Quite a well thought out piece. However, it does not discuss WHAT KIND of republic we should be, and this is where the whole debate breaks down.

Should we have an executive Head of State like the USA? Or a semi-Presidential system as in France, or a parliamentary one as in Ireland?

Just speaking in vague terms about a "republic", the very word scares the hell out of a lot of people.

At one time the ARM had a clear model calling for a democratically chosen Head of State who is one of us. A Head of State with a role and powers substantially similar to those currently held by the Governor-General at the apex of our existing federal parliamentary democracy. But, sadly, now the ARM is set upon an insipid campaign about "Our Identity" which rather misses the point. We already know who we are.

That word "republic" just muddies the waters. The real issue is the Head of State issue. We already are a fully independent nation, and we should have one of us as Head of State to reflect that.

Yet another pointless academic piece about "our identity".

We are, and always have been, a predominantly insular bunch. No amount of pontificating about " project[ing] a reputation in the region based much more on Australia's contemporary reality than our past, a place of remarkable economic, social and environmental leadership" will get past that fundamental fact. We only think about other countries when we have to, a trait that we have in common with the vast majority of nations around the world. It's human nature.

We are, to other people, what we also appear to be to ourselves, whether we like that image or not. We lack a defining culture, which - given our extreme youth as a nation (cf. China) - is hardly surprising at all. Give us another fifteen hundred years or so, and something will no doubt emerge. Or not. It doesn't really matter much, so long as we can take a slab to the beach and set up a barbie.

As far as the Republic thingie is concerned, articles like this tend to polarize, rather than encourage debate. The value to us of being a constitutional monarchy is close to zero, except that it gives the oldies a nice warm glow when they think of the Queen. It is a no-brainer, at every other level.

All it requires is some leadership, and a bit of backbone. Trouble is, those are not easy to find, especially amongst politicians.

Wow, I can see it now. The whole population of Asia & the EU rushing around telling each other the momentous news. Oz is a republic. Yipe.

I'm sure it would brighten their day, if of course they were one of the very few who had heard of us. And that's exactly what we want, to fly under the radar, creating as few waves, well ripples is more fitting, as possible.

The last thing little Oz needs to do is stick our head up, & make a noise. There is always someone looking for a target, lets avoid becoming one any time soon.

The second last thing we need to do is start mucking around with our constitution. We have quite enough serious things that need our attention. Pie in the sky rat bag dreams can wait for the next century at least.

I agree that the republic issue has little to do with our "identity", I bet most other nations do not even know we are not a republic.

In reference to the "Indian student affair" it was not due to a "superficial identity" rather a superficial international education industry. If these economic ties were stable and mutually beneficial, then a crisis like this would have been managed better.

Perhaps our identity would be strengthened if we stopped caring about what other nations think, and actually get working to make Australia a good place to do business, as an independent thinker and contributor to peace, development and democracy.

Contrary to the author’s claims, it is not Australia’s identity which is “alarmingly superficial”, but this article and the ARM’s current campaign.

Constitutions deal with power. To suggest that they relate to ‘branding’ and ‘identity’ shows a preoccupation with form ahead of substance.

The real issue with a republic is what to do with Crown power. The pretend republicans want a substitute monarch, called a President.

The author seems to want something more. He mentions a head of state big-noting himself/herself overseas, while the Prime Minister minds the shop at home.

The only proposal based on democratic principle is the Advancing Democracy model: see www.advancingdemocracy.info. The fault in the present Constitution is that there are two sources of power, the Crown and the electorate. The former is an historical relic. Only the latter is based on democratic principle.

Most of the time the Crown doesn’t do much, but in certain circumstances, its power can be used, not by Her Majesty but by those who take advantage of her powers for their own political advantage, and when that occurs power is always used against the democratic majority. Think Kerr in 1975, Game in 1932 and possibly Abbott in 2014.

Remove the Crown and all its powers and the system becomes more democratic and quite simple. To have a pretend monarch (the president) swanning around the country aping the royal family would add nothing. The additional feature we need is a better functioning Parliament.

The Advancing Democracy model delivers this by creating as our head of state a new Governor-General of Parliament, to take the role of the speaker. Imagine a head of state who does a real job - one who does not interfere in Government, but ensures the Government plays by the rules in Parliament.

Spot on Hasbeen,
We don't need the rest of the world let alone Asia.
The author is a geographically challenged writer of cringe.
He is not aware that Europe is closer to Asia than Australia.
He is not aware that Beijing is closer to Berlin than Darwin.
Asia is on the other side of the world.

These simple facts distort his outlook, but he is not alone.
The problem is that when he went to school, as did many here, that
school had world maps on their walls in Mercador's projection.
It tells blatent lies about the shape of the world.

The sad part is those maps have distorted political outlooks as well
as economic projects.