Posts by chris
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Not a lot to take pride in though.
I believe that there is pride to be taken from the fact that us commoner’s were merciful/merciless enough to forgive(?)/retain the monarchy in its current adulterated form as a reminder of all that went before, without chopping off heads and leaving the family destitute. I take pride in that. I think it shows a greater degree of foresight and cultural awareness than what we've seen in other nations' where monarchies have been dissolved entirely.
From the Cohen quote you posted, a couple of things stuck out for me:
because the British are not allowed to vote for their head of state. Charles Windsor constantly interferes in politics and promotes every variety of reactionary superstition and new-age quackery.
And now it’s the population’s God given right to ignore every whimsical utterance that passes his lips.
Yet whatever his personal failings, he will be King because he was born to the right mother.
In terms of this lineage aspect, I feel that post Elizabeth, the heirs have had the bar raised in terms of our expectations of their decorum and public politics to the extent that they’re as likely if not more so to behave in a manner that is in keeping with those in public office. Big shoes to fill as it were.
When looking at issues such as the recent case of Prince Andrew. There’s something about the visibility that the Royal family enjoys that provides us a highly detailed window to the goings on of a largely invisible class we would otherwise not be privy too.
This dying breed of elite represent. And in many ways I feel that if anyone is losing in this deal it’s them. More pragmatically, in this increasingly globalized and connected world with its many problems, being consumed by the heady desire for NZ to extricate itself from benign, potentially useful relationships, seems altogether an extravagance.
-
Hard News: Any excuse for a party, in reply to Sacha,
Ahem – if this a possible mention of the fact that people of Maori descent (not to mention other ANZ groupings) tend to breed rather more often than people of Pakeha* descent…well, forgone conclusion-
Still a way to go there population wise Islander, but this is a strong positive IMHO.
I’d say you’re romaticising that, even beyond the now extinct Privy Council relationship.
Yes Sacha, romanticism is the main basis for my feeling on the topic. The Forbidden City as a thriving expansive tourist trap to be led around by Roger Moore audio commentary, is all well and good (in its way).
Yet I feel acutely aware of the expansive void that fills the niches that history and tradition once inhabited, and in due course the numbing artifice of the substitutes transplanted to fill it.
It’s hard to know which useless body part the monarchy is most akin to. If one is the type to book into surgery to shake off a few grams of body weight, there are many cost effective and natural ways to improve oneself.
Maybe it’s being here, that enhances the degree of pride I feel that we didn’t simply oust or behead our monarchs, but it seems to me that the monarchy’s influence in New Zealand is diluted enough that you can either take it or leave it as an individual persuasion, and so I can’t see it being in dire need of replacement.
Queen’s birthday is as enjoyable holiday as any.
-
Um, I don’t suppose there’s any chance I can backtrack to this strand:
That kiss(es) was a beautiful scene. I think social/ political investment in that moment benefits us as people and as a nation.
-
Ah I see, sorry, I've been out the country a while, well it seems like New Zealand Republica be all systems go!
Now I guess it's just a case of whether those who would retain the treaty can keep up in the baby race against those who would abolish the treaty.
-
Hard News: Any excuse for a party, in reply to Islander,
Since when? Ah, I see, well that's a shame.
-
Hard News: Any excuse for a party, in reply to Islander,
“other legal avenues”?
Urm, which ones precisely?
the one I just mentioned.
-
Hard News: Any excuse for a party, in reply to Islander,
and what precisely makes you think that ‘the British’ would be coming to the aid of Maori if the Treaty was ditched?
Simply that the maintenance of the British/New Zealand relationship leaves other legal avenues open for New Zealanders.
Were New Zealand already a republic, for better or for worse such an avenue wouldn’t have been available to Bain.
Can there be such a thing as too much justice? Looking at this case, arguably perhaps, but the odds are that the next person in need of this instrument may be more deserving.
-
As the link says Islander; 2700 participants, but like any survey, it’s never going to give you a particularly clear indication of the feeling of the greater population, but it’s a high enough figure to cause some concern.
David Bain? Retried in an ANZ court – and what a fiasco that was.
Via the Privy Council.
-
Hard News: Any excuse for a party, in reply to Islander,
I don’t think I know better than anyone here Islander. Perhaps I’m wrong, I simply worry that over 37% of New Zealanders want the treaty removed from New Zealand law, that if this number were to increase significantly, then the Governor General and the British system itself could be the last recourse of mediation in such an instance.
Perhaps it’s naive of me, but I see Britain as a last line of insurance against gross mismanagement of New Zealand for the price of minimal political interference. As evidenced rightly or wrongly in the case of David Bain.
is that the UK offers no real contribution beyond access to higher courts… oh hang on…
You’re speaking my language Paul.
-
Hard News: Any excuse for a party, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
Make no mistake, it affects the Treaty Rich of Obsevationz. Currently the original signatory (the British) still have a stake in the agreement, removing them entirely will certainly alter the dynamic of the relationship between the parties.
Why would you fire your Guardian Angel?