The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Don't get carried away by dreams of a new flag > Comments

Don't get carried away by dreams of a new flag : Comments

By Barry Cohen, published 20/5/2010

For a flag to be acceptable to most Australians it must be uniquely Australian.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
just remove the Union Jack - leave the 'Fed Star', center from top to bottom and slightly enlarge, plus the southern cross as is
Posted by JMCC, Thursday, 20 May 2010 10:40:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes what is unique about the Oz and NZ is that they feature the emblem of another country on their flags. They thus also have the king/queen of another country as their titular and EFFECTIVE head of state (although nostalgic monarchists would like to pretend other wise).

That country, namely England, has no inherent interest in the welfare of the Australian people. Indeed it never REALLY did.

We along with all of the other former British colonies were/are members of the STOLEN-wealth of nations. Most of the wealth used to go back to "mother" England.

We somehow thus pretend that we a mature independent country..
Posted by Ho Hum, Thursday, 20 May 2010 11:11:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ho Hum or Dum Dum what ever your name is.. you truely write utter rot !

"Yes what is unique about the Oz and NZ is that they feature the emblem of another country on their flags"

Look up " unique" in a dictionary sometime.

Next look up the Internet to actually see how many other Countries AND States carry the Union Jack. Don't forget that American State ... Hawaii !

As for "That country, namely England, has no inherent interest in the welfare of the Australian people. Indeed it never REALLY did "

Am I missing something here ,Sunshine ? Except that the Flag of England is the Cross of Saint George ,the Union Jack being that of The United Kingdom.. Small point I know , but Drivel just muddies it all up, doesn't it?

Next , "We along with all of the other former British colonies were/are members of the STOLEN-wealth of nations. Most of the wealth used to go back to "mother" England."..

Reread you History again, though I suspect that we are being quoted Old Wives Tales. I am assuming , of course,that you actually HAVE read your History, but got confused by the big words.

Finally, "We somehow thus pretend that we a mature independent country.."

I agree with you..with people writing Rubbish like yours , there is no way that we can be described as an mature independent country!!

To think that I have wasted 10 minutes of my life reading your diatribe AND resonding to it.. I shall now do something more rewarding , by going outside and watching the Grass growing
Posted by Aspley, Thursday, 20 May 2010 11:53:26 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sounds like you want a gene-ectomy, Ho Hum. Unless you're an indigenous Australian (and even they came from Africa) you are a migrant with a cultural history. What flags have your forebears fought for? How would your coat of arms look if all your ancestors had earned a title? You can't just deny history because you don't like the politics. Or because you belong to an adolescent society that is still rebelling against its parent. That's immature. When we all grow up we'll have one flag for earthlings -- and let's hope space travel brings that time soon because back in July 1969, despite the moon landing's being a giant leap for mankind, there was nothing more disappointing to me than that boastful US flag.
Posted by Polly Flinders, Thursday, 20 May 2010 1:44:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As Barry Cohen suggests, changing the flag brings out extreme arguments (both ways), but in large part this is because the options proposed tend to be presented as a choice between extremes.

To remove the Union Jack altogether would be unpopular with many and historically provocative. However the fact remains that it is still the flag of another nation, and for contemporary Australia reflects another era.

Of relevance is the fact that the Union Jack is itself the child of history, a flag created from several others to reflect a shift in political reality. In a similar fashion, we could "deconstruct" the Union Jack to (say) three vertical stipes on the left hand side of the existing blue ensign, thus reflecting both our past and our present.
Posted by JohnS_Melb, Thursday, 20 May 2010 2:11:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I've come to the conclusion that any serious discussion of a new flag is a waste of time until Australia becomes a truly independent nation-state. If and when we reach that enlightened moment, a new and unique flag will undoubtedly seem appropriate to those who have supported independence.

Until then, these discussions about a new flag will always descend into wankery, from both sides.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Thursday, 20 May 2010 2:46:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy