See our selection of videos from across the world:-
AussieCrownTV - ACM's own TV channel:
Follow ACM on Facebook:
Self Funded Monarchy
Royal Finances
Diamond Jubilee 2012
Head of State
Prince Philip
Special Caribbean Report: Crown & Commonwealth
The Commonwealth
Prince Harry
Prince Andrew
Knights & Dames
The King's Speech: read the book, see the film.
Watch the 2010 Neville Bonner Oration: Tony Abbott.
Royal Commissions
Opinion Polls
Plebiscites
2020 Summit
Orthodoxy & Monarchy
Constitutional Monarchy in the Muslim World
Mate for a Head of State
Racist Republic?
A People's Republic?
Keating Turnbull Republic: The Nineties
Crowned Republic
Polls
ACM Home Constitutional Monarchies and Republics Compared
Constitutional Monarchies and Republics Compared
Invited to a 1999 debate on the republic referendum at an inner city branch of the Liberal Party of Australia, my assertion that constitutional monarchies or crowned republics were among the world’s most advanced countries was greeted with derision and ridicule.
It was difficult to believe this was a branch of the party founded by Sir Robert Menzies. Saying " Well may you laugh," I then recited a list of countries with admirable records, all constitutional monarchies. this was greeted in resentful silence.
The fact is that of the seven oldest continuing democracies, five are constitutional monarchies. Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II reigns over four.
The Westminster system has been exported to many countries and has had an unrivalled success, unlike the constitutional models of the to two oldest ( politicians') republics, the USA and Switzerland.
For many years now, ACM has been posting evidence on this site supporting our argument that constitutional monarchy (or as many say a "Crowned Republic") offers the world’s most consistently successful form of government.
This is principally in the United Nations’ annual Human Development Index and in certain other indices. By ranking countries in a way which is more consistent with this thinking, the HDR report has helped shift the debate away from gross domestic product (GDP) per capita as the only measure of development.
Instead, the HDI has provided a summary of each country’s achievement in attaining for its people:
The process of selecting the next American president will extend for more than a year and cost more than $1 billion. It is effectively a weighted direct election, defeating the original intention of the founding fathers. In the meantime Australia's republican movement is still debating after twenty long years whether the president should be directly elected.
“In Australia, a federal election campaign lasts 30 days and costs less than a single Senate race in California,” writes Paul Sheehan in his recent piece on the interminable American presidential election campaign (“US shows why elections should be a sprint, not a marathon,” The Sydney Morning Herald 5 January5, 2012)
“Anyone who thinks Australia would be better served by having a directly elected president as head of state does not understand why such a model will doom the republican movement,” he adds.
“The debate has never been about attitudes to the monarchy so much as it is about the reluctance of the electorate to add a new layer of pomp and politics to federal government.”
“We have a simpler, superior system in place to the one now on show in the United States”
...direct election proposed...
The republicans have heard Dr John Hirst tell them to change their failed current policy and go for direct election. (We have discussed other aspects of his lecture to the assembled republican movement here.) Dr.Hirst, a respected historian, is an old hand in republican circles going back to the Keating Turnbull Repuablic Advistory Committe.
The movement's policy for the last decade has been not have a policy on what sort of republic they want to impose on this reluctant nation.
But Dr Hirst thinks electors won’t support a republic unless they elect the president. Other republicans don't agree. For example, ACU Vice Chancellor Professor Greg Craven says that once the people understand the dangers of direct election - he for one will make sure they do in any referendum - the republican defeat will make 1999 seem like some sort of victory.
Now Dr Hirst is unfortunately mistaken as to three significant aspects of the 1998 Constitutional Convention. These could have influenced him in his enthusiastic announcement of his particular silver bullet. He misunderstands ARM policy in the convention election, how the non- elected delegates were chosen, and the about final vote.
This is another report in our section comparing constitutional monarchies or crowned republics with politicians' republics.
There is no doubt that constitutional monarchy, or crowned republic, is an excellent form of government. It is the one model which has been exported more successfully than any other in the history of the world.
What do I mean by “successfully”? I mean that the model has functioned for an extended period of stable democratic government.
This can be in non-Western countries where the Judaeo-Christian ethic is not dominant. For example, Egypt and Jordan functioned as more democratic countries when they were constitutional monarchies than when they have been republics.
Constitutional monarchies or crowned republics make up about only 15% of the states of the world. However this form of government is represented disproportionately among the leading countries of the world. This has been demonstrated in a series of different assessments which we have reported on this site.
The Economist Intelligence Unit has just released its latest assessment of democracy across the world “Democracy Index 2011: Democracy under stress”.
Of the top 10 countries, an extraordinary seven are constitutional monarchies. Proportionately there should have been no more than 2.
While the elites long for a politicians’ republic in Australia, think of what is happening in the world’s hereditary republics.
In some the nascent dynasty has been cut off, as in Egypt and Libya. In others, the hereditary ruler is still in power, as in Syria.
Meanwhile in China the princelings – the sons of the communist leaders who pretend to an austere lifestyle– are causing outrage .
"They already control large chunks of the world's second-biggest economy and are wielding considerable influence in the military," writes Jeremy Page. This new red nobility is the subject of an essay by Mr. Page in the Wall Street Journal (26/11).
In Australia, it seems there's only Paul Keating thinks both a politicians’ republic and the shredding of our national flag are achievable in the near future. That doesn't mean that constitutionalists should rest.
The others have only put off the achievement of their inevitable politicians’ republic which will remove a crucial check and balance from our constitutional system .
The offspring of party leaders are growing increasingly conspicuous through business interests and luxury lifestyles, a challenge for a Communist Party that justifies its power monopoly based on its origins as a worker and peasant movement.
As the results of the Moroccan election on 24 November 2011 it is interesting to go back to a program in the series Inside Story, broadcast on the international news service, Al Jazeera, on 19 June 2011 which considered whether the Moroccan people were "buying" the changes promised by King Mohammed VI as part of a "historic transition" into democracy.
Since then the king put the changes to the constitution to the people in a referendum which was approved in July and now he is called a general election which international observers have assessed as fair.
It seems that a moderate Islamist party has won, and the King will call the leader to form a government. The experience in Morocco and in Jordan demonstrates the value of constitutional monarchy over politicians’ republics. The Arab experience of course is confirmed by what happened in earlier years in Iraq, Tunisia, Egypt and earlier Syria where monarchies were overthrown and replaced by republics which have become increasingly undemocratic and brutal in their treatment of the people.
The latest United Nations Human Development Index has just been released, this one for the year 2010. For over two decades the index has been an authoritative guide, measuring and combining statistics concerning health, wealth and education in the development of the countries of the world.
And once again constitutional monarchies or crowned republics do better than their numbers in the world would suggest. Of the top five countries, four our constitutional monarchies – statistically there should barely be one.
[ King of the No.1 country; Queen of Nos. 2,3,5, 6 & 28 ]
Of the top 10, seven are constitutional monarchies. Statistically there should be less than two. Of the top 20, 10 are constitutional monarchies. There should only be three. Of the top 30, 14 are constitutional monarchies. There should barely be five.
And all of the lowest 20 are… republics
...experience...
The first time I argued these statistics was during the 1999 Republic referendum. Invited to a 1999 debate on the republic referendum at an inner city branch of the Liberal Party, my assertion that constitutional monarchies or crowned republics were among the world’s most advanced countries was greeted with hoots of derision and ridicule.
It was difficult to believe this was a branch of the party founded by Sir Robert Menzies. Saying " Well may you laugh," I then recited a list of countries with admirable records, all constitutional monarchies. this was greeted in resentful silence.
Constitutional Monarchies and Republics Compared 
This is another report in our section comparing constitutional monarchies or crowned republics with politicians' republics.
