The speech to ACM by the former Prime Minister of Australia was apparently entitled "The Crowned Republic". This is a recent innovation by Professor David Flint who leads the organization, and who introduced the former prime minister as the keynote speaker on the 10th anniversary of the republican loss.
It is also very smart politics, and provides a glimpse of what a future campaign would look like, which might partially explain why republican leaders are so eager to punt the whole matter into the long grass, saying they will not even consider the issue whilst Her Majesty sits on the throne. Talk about a total white flag surrender - Her Majesty probably has more than a generation left to go, which is ample time for any institution to completely revive itself.
Beaverbrook talked about not getting hung up on semantic plumes not too long ago, that even while Australia and her sister nations are independent kingdoms, commonwealth realms and constitutional monarchies - if you want to add crowned republic to the mix, and it will rob the republicans of half their cause, then why wouldn't you?
Deep down we know Professor Flint has impeccable cavalier tastes and wants to maintain the royal kingdom and restore Australian knighthoods, but we also know as he does that you cannot go into a campaign shouting God is a monarchist. Much better to say "a Crowned Republic, not a Politician's Republic" and ruthlessly expose the latter for what it is.
One must learn to dance with the devil in politics, which is forever passing itself off as progress and enlightenment. The French poet Baudelaire said it best: "My dear brothers, never forget, when you hear the progress of enlightenment vaunted, that the devil's best trick is to persuade you that he doesn't exist!"
Actually, H.G. Wells and The Lord Tennyson both used the term "crowned republic" long before Mr. Flint. I think it's a risky term, given the modern meaning of "republic", but still one that fundamentally fits: constitutional monarchies are places where hereditary crown meets republican populism, and one counteracts the other in a lovely balance. It does work well in anti-republican campaign slogans, too; ironically.
ReplyDeleteI know Dr. Flint didn't invent the term, I meant it brings a new dimension to the debate. Call it the ultraminimalist model for a republic; keep the Crown, declare yourself a republic. Pretend you are both a Realm and a Republic.
ReplyDeleteI was at the speech and the lunch afterwards. (First time I'd been to Tatts, incidentally.) There were about 300 people at the event. During the lunch I was more interested in watching the journalists covering the event. They all looked disappointed, particularly by the number of under-50s and under-40s in the crowd. Once Howard left the lunch, the media pack following him out for a "doorstop" media conference was very big - Paul Keating doesn't get that sort of media interest.
ReplyDeleteCompare this to the ARM, an organisation that really seems in decline, which is interesting.
It seems almost like a miracle that John Howard prevailed in this day and age without having to mask his strong conservative viewpoints which were predictable ridiculed in the leftist media.
ReplyDeleteHe was the greatest modern Prime Minister Australia has had. It's a pity he did not restore Australian knighthoods during his time as PM. I suppose unlike the NZ incumbent John Key, he did face a stronger Republican challenge and conserved his political capital for economic reforms.
I think Howard's blind spot on this issue was that (to use North American parlance) he was great at playing "defense", but lousy at "offense". He knew the 1999 referendum vote would be No, but had no idea on how to rebuild the relationship between the monarchy and the people that voted against it.
ReplyDeletePost-Howard, the relationship has the potential to be rebuilt, as Labor leaders realise the monarchy isn't going anywhere soon, and has a legitimacy of sorts flowing from both the referendum result, and the difficulty of constitutional change. But that won't seal the deal. An imaginative Liberal leader would realise knighthoods would have that effect instantly. Dame Ita, anyone?
Still, I understand there is at least one former senior Howard adviser who now curses the failure to restore knighthoods, on the basis that they could have been a good way to curry favour with elites.... whatever that means...
Have you ever about adding a little bit more than just your articles? I mean, what you say is fundamental and everything. However think of if you added some great pictures or video clips to give your posts more, "pop"! Your content is excellent but with images and videos, this blog could certainly be one of the best in its niche. Wonderful blog!
ReplyDelete