Liberal backbenchers Andrew Laming, Warren Entsch lead charge to abolish knights and dames

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-02/laming-entsch-lead-charge-to-abolish-knights-and-dames/6064132

As I said somewhere else here...

The big (unacknowledged) joke, with regard to the reintroduction of titles and to Prince Phillip's knighthood, is the schizophrenic nature of Australian society.

Why should the Prime Minister of a nation - that voted NO to a republic - that voted to preserve its monarchy (and the status of its privileged aristocrats) - be chasitised or censured in any way for reinstating knighthoods or honouring an aristocrat with a title?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:21pm:

As I said somewhere else here... The big (unacknowledged) joke, with regard to the reintroduction of titles and to Prince Phillip's knighthood, is the schizophrenic nature of Australian society. Why should the Prime Minister of a nation - that voted NO to a republic - that voted to preserve its monarchy (and the status of its privileged aristocrats) - be chasitised or censured in any way for reinstating knighthoods or honouring an aristocrat with a title?

Your missing the point , the LNP backbench has turned on Abort, nothing will stop the momentum.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:21pm:

As I said somewhere else here... The big (unacknowledged) joke, with regard to the reintroduction of titles and to Prince Phillip's knighthood, is the schizophrenic nature of Australian society. Why should the Prime Minister of a nation - that voted NO to a republic - that voted to preserve its monarchy (and the status of its privileged aristocrats) - be chasitised or censured in any way for reinstating knighthoods or honouring an aristocrat with a title?

John Howard had a pretty good answer to that when Knighthoods were reintroduced:

Quote:

Former Liberal prime minister John Howard has disagreed with the decision to reinstitute knights and dames into the Australian honours system and said it was ''unlikely'' he would accept an offer of a knighthood should it be offered. The Australian Financial Review reports that Mr Howard stood by his long-held view that such a move would be considered ''somewhat anachronistic'', even by conservatives. Mr Howard indicated that, because of his views, and the fact that he never entered politics to receive honours, it was unlikely he would accept a knighthood should one ever be offered.

I would post a link, but you can’t unless you have made 100 posts.  It was from an SMH article dated March 27, 2014.

Wolseley wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:30pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 8:21pm: As I said somewhere else here... The big (unacknowledged) joke, with regard to the reintroduction of titles and to Prince Phillip's knighthood, is the schizophrenic nature of Australian society. Why should the Prime Minister of a nation - that voted NO to a republic - that voted to preserve its monarchy (and the status of its privileged aristocrats) - be chasitised or censured in any way for reinstating knighthoods or honouring an aristocrat with a title? John Howard had a pretty good answer to that when Knighthoods were reintroduced: Quote: Former Liberal prime minister John Howard has disagreed with the decision to reinstitute knights and dames into the Australian honours system and said it was ''unlikely'' he would accept an offer of a knighthood should it be offered. The Australian Financial Review reports that Mr Howard stood by his long-held view that such a move would be considered ''somewhat anachronistic'', even by conservatives. Mr Howard indicated that, because of his views, and the fact that he never entered politics to receive honours, it was unlikely he would accept a knighthood should one ever be offered. I would post a link, but you can’t unless you have made 100 posts.  It was from an SMH article dated March 27, 2014.

Well sure he's saying that.... Now.... But before....

Monarchy itself is anachronistic in the Australian context... We have prostrated ourselves to the US - staunchly anti-monarchist for 240 years...

How much more anachronistic can a nation be as a modern state and once colony to an imperial nation ?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:21pm:

As I said somewhere else here... The big (unacknowledged) joke, with regard to the reintroduction of titles and to Prince Phillip's knighthood, is the schizophrenic nature of Australian society. Why should the Prime Minister of a nation - that voted NO to a republic - that voted to preserve its monarchy (and the status of its privileged aristocrats) - be chasitised or censured in any way for reinstating knighthoods or honouring an aristocrat with a title?

Tony Abbott has once again shown he is out of touch with the Australian public who are rejecting his reform agenda in growing numbers.....Bringing back Knighthoods has been a disaster for Abbott who continues to surprise everyone with his captains picks and backflips!!!

:-? :-? :-?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:37pm:

Monarchy itself is anachronistic in the Australian context...

But knighthoods even more so.

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:39pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 8:21pm: As I said somewhere else here... The big (unacknowledged) joke, with regard to the reintroduction of titles and to Prince Phillip's knighthood, is the schizophrenic nature of Australian society. Why should the Prime Minister of a nation - that voted NO to a republic - that voted to preserve its monarchy (and the status of its privileged aristocrats) - be chasitised or censured in any way for reinstating knighthoods or honouring an aristocrat with a title? Tony Abbott has once again shown he is out of touch with the Australian public who are rejecting his reform agenda in growing numbers.....Bringing back Knighthoods has been a disaster for Abbott who continues to surprise everyone with his captains picks and backflips!!! :-? :-? :-?

Out of touch with a nation that voted against a republic and for a monarchy?

Wolseley wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:44pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 8:37pm: Monarchy itself is anachronistic in the Australian context... But knighthoods even more so.

Then its a question of degree?

Monarchy is dumb... Knighthoods stupid...

So... dumb we may be but stupid we're not?!

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:21pm:

As I said somewhere else here... The big (unacknowledged) joke, with regard to the reintroduction of titles and to Prince Phillip's knighthood, is the schizophrenic nature of Australian society. Why should the Prime Minister of a nation - that voted NO to a republic - that voted to preserve its monarchy (and the status of its privileged aristocrats) - be chasitised or censured in any way for reinstating knighthoods or honouring an aristocrat with a title?

Because the 'vocal minority' (that did NOT get their way in the Referendum) are desperately scrabbling for ANY reason to be anger at Tony Abbott, probably because he actually won the election against Rudd, which upsets the 10% or 20% of voters who feel that ONLY their votes should be counted...

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:46pm:

Then its a question of degree? Monarchy is dumb... Knighthoods stupid... So... dumb we may be but stupid we're not?!

You could put it like that.

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 8:44pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 8:39pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 8:21pm: As I said somewhere else here... The big (unacknowledged) joke, with regard to the reintroduction of titles and to Prince Phillip's knighthood, is the schizophrenic nature of Australian society. Why should the Prime Minister of a nation - that voted NO to a republic - that voted to preserve its monarchy (and the status of its privileged aristocrats) - be chasitised or censured in any way for reinstating knighthoods or honouring an aristocrat with a title? Tony Abbott has once again shown he is out of touch with the Australian public who are rejecting his reform agenda in growing numbers.....Bringing back Knighthoods has been a disaster for Abbott who continues to surprise everyone with his captains picks and backflips!!! :-? :-? :-? Out of touch with a nation that voted against a republic and for a monarchy?

It was the model put forward that the public rejected but we will not have a republic any time soon.....The majority of Australians oppose the reintroduction of Knighthoods and especially the Knighting of Prince Philip.....The Monarchy question is a different debate!!!

:-? :-? :-?

Wolseley wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 9:05pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 8:46pm: Then its a question of degree? Monarchy is dumb... Knighthoods stupid... So... dumb we may be but stupid we're not?! You could put it like that.

The qualification, however, would not apply to Abbott.

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 9:15pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 8:44pm: philperth2010 wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 8:39pm: NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 8:21pm: As I said somewhere else here... The big (unacknowledged) joke, with regard to the reintroduction of titles and to Prince Phillip's knighthood, is the schizophrenic nature of Australian society. Why should the Prime Minister of a nation - that voted NO to a republic - that voted to preserve its monarchy (and the status of its privileged aristocrats) - be chasitised or censured in any way for reinstating knighthoods or honouring an aristocrat with a title? Tony Abbott has once again shown he is out of touch with the Australian public who are rejecting his reform agenda in growing numbers.....Bringing back Knighthoods has been a disaster for Abbott who continues to surprise everyone with his captains picks and backflips!!! :-? :-? :-? Out of touch with a nation that voted against a republic and for a monarchy? It was the model put forward that the public rejected but we will not have a republic any time soon.....The majority of Australians oppose the reintroduction of Knighthoods and especially the Knighting of Prince Philip.....The Monarchy question is a different debate!!! :-? :-? :-?

Why that different a debate?

If monarchy is effectively the unearned (by merit) bestowing of privilege of the royal few over the non-aristocratic many... How much of a leap is it, in a monarchic state, to honour an aristocrat with a knighthood?

Why does 'monarchist Australia' begrudge a knighthood to anyone... Even an aristocrat?

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 9:34pm:

Why that different a debate?

Because they are two different things.

Wolseley wrote on Feb 2^nd, 2015 at 10:24pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Feb 2nd, 2015 at 9:34pm: Why that different a debate? Because they are two different things.

Why shouldn't it follow that a monarchist state bestows titles?