The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #121  
Old 04-27-2008, 02:08 AM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 656
There can be no comparison, whatsoever, between Queen Victoria and our present monarch.

Queen Victoria did nothing, absolutely nothing, to deserve her prestigious place in the pantheon, whereas QEII had done absolutely everything!

Queen Victoria's reputation resides in the immensely talented and gifted men who steered her governments (Disraeli; Gladstone, etc) and her brilliant husband, the Prince Consort, Albert. Victoria, to me, has always seemed a little, fat, ignorant dunderhead, who couldn't find her way out of a paper bag. The worst thing that happened to the then British Empire was the death of Victoria's accomplished and clever German prince. He gave more to British society than the Christmas tree and was an immense loss to the Commonwealth of Nations, which duly mourned the loss of his superior intellect and attainments.

Elizabeth II, has, alternatively, worked and worried herself almost to exhaustion ,to uphold the traditions of monarchy and to try to be accessible and relevant in all of her realms. No one, anywhere, even the monarchy's most virulent critics, could deny Her Majesty's sense of commitment and hnoour to duty and her unflagging efforts to maintain the throne's prestige.

I think that hard-line feminist do not have to narrow their gaze too far to see one of the world's most exemplary professional women, who's managed to successful combine her job with being a wife and mother. And to those who might say that she's privileged and can afford it, I disagree. Queen Elizabeth could easily have reneged on her duty as Monarch (as did Victoria) or her obligations as a mother. Despite the tabloids' ill-formed opinion, she did neither.

And here she is, over 80 years of age, a-going on, and on, and on...from her ingrained and admirable sense of duty.

It's not that Australians don't care about this; indeed, nearly everyone admires her tenacity and inherent goodness; it's just that she's not Australian and neither is her son and his wife. This is how I understand the issue, at its most simplistic level, added to which, of course, is the unfathomable resentment, almost everywhere, towards Camilla.

As someone who liked the often silly and usually skittish Diana, I just can't comprehend the strength of animosity of the anti-Camilla forces. She's made her prince happy, so why should we care? What business is it of ours? Sadly, too many Australians, illogical or not, do care. It is disconcerting to realise that if Australia becomes and republic (and New Zealand may well folllow suit) then history will assuredly, 'blame' it on Camilla.

My fervent wish is that whatever the outcome, Ausralia's republic doesn't occur within Her Majesty's lifetime. She just doesn't deserve it.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 04-27-2008, 03:14 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
It is disconcerting to realise that if Australia becomes and republic (and New Zealand may well folllow suit) then history will assuredly, 'blame' it on Camilla
I find that very hard to believe.

Blame it on a woman who in no way or enterprise, has ever associated with this continent, let alone it's politics? That makes no sense. Suggesting an anti Camilla "campaign" is what influenced, by account, any federal transition would be not only rediculous, but totally unsubstantiated.

Camilla will never be of relevance within this governing constitution, and any endorsement of a Republic is quite simply, as you yourself expressed, a reflection of the fact our Head of State is not Australian and neither is her son. Camilla comes not into the equation.

Only in one's local doctor surgery is one likely to observe any discussion regarding the Duchess, and it's normally women of a maturing age, dissecting a two year old Women's Day article who are likey to be heard exchanging their character assassinations. Otherwise, she rarely get's a mention, let alone any real thought. Resentment? More to the point of a general uninterest.
__________________

__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 04-27-2008, 07:00 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polly View Post

As someone who liked the often silly and usually skittish Diana, I just can't comprehend the strength of animosity of the anti-Camilla forces. She's made her prince happy, so why should we care? What business is it of ours? Sadly, too many Australians, illogical or not, do care. It is disconcerting to realise that if Australia becomes and republic (and New Zealand may well folllow suit) then history will assuredly, 'blame' it on Camilla.

My fervent wish is that whatever the outcome, Ausralia's republic doesn't occur within Her Majesty's lifetime. She just doesn't deserve it.
Why try and perpetuate the stereotype that Australians are tabloid reading simpletons. Since the reintroduction of the republican push at the 2020 summit, the focus of Australia becoming a republic has solely been on Australia having a Head of State who actually resides in Australia. The media reports have not at all mentioned Camilla! Not once, nor Charles. The campaign for an Australian HoS treats Australians like they are intelligent individuals who realise that for Australia to become a republic is not a snub to the British royals. As far as history 'blaming' Camilla for Australia becoming a republic, rubbish! Historians will read the news articles of the day which don't focus on personalities, but on the issues of a country of migrants with no strong ties to the UK. Currently Australians don't have any 'favoured' status in the UK, young Australians need work permits to work there, EU members don't. There is no longer a 'favoured' state trade agreement between the Uk and Australia, not since the UK joined the EU.

Why isn't it fair to QEII that Australia becomes a republic in her reign. Why is Australia so important? During QEII's reign South Africa has become a republic despite the 'grand tour' done by George VI and family in 1947 on the advice of the Foreign Office to shore up support for the monarchy. Malta became a republic despite the fact that that as a young married woman Elizabeth lived there, so much for the sentimentality of the Maltese. They wanted their own Head of State. Zambia, Zimbabwe ( they were part of the 1947 tour) Ghana, all became republics in QEII's reign. India, Pakistan and Bangladesh in her father's and they were all more important tradewise to the UK.

There are racist undertones here, Australia (and New Zealand) are predominately white so they are more important? The African and Caribbean countries that became republics in the queen's reign are not.

Personally I'm a status quoist, simply because I think there are far more important and pressing issues in Australia that the government should be spending their time and money on. Rural health, the Murray-Darling basin, programs for the disabled, mental health, all these issues are far more important and effect the lives of more Australians than who our HoS will be. I have no problems with it being Charles.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 04-27-2008, 07:42 AM
tinkerbell1948's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Country SA, Australia
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polly View Post
There can be no comparison, whatsoever, between Queen Victoria and our present monarch.

Queen Victoria did nothing, absolutely nothing, to deserve her prestigious place in the pantheon, whereas QEII had done absolutely everything!
Yes I was thinking along the terms of the length of their reign and what they have both accomplished . QV went into mourning for the rest of her reign after Albert died. I saw in a costume museum in London I think one of her (black of course) dressed, she was so tiny

Queen Elizabeth is in her '80's and I'm speechless at the pace she ( and the Duke) keep up
__________________
Tink
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 04-27-2008, 07:45 AM
tinkerbell1948's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Country SA, Australia
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlotte1 View Post
Personally I'm a status quoist, simply because I think there are far more important and pressing issues in Australia that the government should be spending their time and money on. Rural health, the Murray-Darling basin, programs for the disabled, mental health, all these issues are far more important and effect the lives of more Australians than who our HoS will be. I have no problems with it being Charles.
I so agree with you there yes we will become a Republic at some stage however like you I think there are many more important things to concentrate on just now
__________________
Tink
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 04-27-2008, 09:01 AM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinkerbell1948 View Post
I so agree with you there yes we will become a Republic at some stage however like you I think there are many more important things to concentrate on just now
I agree with the two of you, but we now have a Labor Government, and turning us into a republic is important to them for some reason.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 06-08-2008, 07:31 PM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 656
It's the official Queen's Birthday in most of Australia today. Here's the opinion of the local tabloid rag:

It's happy birthday to who? | Herald Sun
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 06-09-2008, 02:26 AM
wbenson's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,238
Quote:
Along with New Zealand, but not Canada, and for the last time in Bermuda, we get this day off to mark the birth of a remarkable woman whose only fault it seems was producing her dysfunctional children, each of whom could in some unforeseen circumstances replace her as our head of state.
Leaving aside the commentary about the Queen, Canada doesn't get this day off but it does get a day off for her birthday.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 06-09-2008, 02:43 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
That's pretty unfair. Yes, three of her children managed to get themselves into dysfunctional marriages, but I don't think any of them are dysfunctional individuals.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 06-10-2008, 02:49 AM
Polly's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Mebourne, Australia
Posts: 656
Unfair, indeed!

However, the journalist in question has a very high profile international c.v.,which is worrying.

More than that, I was shocked to hear on my local ABC radio station, (our prestigious national broadcaster) a whole day of parodies against Her Majest and her family, eg,

There was a 'interview' with HM, quite funny and good-hearted in its own way until it came to her plans for the day.


The impersonator said, over and again, that her 'son, and his wife..the, err, aah, eeek, Duchess of York (giggle, laugh) were having lunch with her. Time and again it was inferred that The
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 09-06-2008, 03:32 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Australia has sworn in its first female governor general, Queen Elizabeth's representative to the country.

BBC NEWS | World | Asia-Pacific | New governor general in Australia

I note that it too says Her Excellency is a Republican herself. That I did not know if infact true...

Anywho, I think she's tops!
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 09-06-2008, 04:25 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
I seem to remember that when it was announced that she would be coming the new GG that she was a Republican and even hoped to be the last GG, implying that there would be a concerted effort to have Australia become a Republic during the next five years.

I do think that will happen - i.e. there will be another referendum within that time frame and I suspect that we will have a couple of plebiscites first - with the first one asking straight if the majority of Australians and a majority of states want to become a republic. That question would get a strong Yes vote I think and from their the government would then have to move forward towards us being a republic, possibly within 5 years or less.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 09-06-2008, 05:16 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,238
I haven't seen much evidence (other than the BBC article) that Ms Bryce is for a republic. She hasn't aired her views on the matter much if at all, which, given her position, is probably a good thing.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 09-17-2008, 09:47 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monterey, United States
Posts: 2,325
Well looks like Australia may become a Republic.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 09-17-2008, 09:56 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
You'll have to excuse me, but that does seem like quite the obvious statement..haha..
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 09-18-2008, 02:56 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monterey, United States
Posts: 2,325
Wel yes I Was referring to Republicans having a Majority now or something to that affect
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 09-18-2008, 05:28 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal Fan View Post
Wel yes I Was referring to Republicans having a Majority now or something to that affect

In 1999 the referendum was defeated not necessarily because most Australians didn't want a republic but because they didn't like the model on offer - the President being appointed by the Parliament.

What Australians want is a directly elected President.

Now that both the leader of the Opposition and the PM are Republicans (the new leader of the Opposition was in the forefront of the campaign for the Republic in 1999) it is expected that at some time in the next few years the process will begin.

I suspect a plebiscite within the next two years asking simply 'Do you want Australia to be a Republic?' If that gets a Yes vote from a majority of Australians and a majority of the states then the government will move forward with a model. If that simple question gets a No vote then it will be put on the backburner again (possibly for a very long time).

I would expect a Yes vote for the simple question and an overwhelming Yes vote at that.

The only problem for the Opposition leader is that quite a number of members of his party are still strong monarchists and he has to tread warily or possibly split the party and hand Labour the government for years.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 09-23-2008, 01:21 PM
Avicenna's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: North of Lake Constance, Germany
Posts: 527
Umfrage: Australier haben die Monarchie satt - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten - Panorama

The above article, published in German on the Spiegel website, talks about australians being fed up with the Monarchy. According to a public opinion poll of the Herald/Nielsen-Institute 52 percent of all citizens decline the parlamentary monarchy. Only 40 percent support the Queen, der rest remains undecided. It also says that the general opinion and mood of the public might change once Prince Charles becomes King since he is not as well liked as his mother.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 01-01-2009, 06:50 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,495
Calls again for Australian republic.

When I got up this morning I turned on SkyNews and found a reference to the republic so I went to their website and here is the story:

http://www2.skynews.com.au/politics/article.aspx?id=291748

If true then we can expect the pressure to build again for another referendum over the next year or so.

It is also being reported in 'The Age'

http://www.theage.com.au/national/la...0101-78ju.html
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 01-01-2009, 06:56 PM
crisscross1's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 818
This issue had to raise it's ugly head again
I think getting rid of the monarchy would be a waste of time and money and would serve absolutely no purpose.
They got a no vote from me last time and will this time. (JMO)
__________________

__________________
Everyone is born right-handed, only the gifted overcome it!!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
australia, british commonwealth, elizabeth ii, governor general, julia gillard, monarchy versus republic, parliament, queen elizabeth ii


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Queen and Canada, Residences, Governor General, etc... Duchess Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh 401 09-27-2014 10:35 AM
General discussion about royal residences auroraDaniel British Royal Residences 87 08-09-2014 08:29 PM
Swedish Residences General Discussion Josefine Swedish Royal Residences 54 06-21-2014 10:12 AM
Official Visit from Australia to The Netherlands; September 26-27, 2006 fanletizia Dutch Royals 46 10-08-2006 01:22 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility olympic games olympics ottoman poland pom president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:47 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]