Could the British Empire have surrvived?

In 1867 Canada had become the first "Dominion", after the Great War all english-speaking Countrys inside the British Empire had become selfgoverning "Dominions" which were equal in Status to Britain and connexed through the Crown.

After World War 2 the relations inside the British Empire changed and India became and independant Member of the Commonwealth. This caused that the Commonwealth was now no longer a real political power, through the connection with the Crown and this way the "Empire" was disolved. As Britain joined the European Community also the last influence of the remaining organisation "Commonwealth of Nations" was, nuffly said, made rubbish.

Here is the Theory:

India and all other non-english-colonies were expulsed from the Commonwealth after gathering independence and the politicians had concentrated on the english-speaking Dominions, which were bound together by the Crown, only. The attempt was made to create a Constitution for the CON, beeing similar to the Austro-Hungarian Gouverment*.

~:confused: ~:confused: * -> The Austro-Hungarian Gouverment was a combination of three conjoined Gouverments: the Austrian Gouverment with its own Constitution and Army, the hungarian Gouverment with its own Constitution and Army and the common imperial Gouverment under Kaiser Franz-Joseph. The Austrian and Hungarian Gouverments were democratic and could work withouth any interfearance of the Kaiser to rule their Lands, the only exeption was that the common Gouverment under the Kaiser made the foreign and defense policy.

So after the Theory, Britain, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa would all have seperated Gouverments and Laws, but all be connexed to the Crown, the new "Commonwealth of Nations"-Gouverment would make the foreign policy and rise the new common Army.

Today it's too late to create a federal State like this, but George VI, Chruchill and the young Elizabeth II did have a chance to do it. Imagine they had don and the Commonwealth would now not be an organisation, but a common State of these "Dominions" replacing the British Empire. Would you like this reformed "British" Empire?

South Africa would have been a problem because the Boers never liked living under overall British rule, regardless of how much local autonomy they had, and the treatment of blacks would have been a source of tension in view of the more liberal policies of the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. I think that South Africa would not have remained in such a union for long.

However, the combiined resources of the other four countries would have made the union a strong power in international politics as opposed to being a group of very junior partners to the US. It would have been on the same side as the US during the cold war though.

I think it would have had more chance of working than the current European Union.

Quote:

---

However, the combiined resources of the other four countries would have made the union a strong power in international politics as opposed to being a group of very junior partners to the US. It would have been on the same side as the US during the cold war though.

---

Many good Ideas have not come true through the historic persons who had the chance to make it didn't want it or the developments around them didn't allow it. In Case these four Dominions, Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada would have formed a Federation there was no argument against the Commonwealth to join the European Community. With the support of the other European Countries this "Empire" could have even become equal in power to the USA... Surely the "Royal Federation", if I simply name it this way here, would work better than the current EU because the four States are made up from people with an equal culture and a common mothertongue.

Maybe it is close to be somehow utopic, but aslong as these Countries remain Dominions (and don't remove the Monarchy a Australia plans it) the political decsision to found a "Royal Federation" is theoretically possible... But how to convince people to do that? ~:confused: ~:confused: ~:confused:

Going to the category "genius failures"... :tomato:

You can forget Malta ~:wave:

sounds like an all right idea which could work in practice, but i doubt it would have that much political sway in reality.

I prefer Britain to be in charge, otherwise, it's a good idea.
Dominions were not equal in status to Britain until 1931, when the Statute of Westminster or something declared that The Palace of Westminster had control over the dominions, but still, they are mearly territories with complete self-governance, sort of like Home Rule, and represent themselves externally.

Just to specify how I imagine how this would have worked, today it's maybe too late...

The reshaped "British" Empire would have been a Realunion of the four States Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand inclueding their oversea Territories. The Gouverment was a mixture of Monarchy and a Federation:

Every Dominion has an independent Gouverment and the Federation can't interfear into their internal Affairs. But everything going into foreign-policy is done by the Gouverment of the Federation, awesome there's an Army on the Federation's level not for the single Dominion. The common Gouverment is made up from a Council of Represantatives of the Parilaments of the Dominions, their "Boss" is a President elected directly by the people in all Memberstates.

Their boss should be the monarch, otherwise it sounds fandabidozie

This is actually a topic that i find lots of people, espeically in New Zealand and Australia, are talking about today.

But of course there is two huge problems.
1. Politicians. You won't get them to give up there greed.

2. The So called Social Elite. Those that have the opinion they are the upper tier of soceity in Australia and New Zealand for example.

But it is surprising, just how many people right across the age groups want the reformation, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zeaand.

Those 4 Countries would have considerable, Economic and Political Clout. Not to mention a very sizeable Military one.
All 4 countries, have Cultural, and Ethnic (Anglo-Celtic) ties.

I would think it would be based on the following, 9 States of Canada, 7 States in Australia, New Zealand 1 State, 1 Scotland, 1 England, 1 Nth Ireland.
Total.....20 states, and ~120 million Population. woot fun time.

Head of State; Monarch.
Head of Imperial Government; Prime Minister. ( in imperial Terms, Federal is Imperial.)
(Two Houses; 1 representitive; 1 upper house of 100, 5 members for each state.)
Head of Royal (state) Government; Premier
Single House of representitives.

It also makes more sense, than being, little fish in a pond of sharks.

But yes I think it's a good idea.

Oh well that was fun.

fenir

Can kiss my dual Australian-New Zealand Citizen butt before I have Britain rule us again.

They have an inbred royal family (which is still techically our head of state... while technically my appendix is an organ it ain't useful).

They cannot match either New Zealand or Australia in sporting prowess.

When push came to shove in WWII Britain took as many troops as possible and let the 3rd wave of recruits fight it out with the Japanese.

And Australia may speak English but the population is not English.

:knight:

A republic with equal oppourtunity for any citizen to serve as the head may be a different story...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Can kiss my dual Australian-New Zealand Citizen butt before I have Britain rule us again.

They have an inbred royal family (which is still techically our head of state... while technically my appendix is an organ it ain't useful).

They cannot match either New Zealand or Australia in sporting prowess.

When push came to shove in WWII Britain took as many troops as possible and let the 3rd wave of recruits fight it out with the Japanese.

And Australia may speak English but the population is not English.

:knight:

A republic with equal oppourtunity for any citizen to serve as the head may be a different story...

---

Nah, you would just end up with a spoilt brat like Bush. Probably as inbred as the Windsors too. At least they are trained to sit there and be polite. They can't quit either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Can kiss my dual Australian-New Zealand Citizen butt before I have Britain rule us again.

They have an inbred royal family (which is still techically our head of state... while technically my appendix is an organ it ain't useful).

They cannot match either New Zealand or Australia in sporting prowess.

When push came to shove in WWII Britain took as many troops as possible and let the 3rd wave of recruits fight it out with the Japanese.

And Australia may speak English but the population is not English.

:knight:

A republic with equal oppourtunity for any citizen to serve as the head may be a different story...

---

Okay, that's the other side, but the Arguments for a union between Australia and New Zealand stragely remember me on that topic here...

Just to calculate the Royal Federation's Power, independently from the Way it is acieved. -> :crowngrin: ->

Population: 112,6 Million
Econnomy (BSP): 2547,4 Billion Us$
Militery: 161 150 Army / 84 300 Airforce / 67 830 Navy / 313 280 Total
Currency: 1 Pound = 100 Pence = 1,56 € / or / 1 € = 100 Cent

I simply added the Data of the Member-Countries from dtv "Jahrbuch 2003". The Union of these Nations (re)creates a Worldpower, but still jet not as powerful as the USA. To improve the Economy, the whole Royal Federation should joinup the EU and Introduce the Euro-Currency. By keeping close Friendship with France and Germany through the EU there'll be strong supporters which allow the Federation to get equal in Power to the USA.

Just for fun I produced a Flag, it shows the Unionjack and for Crowns for the four Dominions. Put it in your Signature, or do somewhat if you like...

http://www.beepworld.de/memberdateie...federation.gif

I think it's an excellent idea, it'd certainly give the Yanks a shock ~:joker: . I also think it could potentially work very well if a few specific details were ironed out, like how much of an independant identity each of the participating 'nations' could keep, which I think could be achieved through varying levels of government. Of course, to keep everyone happy that this wasn't just another British Empire, there would have to be major government buildings in all the participating countries, but yes... I think it could work if there was a large enough political impotus.

It certainly has more chance of working as a unified state than the EU...

The Flag should be the Union Flag, with something like the UN symbol in the middle, but with the British Isles, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

The Imperial Government -

States = Canada, Newfoundland, 6 Australian Territories, England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, That other Canadian one, can't remember it though, and Quebec.
Regions = Regions existing in member countries

1) Imperial Council (special commitee of Imperial Government)
Monarch as head
Premiers of each of the states elected parliaments, or representative.
Lord Chancellor.
Representative of Churches.

2) Based on House of Lords.
Highest Court in Federation
Imperial Council (excluding Monarch)
Presided by (appointed) Lord Chancellor
26 Bishops, appointed from existing bishops and equivalents from states by Church(es).
2 Hereditary Royal (Imperial) office holders (Lord Great Chamberlain, Earl Marshal).
14 Hereditary elected office holders.
75 other Hereditary Peers, appointed from each of the states by Imperial Council
570 elected Lords, as representatives of Regions of States. Elections every 5 years.

Just a quick thought, but perhaps the Republic of Ireland could also be in on the deal, after all, they share a language and are as similar in culture as anyone else in this Union.

I suppose the population might not particularly like the idea of union with Britain again, but I can't think they'd dislike it anymore than the old colonies, and so long as all the nations were given equal power I can't see how any could oppose a union that would benefit all parties considerably.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thrashaholic

It certainly has more chance of working as a unified state than the EU...

---

The European Union is not supposed to become a Nation by its creators, it is made up as a Confederation to boost its larger Member's Power and secure Peace In Europe but nothing higher than that. The political Elite would never give any realistic power to it.

--------------

The new Worldorder of my Dreams, probably never getting true:

The Royal Federation is formed and Austria unifies with Germany (Last german-HrE Dukeship left outside the federal Republic). The European Union forms up a Militery-Alliance. Germany, RF and France sign up the "Euro-Dreibund" (Euro-triplealliance) in which they endup all open arguments and promise to cooperate in their foreign policy (Similar pacts were the Entente or the historical "Dreibund" between Germany, Austria and Italy). In Result the "Gleichgewicht der Mächte" (Balance of Power) Metternich intended is restored within the global politics unless the USA will no longer keep their "dominance".

Come on, sign the Euro-Triple! :deal2:

[QUOTE=Papewaio]Can kiss my dual Australian-New Zealand Citizen butt before I have Britain rule us again.

They have an inbred royal family (which is still techically our head of state... while technically my appendix is an organ it ain't useful).

They cannot match either New Zealand or Australia in sporting prowess.

When push came to shove in WWII Britain took as many troops as possible and let the 3rd wave of recruits fight it out with the Japanese.
QUOTE]

At least we can be sure that British athletes don't take performance enhancing drugs ~D

Maybe we should send out Prince Andrew as an Imperial Viceroy whenever we want to provoke a rebellion ~:joker:

I highly doubt the ROI would want to be part of Britain or any state with Britain as a mjor player (They didn't join NATO because Britain was in it ~:dizzy: ). This is also a country that has channels and programmes on TV completely in Gaelic. The funny part is about 80% of the population dont speak it and quite a few have no idea what's going on. ~:joker:

Scotland only gets 2 hours of Gaelic programmes a week, at least, but it's all subtitled.

[QUOTE=Accounting Troll
At least we can be sure that British athletes don't take performance enhancing drugs ~D

[/QUOTE]

At least we bother to find and prosecute those who do... howsmart are British scientists that they cannot outsmart athletes?

I would support Australia and New Zealand joining the USA before France and Germany.

France... WWII we supplied the Mouse... 40 years later they repay us by a terrorist attack against the Rainbow Warrior.

Germany... nothing against them accept they are bed mates with the French and no way do I want to support any form of hegmony with Germany in a leading role...


Personally I would rather have independent countries and free trade while looking at tying in social reforms... free trade ain't really free when one country is polluting and using sweatshops etc...

Papewaio
Uk Does not mean English. The English are just one Group of Anglo-Celtic Peoples, like the Irish, and Scottish.

And they wouldn't be ruling anyone, we all would rule. It's called Democracy

Quote:

---

They have an inbred royal family (which is still techically our head of state... while technically my appendix is an organ it ain't useful).

---

Then I think you need to read up on the powers of government. All three levels and then the monarchs powers, then the history of the royal family. And then your appendix.

Quote:

---

They cannot match either New Zealand or Australia in sporting prowess.

---

Didn't the English Beat the wallabies for the Rugby World cup? And they did it in Australia? And they beat the All Blacks last year at home for the first time in 30 years.
True they didn't match us, they beat us. Omg......thats means .........they are better than us.
Neither NZ /Aus can match the UK for Soccer. Or money in Sport.
Mind u, not many countries spend so much per captia on there sportmen and woman like Australia does. Simply to win a little bit of silverware. It's like having the USSR Socialist party kicking back it's heels on the gold coast again. ( sorry but in my opinion, those billions could be better spent helping the people of Australia instead of stinkin medals for feel good frecks).

NZ is a 5th of Aus size, and only got 2 gold? and no Budget for there sports people.
Bahamas got 2 Gold too......and only has 300k people, no budget and no money at all.

Quote:

---

Personally I would rather have independent countries and free trade while looking at tying in social reforms... free trade ain't really free when one country is polluting and using sweatshops etc.

---

Like Australia Does, yes very true. Australia should be kept out until they clean their act up perhaps?
(water is starting to look deep......)

Quote:

---

When push came to shove in WWII Britain took as many troops as possible and let the 3rd wave of recruits fight it out with the Japanese.

---

Don't go in water over your head, because that statement is bullocks.
Check your last ww2 statement in this forum in the other thread.
NOTE:Thousands of English, Irish and Scottish died defending NZ/Aus.
Don't even tempt me!

France was welcome to the Rainbow wimpet, just not in our bloody harbour.

As for a republic?
I see no greater source of political corruption. And the true meaning of the political term of oligopoly laid down in aristotle (sp, i know, i am to tired to care). The USA and France are to me a classic examples.

Join the USA? Not on your life! I have nothing against them, I have lots of friends and family there, but I would never Join them.

The Republic of Ireland, I think all of us would agree, while there would be only a slim chance of them joining, we would always leave the door open for them, they are after all a part of us, they are still family.


The Flag, I agree with King Mal.

The Flag is the Union Jack. It has the three Crosses on it. It's our whole History.


But Papewaio, you certainly upset me by your comments.
Your original comments, came across as.....almost hatred. Then you give party political broadcast rubbish to justify you stand.
Why?

Whats wrong with 4 countries that all have almost the same people, and certainly the same culture and language, shouldn't join up?
No one group would be ruling, we would all be as one. So the prime Minister could come from England, Scotland, Nth Ireland, NSW, NZ, NS, NF, Quebec, BC, or even tasmania(god help us).




fenir

First off sorry for upsetting you. But I do believe you are looking at things differently to what I am... probably due to the short abrasive nature of my post that would be a primary factor.

First off the theory posted was this:

Quote:

---

India and all other non-english-colonies were expulsed from the Commonwealth after gathering independence and the politicians had concentrated on the english-speaking Dominions, which were bound together by the Crown, only. The attempt was made to create a Constitution for the CON, beeing similar to the Austro-Hungarian Gouverment*.

---

Bound together by the Crown. Sorry that is an antiquated insitution and only deserves the respect of history along with the Dodo.

Also I do not agree with the idea that it is essenitally a White Paper policy. I would rather not support a country that is based on a continous idealogy of racism. In fact I would go to war against it.

Quote:

---

Personally I would rather have independent countries and free trade while looking at tying in social reforms... free trade ain't really free when one country is polluting and using sweatshops etc.

---

This was aimed not at Britain but at Australia, USA and New Zealand. That our free trade agreements are not really free trade when we are essentially ducking the workers rights that have became the norm in our countries by exporting that labour somewhere else where it is cheaper because they lack those laws for workers rights and anti-pollution legislation.

Quote:

---

They have an inbred royal family (which is still techically our head of state... while technically my appendix is an organ it ain't useful).

---

They are rather inbred that is why one branch of the family (Russians) had blood clotting problems.

Australia certainly needs to have its own head of state from within Australia. I think Australians need it to have the final stage of maturity of the state take place. New Zealand can keep the Monarch as it is not as crucial to the maturity of New Zealands social character. I'm referring to the tall poppy syndrome, whining of Aussies and the general pass the buck attitude relative to NZ. Essentially Australia needs to take full responsibility for its actions like any adult should.

Quote:

---

They cannot match either New Zealand or Australia in sporting prowess.

---

On average, across a wide spectrum of sports Britain is pretty miserable. Looking at the Olympic games there was a direct ratio between the medal count and population and how well off the average citizen is within those countries. Britain is doing something wrong when New Zealand and Australia outperform it so much so often.

But sport is just a part of the social fabric not the society as a whole... so not my main point and really more a jest at the British slide... cricket anyone?

Quote:

---

France was welcome to the Rainbow wimpet, just not in our bloody harbour.

---

Glad you support terrorism. Really what did you mean by that comment?

Quote:

---

When push came to shove in WWII Britain took as many troops as possible and let the 3rd wave of recruits fight it out with the Japanese.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fenir

Don't go in water over your head, because that statement is bullocks.
Check your last ww2 statement in this forum in the other thread.
NOTE:Thousands of English, Irish and Scottish died defending NZ/Aus.
Don't even tempt me!

---

Don't forget the Welsh. I'm Welsh/Irish/Scottish and English so I know what the UK is.

Little history lesson... After the Fall of Singapore where one of my Welsh Great Uncles Died and before the Burma Stars and co arrived where my Welsh Grandfather was a part of... Australia had the unpleasant situation of being invaded through Papua New Guinea and left to the 3rd round of recruits to defend the Kokoda trail with. The British Empire had to chose either to defend North Africa or send reinforcements to Australia. Luckly the Japanese had bitten off more then they could chew with the Americans.

Maybe you should also check the % of populations serving from Australia and New Zealand who died defending UK. The length of services as well as percentage serving where above that of the UK servicemen on average. Go back one WW and look at WWI as well. Look at who commanded the air defense in the battle of britain. Look at the numbers of airmen from Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

Quote:

---

The Flag is the Union Jack. It has the three Crosses on it. It's our whole History.

---

Our whole history is not the flag of another country. If you havn't noticed the UK is not in Australia it is on the opposite side of the world. Australia has a few other histories... aboriginal and all the others that come from around the world. Australia is a multicultural country. The union jack is part of the histories it is a gross inaccuracy to so it is our whole history... it is history however.

:knight:

Quote:

---

Bound together by the Crown. Sorry that is an antiquated insitution and only deserves the respect of history along with the Dodo.

---

Did the brits upset you somehow?

With regard to the stats mentioned regarding NZ and AUS troops. I thank my lucky stars that troops from the various territories and Dominions were so completely SELFLESS to get off their butts and come and help Britain when she was in serious trouble. I consider it a remarkable testament to a political entity that in many ways (not all-unfortunately) was a grand and wonderful idea.


@Stefan

Love the idea. I would love for the former territories to come back together and have closer bonds. We would all benefit from the strength of the many.

With regard to the flag, I'll fly it but I think maybe there could be a cooler design. Trouble is, Im pants at design stuff but would love to see some alternatives. What do you think?

No the Brits have not upset me. Just have had this discussion with my British mum alot in the past. Even if I was British I would prefer to be a true democracy with a democratic head of state.

I just don't believe in mixing my political systems... be a full democracy and stop kowtowing to an insitution that is part of a different one. As stated I think it does not make any difference to the way New Zealand acts. It would make a fundamental difference for Australian politics to get rid of the monarchy.

Britain did the best it could in WWII and did its utmost to defend its colonies and vice a versa. However as demonstrated with the fall of Singapore and the Kokoda trail by this point in the Empire the Empire could not truly protect its furthest colonies. That is why the swing from Britain to the USA as underscored with the AN(Z)US treaty (New Zealand is half in/half out ~;) ).

Well, if it makes you feel better, Britain itself was woefully unprepared for a German invasion also.

To put it mildly, we would have been screwed. A few regular army and a lot of insurgents and home guard would have probably fared even worse than the troops a kokoda trail.

Also, Im not surprised about the lack of resources and manpower to protect the empire. I think it is generally under-mentioned just how much the UK bled itself white in WW1 in all areas. If we would have stayed out of that, chances are the Empire would have been in a much better condition for round 2.

I will post a reply in the next few days, or in the weekend.

As i am far to tired at the moment, another 14 hours day at the office.
And I fear if I start now, I will not be able to answer to any suitable standard.

fenir

No Chance. Largely I agree with Pape here, the UK (which is where the bulk of the military would be stationed) is just to far away from the other territories to be able to defend properly. I can also see the proposed union being dominated by the UK. Nothing wrong with the situation as it is nowadays IMHO.

well, its not just about the military anymore.

Political clout and economics would probably be more important these days.

And for me, its not even about that. Its about forging ties rather than breaking them, bringing peoples that have common ties back closer together.

I want to feel like a part of a larger, more important world entity than the UK is alone.

I think im getting all misty eyed..... ~:mecry:

Actually I would rather go the opposite direction entirely...

Western Australia the Country ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Actually I would rather go the opposite direction entirely...

Western Australia the Country ~;)

---

hehe, yeah that'd be alright actually, we make more money than any other state in Australia (about one third of Australias GDP) cause of all the mining and agriculture except those leaching b*******s in the eastern states take most of it! Rise up WA!!!!!

Hail the Sandgropers... so are you a Docker, Coaster or Glory fan?

Glory all the way!!! Are you a West Aussie too Pape? I knew you were from New Zealand then moved to Aus, didn't know it was here though! What about you, Glory Supporter? Or more a AFL person and going for dockers or eagles? I'm assuming you're a fairly enlightened person and don't go for any eastern states teams..... ~:joker: ~:cheers:

New Zealand / West Aussie... parents meet in Mt Newman...

Grew up in NZ and moved to WA when I was 15 with my parents... so I am WA/NZ...

Eagles and All Black supporter... love to see a non Victorian team win at AFL.

Well I would put my money on Brisbane Lions again this year. Shame about the eagles getting eliminated, I don't follow AFL heaps but I always try and keep track of the WA teams. I heard the Eagles didn't score a single goal in the second and third quaters? Hmm This is getting a bit off track though, maybe I will have to start an AFL finals thread in the frontroom. Final is o the 26th of this month right?

As a patriotic Canadian, and an ardent supporter/admirer of the British Empire, I gotta say this would most definately have rocked, and if all the conditions were ideal and whatnot....it might have been worked. But as we all know, conditions are NEVER ideal. I mean, there were the aboriginals in Australia, apartheid in South Africa, French-Canadians in Canada, the Irish....Eventually it'd have failed, and it's better that it didn't happen because imagine the loads of problems to clean up after the fall of that British Empire. Plus, my first love is Canada and a Canada that isn't known as Canada but as part of the British Empire is very bad.


Blah, er, I love rugby, go all-blacks, I don't love the English rugby, I am disappointed by the Canadian rugby teams, I went to a game of the Churchill Cup which came to my city this summer.

Prop Power!!!1

The Empire's strength wasn't so much based on it's territory, but rather the fact that it controlled so much of the world's trade. It's fun to play with maps and flags, but the real power of the empire was economic. Losing the colonies was not what weakened Britain, it was the fact that it exausted itself fighting from start to finish, the 2 most costly wars in human history, and was brought to the brink of ruin during both of them, creating massive debts.

The British Empire could definitely have survived had WW1 and WW2 never happened. If that had been the case, Britain, France and Germany would be much, much stronger than they are now, all 3 most likely considered superpowers, while the USA and Russia would not have risen so quickly. The USA"s meteoric rise was mainly due to the way it stepped into the econimic vacuum created when the European powers were ruined. Britain lsot it's colonies mostly as a result of these wars, which made it impossible to maintain them financially (and even though Canada/Australia/NZ/South Africa had gained independance pre-ww1, they were still very close and gave their full support to Britain untill post WW2).

I would agree with that assesment Beelzebub.

Although I would think probably the French would have been in a more precarious position.

Terrible shame.

re-instate the Empire! :knight:

What an excellent idea. I don't see it as racist at all its to do with a common culture.

Whats in it for the Canadians though my impression is they don't see themselves all that closely associated with the British (including Ozzies and Kiwis) any more?

I'm glad I found this post that flag has been bothering me in people's sigs for a while, I thought I ought to know it but I didn't. Now I see why.

@English assasin

Are you saying the flag bothers you or it was bothering you that you couldnt find out what it was all about?

Quote:

---

What an excellent idea. I don't see it as racist at all its to do with a common culture.

---

What are you on about here? ~:)

Well, this is all very interesting stuff. As far as taking down the US, don't worry, we're doing a pretty good job of that all by ourselves :dizzy2:

But even with a Union like you propose, China will still be the next primary superpower. They've already bought us out and are in the process of quietly plundering. And you would not be able to count on Europe once it has been taken over by the Moors (it will happen within 50 years, mark my words).

So actually, as a US citizen I would very much like to see such a Union between all you Brits. It would give us a more friendly arm to lean upon in the very scary world which is forming up now :surrender: :duel: :oops:

DA

Americans don't like to admit it, but they are just as close to Britain as Canada or Australia are. They are a former british colony also, founded on british values and are just as much a part of the white english speaking guys alliance as any other former British colony. Sure, all the countries of that group act in their own interests to some extent, but we're a lot more alike than we are different. Combined, the USA + Britain + Australia + NZ is still by far the most powerful group in the world with nobody even close. It will take China a helluva long time to be able to project more power than those countries combined (plus throw in hardcore US allies like Japan, Taiwan, S Korea when discussing china, and China has even further to go), because China is horribly backward still in many areas with tons of reform needed to catch up.

The above mentioned english speaking club will continue to be the dominant force in the world for hundreds of years, just as it has been already for over 200.

I dunno, Beel. If you ask me, Russia, US of A, Britain, et al, are Greek city-states. China is Rome. China may be under-developed, but we are un-developing, so it evens out pretty well.

I think that Liberal Democracy may have finished its dominant run, at least for this age... many of its weaknesses are beginning to show, some severely.

Not that I think we're doomed-- the Greeks certainly weren't, and we may even yet give a better show than them.

DA

The Greeks didn't have the power to cause a nuclear winter...

Quote:

---

@English assasin

Are you saying the flag bothers you or it was bothering you that you couldnt find out what it was all about?

---

I thought I ought to recognise it but I didn't. I'd sort of decided it must be St Helena or some weird out of the way place.