Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: Steph, I dare say you are far more aware of this history than most Americans | |
Author: Ian (Australia) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 11:26:15 11/28/04 Sun In reply to: Steph (U.S.) 's message, "Trixta History" on 04:55:45 11/28/04 Sun You are obviously far more knowledgeable about it than I am. I'm not so sure that current US citizens would view this historical relationship with the British monarchy and the British system of government in quite such a positive way. I am, as always, more than happy to be proved wrong. Regardless of the common origins of our forms of government, I do feel there is a substantial difference in functioning between a parliamentary system, with a symbolic head and a government based on a majority of local representatives, and a presidential system, with a powerful head and frequent conflict between executive and legislative branches. My experience of living in Brazil is largely responsible for this feeling. I, for one, would be astonished and very pleased if the USA should show interest in joining the Commonwealth, not so much because of anything related to the monarchy, but because joining an organisation that would put it on the same level as Lesotho would be an important sign of multilateralism. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Yes | |
|
Author: Steph (U.S.) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:27:44 11/28/04 Sun I agree that many Americans have a less positive view of our early conection to the crown. But I do think that many of us have a positive view of Great Britain. We were allies through all of the 20th Century. There are substantial differences in functioning between our systems. I only wanted to point out that they are different developments of the same system. If Cromwell had made the Protectorship directly ellected and their had been no restoration, the American system would be standard through out the English Speaking world. As for us joining the Commonwealth it is something that would have to be worked at just as Federation will have to be worked at. As for having only one vote, we had only one at the U.N. and the U.S.S.R. had three. We didn't like it but we lived with it. Regarding multilateralism, I guess I hold to view that the purpose of the state is to defend the persons, rights and interests of its citizens. To sacrifice those to international concensus would be to deligitimize itself. Cheers Steph [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Well said | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (Venezia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:39:20 11/28/04 Sun I don't always agree with Dubya, but making US defence policy dependent on the consent of foreign nations is rather an abrogation of the Commander-in-Chief's responsibilities. Look at how much fuss we're making over here about the Euro-army! It would be hypocritical for Brits to criticise Americans for refusing to do something which we refuse to do ourselves. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |