi

Registered:
Posts: 387
Reply with quote  #62 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
That Chavez was an authoritarian, at the least, I think is obviously true - he certainly did take plenty of action to intimidate his opponents, control the press, etc., but I can't be bothered to go endlessly over that with you. This is all very tedious. To accuse me of using neocon lines is hilarious, given my outspoken criticisms of interventionism here

Personally, I think the Good Friday Agreement was shameful, but even if I didn't, I don't accept your rather silly point. Sinn Fein was a terrorist front group with blood on its hands, and remains so. The same goes Adams, McGuiness, etc. Neither Sinn Fein nor its leaders has ever done much to show regret or remorse. But at least with them we're actually talking of Ulstermen. Corbyn wasn't an Ulstermen, and was a British MP no less. He should continue to be held to account for his despicable words and actions here, and in his other expressions of support for terrorism and authoritarianism (his friends in Hamas, etc.). The idea that it would be okay for a British opposition leader to be prp-IRA because if the Good Friday Agreement is just ridiculous. Stop trying to whitewash such a despicable person. I doubt Theodore would appreciate it.

I don't support Corbyn. I'm opposed to his republicanism, his lack of clear support for Brexit, his tolerance of anti-Semitism in Labour, his support for Palestinian terrorism, his support for PKK/PYD and his support for the Iranian regime. A British opposition leader supporting Irish unification with the consent of the majority of Ulstermen isn't wrong, but I agree, that a British opposition leader supporting Irish republican terrorism is wrong.
azadi

Registered:
Posts: 387
Reply with quote  #63 
I dislike the current social democratic parties of Western Europe, because they support closer European integration, mass immigration and multiculturalism. I'm a nationalist social democrat, who supports national sovereignty. Immigrants ought to be allowed to practice their own culture and to speak their native language, but the state must not be neutral in cultural matters. The state must promote the native cultural heritage and the native language. Kurds living in Germany must to be allowed to speak Kurdish and to celebrate Newroz (Kurdish New Year), but Kurdish must not be made an official language of Germany, and Newroz must not be made an official holiday of Germany. Immigration ought to be limited, because immigrants will inevitably change the culture of their host country, if they become too numerous. The EU ought to prevent economic migrants from Africa and the Middle East from settling in Europe.
Ethiomonarchist

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 5,270
Reply with quote  #64 
Leave well enough alone.  The succession in all realms should remain as is.  It is absurd to think changing the succession will weaken Republicanism which is not about the succession but about the system itself.  The idea that Lady Davina would be a better monarch than the Prince of Wales is surreal.  I'm sure she's a lovely person, but she has none of the training or exposure that Prince Charles has, so what make you think she'd be more successful or more popular as a monarch?  
__________________
The Lion of Judah hath prevailed.

Ethiopia stretches her hands unto God (Quote from Psalm 68 which served as the Imperial Motto of the Ethiopian Empire)

"God and history shall remember your judgment." (Quote from Emperor Haile Selassie I's speech to the League of Nations to plead for assistance against the Italian Invasion, 1936.)
azadi

Registered:
Posts: 387
Reply with quote  #65 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethiomonarchist
Leave well enough alone.  The succession in all realms should remain as is.  It is absurd to think changing the succession will weaken Republicanism which is not about the succession but about the system itself.  The idea that Lady Davina would be a better monarch than the Prince of Wales is surreal.  I'm sure she's a lovely person, but she has none of the training or exposure that Prince Charles has, so what make you think she'd be more successful or more popular as a monarch?  

Because her children have a Maori father. Republicanism in the Commonwealth Realms are fueled by the desire for a resident for president. Republicans in the Commonwealth Realms often claim, that the British monarch is a foreigner. Monarchism is closely linked to nationalism. The king embodies the history and traditions of his nation. Multinational empires such as the Ottoman Empire and Austria-Hungary worked well in the past, but today most people want their nation to be independent. I'm personally not opposed to New Zealand having the British monarch as its head of state, because of the close cultural and historical ties between New Zealand and Great Britain, and New Zealand is a fully independent state today, despite the British monarch being the head of state of New Zealand. But it's understandable, if New Zealanders desire a New Zealander as their head of state. As a Kurd, I prefer Kurdistan electing its own Osmanoglu Shah to the Sultan of Turkey being the Shah of Kurdistan, if the Turkish monarchy is restored. The children of Lady Davina will be symbols of unity between Pakehas (white New Zealanders) and Maoris, because their mother is a Pakeha, and their father is a Maori. But I definitely prefer the British monarch remaining the head of state of New Zealand to New Zealand becoming a republic. 
Ethiomonarchist

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 5,270
Reply with quote  #66 
Quote:
But it's understandable, if New Zealanders desire a New Zealander as their head of state.


Lady Davina Windsor is not any more a New Zealander than Prince Charles.  Her ex-husband was a New Zealander, not her.  She doesn't live in New Zealand, nor do her children.  She and her children have been raised in Britain and are essentially British. She and her children are as British as Prince Charles. Does Prince Charles' Greek-born father make him Greek? 

If you had argued for the Maori King to be made New Zealand's head of state, there might be some logic to your argument, but Lady Davina and her children don't really fit the bill.

__________________
The Lion of Judah hath prevailed.

Ethiopia stretches her hands unto God (Quote from Psalm 68 which served as the Imperial Motto of the Ethiopian Empire)

"God and history shall remember your judgment." (Quote from Emperor Haile Selassie I's speech to the League of Nations to plead for assistance against the Italian Invasion, 1936.)
azadi

Registered:
Posts: 387
Reply with quote  #67 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethiomonarchist


Lady Davina Windsor is not any more a New Zealander than Prince Charles.  Her ex-husband was a New Zealander, not her.  She doesn't live in New Zealand, nor do her children.  She and her children have been raised in Britain and are essentially British. She and her children are as British as Prince Charles. Does Prince Charles' Greek-born father make him Greek? 

If you had argued for the Maori King to be made New Zealand's head of state, there might be some logic to your argument, but Lady Davina and her children don't really fit the bill.

I would like the Maori King to become the King of New Zealand. New Zealand becoming a native Polynesian kingdom like Tonga would be amazing. My reason for proposing Lady Davina as the Queen of New Zealand is, that the Pakehas likely will prefer a Windsor to the Maori King, and that the children of Lady Davina will be symbols of unity between Pakehas and Maori. In addition, Lady Davina has lived in a working-class suburb of Auckland. The culture of New Zealand is very egalitarian. Despite being a monarchy, New Zealand is far more egalitarian than many republics, including Kurdistan and Germany, because New Zealand lacks nobility unlike Kurdistan and Germany, and New Zealand lacks Russian-style oligarchs too. It will be very difficult for republicans to attack a Queen of New Zealand, who has lived in a working-class suburb of Auckland and who has half-Maori children. 
The ethnicity of the head of state doesn't matter regarding the desire for a resident head of state. What matters is the desire for having your own head of state rather than sharing your head of state with a foreign country. I would like an Osmanoglu to be elected Shah of Kurdistan, despite the Osmanoglus being ethnic Turks, but if the Turkish monarchy is restored, I will definitely prefer Kurdistan having its own Osmanoglu Shah to the Sultan of Turkey being the Shah of Kurdistan.
In addition, it is possible to identify with more than one country. I identify primarily as a Kurd, but I cherish my German ancestry too. My German ancestors were nobles from the Prussian province of Saxony. I'm born in Schleswig-Holstein in Germany, because my parents fled the Saddam regime, and I lived in Germany until after the Iraq War. I'm a dual citizen (I'm a citizen of Iraq and Germany). Perhaps the children of Lady Davina identifies as both New Zealanders and Britons, and perhaps Prince Charles identify as both a Greek and a Briton. Prince Charles actually prefers Orthodox Christianity to Anglicanism, and the children of Lady Davina have Maori names. 


Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,268
Reply with quote  #68 
Surely New Zealand must be ruled by Inca Emperors. The Incas are the true rulers of the South Pacific. It must happen. It's what the New Zealanders want, according to a dream I had. Also, Kurdistan should be ruled by Gibraltar.
DavidV

Registered:
Posts: 5,037
Reply with quote  #69 
This discussion has gotten too weird for my tastes.
Peter

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 7,032
Reply with quote  #70 
I thought Wessexman introduced a touch of sanity to it. It was certainly getting a bit strange before.
Ethiomonarchist

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 5,270
Reply with quote  #71 
Quote:
Surely New Zealand must be ruled by Inca Emperors. The Incas are the true rulers of the South Pacific. It must happen. It's what the New Zealand want, according to a dream I had. Also, Kurdistan should be ruled by Gibraltar.


Well I had a dream that I am the direct heir to the Inca Emperors and also the legitimate Grand Duke of Gibraltar.  Problems solved.  You're welcome!

__________________
The Lion of Judah hath prevailed.

Ethiopia stretches her hands unto God (Quote from Psalm 68 which served as the Imperial Motto of the Ethiopian Empire)

"God and history shall remember your judgment." (Quote from Emperor Haile Selassie I's speech to the League of Nations to plead for assistance against the Italian Invasion, 1936.)
azadi

Registered:
Posts: 387
Reply with quote  #72 
I apologize for appearing to have attacked the British monarchy. I'm not opposed to the British monarch ruling New Zealand, because of the historical ties between New Zealand and Great Britain, and because New Zealand is a sovereign state despite sharing its head of state with Great Britain. But I consider the British monarch being the head of state of New Zealand unsustainable, because of the widespread desire for a resident for president. Antipodean republicanism is fueled by nationalism rather than by ideological republicanism.
"I think, that it's inevitable, that New Zealand will become a republic and that would reflect the reality that New Zealand is a totally sovereign-independent 21th century nation 12,000 miles from the United Kingdom" - Helen Clark, a former Prime Minister of New Zealand.
New Zealand is the only Commonwealth realm, which has other monarchist options than the British monarch (Lady Davina and the Maori King).

azadi

Registered:
Posts: 387
Reply with quote  #73 
It's surprising, that republicanism traditionally has been stronger in Australia than in New Zealand and Canada, because Australia is far more culturally British than New Zealand and Canada is. Australia is monolingually English-speaking, while Canada is bilingual, and the Maori form a far larger part of the population of New Zealand than the Aboriginals form of the population of Australia. The entire non-indigenous cultural heritage of Australia is of British origin except the Sydney Opera House, which was designed by Jörn Utzon, a Danish architect.
Wessexman

Registered:
Posts: 1,268
Reply with quote  #74 
It depends how you are using culturally British, but that strikes me as a misguided assessment. I live in Australia for the moment. I have never been to New Zealand, but I have certainly met many a Kiwi in Australia, including as a roommate once. My understanding is that New Zealanders have more affinity to Britain than Aussies. In Australia, the British are the Poms, the old enemy in cricket and rugby. I believe that Australians experience less of British popular culture than New Zealanders. I recall even hearing from my old roommate that they still show Coronation Street in New Zealand, and it's popular. There's little like that in Australia. Perhaps the British crime dramas shown on the ABC are the closest, but it's a particular demographic that watches those. Australia has a more Americanised popular culture, from what I can gather. Perhaps some of this is to do with Britain being the older, bigger rival to Australia, and Australia being that for New Zealand. The Australians wish to set themselves apart from us Brits, and the New Zealanders wish to show themselves different from the Aussies.
azadi

Registered:
Posts: 387
Reply with quote  #75 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wessexman
It depends how you are using culturally British, but that strikes me as a misguided assessment. I live in Australia for the moment. I have never been to New Zealand, but I have certainly met many a Kiwi in Australia, including as a roommate once. My understanding is that New Zealanders have more affinity to Britain than Aussies. In Australia, the British are the Poms, the old enemy in cricket and rugby. I believe that Australians experience less of British popular culture than New Zealanders. I recall even hearing from my old roommate that they still show Coronation Street in New Zealand, and it's popular. There's little like that in Australia. Perhaps the British crime dramas shown on the ABC are the closest, but it's a particular demographic that watches those. Australia has a more Americanised popular culture, from what I can gather. Perhaps some of this is to do with Britain being the older, bigger rival to Australia, and Australia being that for New Zealand. The Australians wish to set themselves apart from us Brits, and the New Zealanders wish to show themselves different from the Aussies.

I considered New Zealand less culturally British than Australia, because Maori culture is far more influential in New Zealand than Aboriginal culture is in Australia. Is it true, that non-Anglo-Celtic immigration has impacted New Zealand less than Australia? Australia experienced a continental European immigration wave after World War II, and Australia has experienced significant Asian immigration since the 1970's. 
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.