HRH to retire next year, at 95 ?

My lot go back to Jesus Christ, you know, the Scots one or is it MacAdam & Eve??

Do you want a theocracy in which priests rule in the name of God? Doesn't seem to be working well in Iran.
Still, it would be better than having kings who think they are God in charge.
Personally, I want a weak and accountable government subject to regular boots up the bum by the people. So I favour a weak President, replacing a Governor-General, appointed by parliament, with few powers except the ability to hold the ship on course when the politicians are predictably useless, which is often.
When in doubt, let's put it to the people and have an election. Elections should be fixed term to reduce the ability of the politicians to manipulate the system for selfish reasons.
I do not favour the American system in which a rich populist can lie his way into office with the support of a minority of support from the population. America is becoming undemocratic.
I also favour a federal Independent Commission Against Corruption, appointed by parliament, properly funded, with lots of power to scare the politicians. Ministers under investigation by the police should always stand aside until there is a result.
And let's bring back the stocks, in which people convicted of particularly repulsive acts are pelted with rotten tomatoes on street corners. Would be great. Be like the old tribal days when the worst offenders were booted out of the village and the gates locked to keep them out.
I have a list of names... [emoji41]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Do you want a theocracy in which priests rule in the name of God? Doesn't seem to be working well in Iran.
Theocracies have never been very nice places to live. Probably describes China under Mao or the Soviet Union or Cambodia under the Kmer Rouge as well. Theocracies don't need a god, just a belief system that everyone has to adhere to.
Still, it would be better than having kings who think they are God in charge.
Not really. Monarchies have the advantage, at least in theory, that an heir can be trained from childhood for the job. Of course, it doesn't always happen like that.
Personally, I want a weak and accountable government subject to regular boots up the bum by the people. So I favour a weak President, replacing a Governor-General, appointed by parliament, with few powers except the ability to hold the ship on course when the politicians are predictably useless, which is often.
Needs to have some sort of a system to try to avoid the office becoming a political one. Perhaps jointly appointed by both states and federal parliaments?
When in doubt, let's put it to the people and have an election. Elections should be fixed term to reduce the ability of the politicians to manipulate the system for selfish reasons.
I think these two sentences are in contradiction! How exactly do you have an election every time there is doubt and also have fixed terms?
I do not favour the American system in which a rich populist can lie his way into office with the support of a minority of support from the population. America is becoming undemocratic.
Which bit of their system don't you like? In my view, the two biggest improvements Australia has over the US system is compulsory voting and preferential voting. Multimember electorates would be better.
I also favour a federal Independent Commission Against Corruption, appointed by parliament, properly funded, with lots of power to scare the politicians. Ministers under investigation by the police should always stand aside until there is a result.
Good idea.
And let's bring back the stocks, in which people convicted of particularly repulsive acts are pelted with rotten tomatoes on street corners. Would be great. Be like the old tribal days when the worst offenders were booted out of the village and the gates locked to keep them out.
I have a list of names... [emoji41]

---

I've got a little list, none of 'em 'll be missed....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Do you want a theocracy in which priests rule in the name of God? Doesn't seem to be working well in Iran.
Still, it would be better than having kings who think they are God in charge.
[emoji41]

---

Actually, IRAN is an Islamic democracy, by definition.


https://www.scienceabc.com/social-sc...iamentary.html

Australia, UK and the USA are described as Social democracies,

YouTube

Social democracy VS Free market capitalism.

YouTube

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Do you want a theocracy in which priests rule in the name of God? Doesn't seem to be working well in Iran.
. [emoji41]

---

This didn't work well in Eire either with the Roman Catholic church in charge through their surrogates, the Irish Dail.