tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post8183570444851042098..comments2024-03-29T11:07:51.893+13:00Comments on Bowalley Road: Bonnie King BillyChris Trotterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09081613281183460899noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-20338560835095074502010-01-26T21:26:53.407+13:002010-01-26T21:26:53.407+13:00I did not say we should never be a Republic, only ...I did not say we should never be a Republic, only that now is not a good time for such a move. While I agree that I did put things in bleak terms, at present we have a society that is sharply divided into haves and have-nots, with all the social ills that follow from this, a status quo which I would not like to see get any more deeply entrenched. If we were to become a Republic under such conditions I think they would become more deeply entrenched.Olwynnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-25932462779803779402010-01-26T15:25:04.768+13:002010-01-26T15:25:04.768+13:00Hasn't Palmer spent the last 30 years silently...Hasn't Palmer spent the last 30 years silently wishing himself into such a role?<br /><br />Next somebody will be suggesting Lockwood Smith for President!<br /><br />NZers are a more communal lot who like committees and sharing of power, notwithstanding the odd populist individual (Seddon, Savage, Muldoon). They prefer constitutional heads of state with no effective power and a faint halo of monarchical magic.mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-9567698890028618592010-01-25T18:49:22.088+13:002010-01-25T18:49:22.088+13:00Olwyn, I disagree with your pessimistic view of wh...Olwyn, I disagree with your pessimistic view of what a republic might be. I understand that parliamentary politics is a frustrating process with lots of silly rhetoric and spin doctors all over the show and people like Michael Laws who lower the quality of every debate they are in but that is all the more resaon why it is time for a republic. The office of head of state/ constitutional leader who sets out a far more objective and principled example of what politics should be like. They would have enough powers to keep government functioning properly and probably spend a lot of time doing ceremonial things like opening court buildings and awarding people honours. I think we can trust NZers (and a good electoral system) to elect a suitable person. Sir Geoffrey Palmer seems an obvious choice even if he doesn't quite have the common touch. Alec from Auckland.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-50570227870649385482010-01-23T22:19:35.094+13:002010-01-23T22:19:35.094+13:00They are constitutional heads of state these days ...They are constitutional heads of state these days - they can no longer order beheadings. I do not think this is a good time for NZ to become a republic - it would take us about 6 months to devolve into a corporate feifdom, with people like Paul Holmes, John Banks and Michale Laws staining at the bit to be president, and a constitution written by Crosby and Textor, or Kevin Roberts.Olwynnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-4411982259893554942010-01-23T19:44:26.346+13:002010-01-23T19:44:26.346+13:00Francesca
You are also, equally obviously, corre...Francesca <br /><br />You are also, equally obviously, correct in thinking that accident of birth is not in itself a good qualification for becoming a head of state.<br /><br />But wanting to be elected suggests a weakness of character that should disqualify anyone from anything.<br /><br />VictorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-26172434134253012132010-01-23T18:59:15.770+13:002010-01-23T18:59:15.770+13:00Francesca is, of course, correct about both Mary T...Francesca is, of course, correct about both Mary Tudor and Charles II.<br /><br />In the case of William III, it helped that he was a wily politician and a succesful general, with a bodyguard of loyal Dutch currassiers and Swedish mercenaries<br /><br />By the way, he was also probably gay but, unlike in the case of Edward II, this didn't seem to affect his reputation or his grip on power.<br /><br />If William and Mary had produced progeny, the fates of the British and Dutch empires would have been intertwined for the next three centuries. An interesting topic for fans of counter-factual history, perhaps.<br /><br />VictorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-8803981310011173702010-01-23T18:33:52.317+13:002010-01-23T18:33:52.317+13:00The Royal Family have only used the name Windsor s...The Royal Family have only used the name Windsor since 1917 when it was a bit embarrasing to be called Saxe-Coburg and be at war with Germany.<br /><br />Edward is not a traditional name of the Hanoverian monarchs - Edward I ,II, III, IV and V were all medieval Plantaganet monarchs and Edward VI, born in 1537, was named after them.<br /><br />There was no other Edward until Edward VII. The Hanoverians favoured the name George and gave us the glorious parade of German numbskulls named George. The only reason there was a William after George IV was because there were no other legitimate heirs apart from his younger brothers.<br /><br />This is not due to a lack of progeny of George III's sons - problem was their huge families were all illegitimate. Their stories should be required reading for people who think that an accident of birth qualifies someone to be a head of state.<br /><br />Francesca.<br /><br /><br /><br />\Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-55201438828409446922010-01-23T17:42:38.358+13:002010-01-23T17:42:38.358+13:00To Victor:
You are quite correct re: Mary Stuart....To Victor:<br /><br />You are quite correct re: Mary Stuart. <br /><br />I sent the draft of this essay to my wife, Francesca, to be sure that I had my facts straight. Sadly, in this instance, her encyclopaedic knowledge of the British monarchy proved unavailing - she looked only at the medieval kings and queens and skipped over the Restoration material.<br /><br />My humble apologies.<br /><br />However, she has asked me to draw your attention to the role of the people in cementing the rule of both Mary Tudor and Charles II - both of whom were acclaimed by their subjects. In Mary's case, this popular support so unnerved the Royal Council that they abandoned their plans to install Lady Jane Grey as Edward VI's successor. Good news for Mary - not so good for Jane.Chris Trotterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09081613281183460899noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-37671350519733134472010-01-23T16:22:46.190+13:002010-01-23T16:22:46.190+13:00Another boring pedantic notes:
If Charles does ta...Another boring pedantic notes:<br /><br />If Charles does take the throne, it will be as King George VII, not Charles III. Chas has already indicated that George will be his regnal name, mainly in honour of his grandfather (Charles is far too Stuartish)<br /><br />Billy boy could in turn take William as a regnal, but may be considered too Protestant in this new shiny era of tolerance (Will III) and the last William (IV) was no great shakes - possibly as George VIII -<br />the other Windsor standby of Edward has been rather mucked up by Edward VIII.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-90703185707124769672010-01-23T12:13:30.608+13:002010-01-23T12:13:30.608+13:00An elected Head of State is sounds like a fair sys...An elected Head of State is sounds like a fair system given that not everyone wants the British Monarchy to supply our Head of State. The Royal Family could put forward a candidate at each election. <br />A neutral constitutional leader who can keep parliament in line and act if there is ever a serious constitutional dipsute sounds like a very good idea to me. Then again Switizerland has seven heads of state. They rotate the position among each person I think. A kind of constitutional council. There are plenty of possibilities.<br />Lets not get hung up on traditions so much. A system that will be effective as the 21st century progresses is sensible and good planning.<br />We are a seperate relam from the UK so its possible for Charles to take the UK throne and for William to take the throne of New Zealand and Australia when Her Majesty dies. Perhaps Canada can have Harry. I am not sure anyone wants Harry...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-922699795436877742010-01-23T10:37:33.103+13:002010-01-23T10:37:33.103+13:00My apologies
'Throne' not 'Thrown'...My apologies<br /><br />'Throne' not 'Thrown', of course<br /><br />At least my typos are consistent<br /><br />VictorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-81433246331422227692010-01-22T23:11:28.474+13:002010-01-22T23:11:28.474+13:00Chris
Forgive me if I don my pedant's hat.
W...Chris<br /><br />Forgive me if I don my pedant's hat.<br /><br />William III's wife, Mary II , was James II's daughter, not his sister.<br /><br />However, William's mother (also a Mary) was indeed James II's sister.<br /><br />William's supporters could, and did, claim, that, apart from his marriage to Mary, he was, in his own right, the most direct, legitimate, male, Protestant heir to the thrown. <br /><br />By the way, although you are right in asserting that the English have a long tradition of getting rid of or by-passing unsuitable monarchs, the decision was normally taken not by 'the people' but by a few dozen super-rich, landed families.<br /><br />Ironically, the current reigning dynasty originally owed their crown to the machinations of, amongst others, the Spencers.<br /><br />If my memory serves me right, George Ist was 58th in line for the thrown when the Whig oligarchy catapulted him onto it in 1714. <br /><br />Of course, most of the other 57 were Catholics, which would have ruled them out of consideration after 1688. <br /><br />VictorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3753486518085091399.post-2955269527818688212010-01-22T14:40:46.365+13:002010-01-22T14:40:46.365+13:00Chris,
You foretell a grim picture of the likely ...Chris,<br /><br />You foretell a grim picture of the likely future presidents of NZ. No thanks indeed.<br /><br />(Certainly I imagine none of Keith Locke's preferred candidates would get near the job).<br /><br />Give me the mingled threads of English monarchism, pakeha politics, and Maori traditions to the "purity" of republicanism any day.<br /><br />Cheers for the column.mikenoreply@blogger.com