Belly you need to READ what I've posted! PLEASE! - I have in no way said that wanting change is a cringe: I'm saying that wanting it for the petty reasons which I've attacked is the classic cliched "cultural cringe".

You KEEP trying to paint this in black and white - "if you're not agin the Royals then ye be FER 'em B'god!" - My point is that they are irrelevant and therefor it does no justice to Australia to keep POINTLESSLY figuring them in our future plans and aspirations. Like I said: the world KNOWS who we are and so should we - so yes the British royals are NOT relevant. To keep holding them up as meaning anything at all IS cultural cringe.

It occurs to me that we're all making a big mistake in even using the term "Monarchy" and any of it's forms as that suggests an active role of governance - delete all forms of "monarch" from my posts and replace instead with Windsor Royals and see if it all makes more sense?

I can still remember God Save the Queen being played in cinemas and other public venues and my family never stood either.... But I remember one occasion where for some reason I didn't and still don't fathom (I was a small boy) - perhaps it was Anzac day? - there was war footage of Aussie soldiers marching on the screen - and EVERYONE stood. Even then I understood we were paying homage to the soldiers.

And until they died out in the 1960's I had relatives sending money back to the IRA so I've hardly had an upbringing that figured much in the way of Queen and Glory...

On the subject of who / what should a new "Head of State" be: the answer is so simple it's ridiculous.

The PM - or whatever that role ends up being called.

By this I mean that one thing I'm certain does confuse the world at large right now is this odd institution we have called "Governor General". I imagine there have been countless whispered conversations amongst foreign dignitaries along the lines of "so who's this? - the Prime Minister is coming next week - so who exactly is this one??".

By default our head of government - PM - is pretty much filling the role already - much the same as the American president - so my money is on simply doing away with a separate and superfluous position altogether.

Maybe not a trained Kangaroo - so would a Galah do ok instead? ;-)

Simple.

I will meet you half way spinner, I still want an end to the wealthy Windsor family leaching on any tax payers.
Yes England's too.
I shrivel up in shame on reading the old dear, look no I do not think of her as a dear old thing, never liked her.
But if seated at a table next to some one who bores her she just places her purse on the floor and the person is whisked away to another seat.
Have you heard the pompous way they talk, seen the way they had to be pushed to publicly morn for Diana.
Fact is the Queen mum was a LADY, loved her, feel sorry for Chuck, his kids seem ok.
But unlikely to invite old bloke the rude Duke and his bride to the next sausage sizzle at Belly's hideaway.
Those corgis, better with a few blue cattle dogs soon get Phil moving.
Laugh then with me, just think she actually thinks she is better than us.

Belly wrote:
"Raw Mustard I hope that is your considered opinion."

Everything I write on here is "my" opinion, Belly.

Belly wrote:
"In debate, in truly talking about any subject.
It is my view we should not let our personal views of others control how we think."

Wise words my friend, I have no personal view of you, Belly, so whatever I've said has not been swayed by those views. It's just that Spinners views parrot my own, hence why I wrote what I did.

Belly wrote:
"And yes, no surprise we think differently, I do not say me and you but every one."

Ah you mean opinions are like ars... err you know how the saying goes, everyone has one :)

Belly wrote:
"The debate is, well I think it is, did Williams visit truly change the republican debate?"

I don't think so. It's had no effect on my view of Australia becoming a republic, nor the circle of friends I keep. They all still think royals are a waist of time and so do I and they all pretty much feel the same as before his arrival about the republic issue. They're also firmly in touch with their identities as sovereign Australians.

Belly wrote:
"Now I believe if politicians had not pressed their own wishes, very wisely used by monarchists, we may have voted for a republic."

Do you honestly, with all your heart believe that we Aussies, the ones that truly call themselves Dinky-Di are that silly? And no that does not make us monarchists. I feel you might be a bit out of touch on this one.

Belly wrote:
"You Raw Mustard and I can be wrong, often we will be."

Hehehe! Ain't that the truth, but lets no forget! We have a great privilege in this country and that is our freedom to debate, let's be mindful of those that would take that away from us, republican or monarchist.

Belly wrote:
"But in spinners claim, with your support, both monarchists and republicans do not have a leg to stand on."

Ah sorry Belly. I'm feeling my comprehension skills are lacking on this one?

Do you mean that our view does not allow for a winner?

If you do, then to us the status quo will be fine until a true leader steps up to the plate and offers real change that will benefit all of us honestly.

Belly wrote:
"Do we want a King. Or a republic."

No we don't want a king and no we don't want "the type" of republic that is being foisted upon us.

We're simple people really in touch with our identities and reality. If a republic is not going to change our way of life in any meaningful way then why bother? You see, some of us don't give a rats about titles and all that hooplah. All we care about is how is it going to improve our lives. Will it significantly reduce our taxes? Will it give us fixed interest rates? Will it remove the corrupt, thieving banking system? Will it lower the cost of living? Will it reduce road congestion? Will it better educate our children? Will it prevent corruption in parliament? Will it substantially reduce government? Will it prevent corporate rape of our environment? Will it give us true land rights? and the list goes on. And to that we say no it won't! So why bother?

Belly wrote:
"In two posts you both take at best a marginal view, one that says openly if we want any change we are cringer's/wimps/ maybe Australian."

Should that have been Un-Australian?

See this is where I see a flaw in you Belly (without prejudice of course)

Spinner wrote:
"Some of you might have a crisis of identity but I certainly don't and it's painful to see fellow Aussies carrying on like such snivelling whimps."

You've taken this to heart as being an attack on your views and your patriotism.
I see it as Spinner trying to tell you, you don't need to change your flag or system of government to know your identity as a true Aussie oi oi oi. Perhaps not the best choice of words, but he got his point across :)

Belly wrote:
"Americas system is not one I support but with refinement, with publics right to select, to Honor a figure head?
ok by me."

See now you're seeing it my way, where as before I understood you to be in favour of the past model?

Yes I too would favour the American model with refinement. We have hindsight in our favour and could improve on it immensely, but that's for another discussion.

Hopefully Belly I have given you a good view into my thoughts and those of many of my friends and I would suspect many true Dinky-Di Aussies.