On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:55:06 +1000, JohnJohn >
wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:51:16 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:28:50 +1000, JohnJohn >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 09:17:00 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 14 Sep 2014 07:19:15 +1000, JohnJohn >
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 15:08:53 -0600, Mayo > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>But is it really a true democracy?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Or more in the parliamentary style?
>>>>>
>>>>>Where you elect politicians who then break all their promises until
>>>>>the next election time, when they start to suck up again?
>>>>>
>>>>>>I believe you've still a monarchical Governor General to answer to.
>>>>
>>>>Which was the instrument used to sack our Prime Minster in 1975.
>>>>
>>>>>As long as Australia doesn't cut the umbilical cord, it's still some
>>>>>sort of colony. I don't know what's stopping them.
>>>>
>>>>"Them"? Are you only here on holidays?
>>>
>>>Not at all. But I think Australia should be its own country and "them"
>>>are the people who don't agree with that.
>>>
>>>>>I guess people are
>>>>>afraid of change. Especially older people.
>>>>
>>>>Partly. I'm no monarchist by any means, but sometimes you need to be
>>>>careful what you wish for. What exactly do we replace it with? A
>>>>'Republic' can be all sorts of things, including a totalitarian state
>>>>where most of the citizens think they live in a democracy.
>>>
>>>Why would Australia become a totalitarian state? It would remain a
>>>democracy run by crappy politicians, just like all other democracies.
>>
>>I think I'll leave this one alone.
>
>It's your baby

Heh... nah, I just don't want to go there right now, especially on
this group