What's so wrong with the USA breaking up anyway?
- Thread starter Lancecastor
- Start date
Don K Dyck
Devilish Don Downunder
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2002
- Posts
- 8,255
Lancecastor said:
In fact, Lance, I think Oz was the only former British colonies or country until post WWII that did not have a war, civil or revolutionary, to achieve Commonwealth nationhood in 1901.
We even beat Canada to female franchise . . . in 1892 in South Australia and 1901 in other States at Federation . . . but Isaacs CJ took away the Indigenous vote in 1905 in a single High Court judgement. It took until the 1967 referendum for Indigenous Oz people to be considred citizens in their own country.
Lancecastor
Lit's Most Beloved Poster
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 54,670
So...if you Americans can postulate on how to invade and divide Iraq, I presume you won't mind when Hussein, Bin Laden & Friends invade with terror campaigns to divide your country against itself.
Lancecastor
Lit's Most Beloved Poster
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 54,670
Don K Dyck said:
Gee, I thought our non-violent negotiated Confederation via the BNA Act in 1867 worked for us....
Hazguy
The Science Guy ....
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2002
- Posts
- 1,517
legal precidence to split from the Union .. I don't think so ... Texas split from Mexico .. not the US and it voted to join the Union after being a country for a while.
and as for the colonies .... that has no legal basis either .. colonies are colonies .... history is dotted with examples of colonies breaking away from their rulers ... the UK has had more than its fair share of this.
and lets say for the sake of argument that a group can break away .. where they getting the land from???? Last I checked, North America doesn't have any unclaimed land ... Antarctica does .. go down there and start a new country.
realistically, I can't see this happening ... but of course, people like me are always proved wrong.
and as for the colonies .... that has no legal basis either .. colonies are colonies .... history is dotted with examples of colonies breaking away from their rulers ... the UK has had more than its fair share of this.
and lets say for the sake of argument that a group can break away .. where they getting the land from???? Last I checked, North America doesn't have any unclaimed land ... Antarctica does .. go down there and start a new country.
realistically, I can't see this happening ... but of course, people like me are always proved wrong.
It won’t ever happen because we will not divide amongst ourselves and any foreign intervention seeking to do so will only bring us all closer together to fight out common enemy. All the more reason to destroy them though, for trying it, you just made a very good case for war against Hussein, thank you very much.
Don K Dyck
Devilish Don Downunder
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2002
- Posts
- 8,255
Canada was First . . .
Sorry . . . you're right . . . and it may have been a model that the English were considering during the 1890s when the Oz Commonwealth was being discussed.
The colonists in New South Wales (NSW) had been pestering the English Colonial Office for nationhood since the 1830s, but James Stephen just put them off until his retirement in 1848. After the public announcement of the discovery of gold in 1851, everybody was too busy making their fortune to worry. The 1870-1880s were a period of great expansion and borrowing of overseas funds which led inevitably to foreign debt with the subsequential crash in 1891 concurrently with the hardest drought to that date.
Oz as we know it today very nearly didn't happen. Firstly, the early Constitution Conventions died for lack of interest, and then Western Australia, the westernmost third of the country wanted to do its own thing. Only the miners at Kalgoorlie and the Golden Mile fields in eastern WA swung the voting numbers at the referendum, and WA joined the Federation.
But all was not lost . . . an attempt was made by WA in 1935? to leave . . . but the Federal government simply ignored the overwhelming results of the referendum and, ho hum, life went on as if nothing had happened.
Now Oz is looking towards Canada for a lead in the native title area. Our pollies are traumatised by fear campaign being conducted by the Conservative "Land Occupying Minimal Production" Farm Lobby. Perhaps they need to look north to find the answers.
Lancecastor said:
Sorry . . . you're right . . . and it may have been a model that the English were considering during the 1890s when the Oz Commonwealth was being discussed.
The colonists in New South Wales (NSW) had been pestering the English Colonial Office for nationhood since the 1830s, but James Stephen just put them off until his retirement in 1848. After the public announcement of the discovery of gold in 1851, everybody was too busy making their fortune to worry. The 1870-1880s were a period of great expansion and borrowing of overseas funds which led inevitably to foreign debt with the subsequential crash in 1891 concurrently with the hardest drought to that date.
Oz as we know it today very nearly didn't happen. Firstly, the early Constitution Conventions died for lack of interest, and then Western Australia, the westernmost third of the country wanted to do its own thing. Only the miners at Kalgoorlie and the Golden Mile fields in eastern WA swung the voting numbers at the referendum, and WA joined the Federation.
But all was not lost . . . an attempt was made by WA in 1935? to leave . . . but the Federal government simply ignored the overwhelming results of the referendum and, ho hum, life went on as if nothing had happened.
Now Oz is looking towards Canada for a lead in the native title area. Our pollies are traumatised by fear campaign being conducted by the Conservative "Land Occupying Minimal Production" Farm Lobby. Perhaps they need to look north to find the answers.
Lancecastor
Lit's Most Beloved Poster
- Joined
- May 14, 2002
- Posts
- 54,670
Re: Canada was First . . .
Nunuvut is an interesting and new example of native self governance within the federal framework, so that the land doesn't cede from the Crown, but the first nations are given special powers as a Territory that differ from those of the Provinces.
Don K Dyck said:
Now Oz is looking towards Canada for a lead in the native title area. Our pollies are traumatised by fear campaign being conducted by the Conservative "Land Occupying Minimal Production" Farm Lobby. Perhaps they need to look north to find the answers.
Nunuvut is an interesting and new example of native self governance within the federal framework, so that the land doesn't cede from the Crown, but the first nations are given special powers as a Territory that differ from those of the Provinces.
Don K Dyck
Devilish Don Downunder
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2002
- Posts
- 8,255
Hazguy said:
HI Hazguy,
but what about Hawaii and Alaska . . . why are these discontiguous land areas part of the USA?
What if the native Hawaiians or native Alaskans wanted to be their own nation, would they be able to secede from the Union?
(I realise that the America has a fine tradition established by Andrew Jackson of genocide of indigenous peoples . . . but this may be a little out of favour in the 21st Century . . .
)Maybe Texas will want to go back to being its own country once they own all the undeveloped Iraqi oil reserves . . .
Don K Dyck
Devilish Don Downunder
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2002
- Posts
- 8,255
Re: Re: Canada was First . . .
Our education system teaches us very little about Canada . . . except that it is cold, big and a member of the British Commonwealth. The academic lawyers are looking north on land rights and areas including constitution and common law. But then, the local Law Professor is Canadian, so I guess that may be a big influence.
For example, we have recently had a double jeopardy case, a murder case spread over 30 years called Carroll that the defendant has won 3/2 on appeals, with the Oz High Court most unimopressed that the DPP brought their least favourite perjury claim on old and technologically re-visited evidence to get behind the original Court of Appeal acquittal.
The academics have scurried to their books, looking at the 1993 English student murder case plus the subsequent "reform" of this 800 year old practice, to attempt similar "reforms" in Oz. Needless to say, the professionals are not impressed that The Australian newspaper is funding a civil action. Only the lawyers will win this one, I think.
In Oz, the High Court is asisting the graziers and politicians to dispossess the Indigenous people of any land rights. They could look at Nunuvut for inspiration.
Lancecastor said:
Our education system teaches us very little about Canada . . . except that it is cold, big and a member of the British Commonwealth. The academic lawyers are looking north on land rights and areas including constitution and common law. But then, the local Law Professor is Canadian, so I guess that may be a big influence.
For example, we have recently had a double jeopardy case, a murder case spread over 30 years called Carroll that the defendant has won 3/2 on appeals, with the Oz High Court most unimopressed that the DPP brought their least favourite perjury claim on old and technologically re-visited evidence to get behind the original Court of Appeal acquittal.
The academics have scurried to their books, looking at the 1993 English student murder case plus the subsequent "reform" of this 800 year old practice, to attempt similar "reforms" in Oz. Needless to say, the professionals are not impressed that The Australian newspaper is funding a civil action. Only the lawyers will win this one, I think.
In Oz, the High Court is asisting the graziers and politicians to dispossess the Indigenous people of any land rights. They could look at Nunuvut for inspiration.
Similar threads
