Brexit Means A Republic? Of Course It Does.

Apparently Brexit means Australia should become a republic.  At least according to certain supporters of the republican movement it does.  Mind you pretty much anything can be taken by various supporters of the republican movement as validation for their cause.  If the birds fly south for the Winter (difficult in Australia it must be admitted) we should have a republic.  If the queen rolls over in bed we should have a republic.  And now apparently if one nation decides to leave an economic agreement come quasi superstate that we aren't connected to then we should absolutely have a republic. 

The arguments for becoming a republic go something like this;

• It is embarrassing that the Queen is our head of state (not to me it isn't, possibly you're over sensitive)
• It is an anachronistic throwback of a bygone age of no relevance to modern Australia (absolutely, I believe it is what is called a "traditional, cultural practice" which totally has to be respected by modern society despite its self evident stupidity)
• It creates confusion amongst people we do diplomacy with (really?  International diplomats must be incredibly stupid then, and badly informed as well - not that I'm ruling that out)
• It will be a symbol of Australia's maturity as a nation (actually its more likely a symbol of insecurity and immaturity as a nation to stand on a box and scream loudly about how we don't need them anymore. Mature nations just move on)
• Britain isn't interested in us (well, I'm not that interested in them).
• Australia should have an Australian as head of state (this one is hard to refute but if you're looking for an impartial figurehead to stand above the turmoil of the politics of the day then a complete stranger who probably couldn't find Australia on a map is pretty much the perfect candidate).

There's another argument for becoming a republic which its proponents don't tend to mention.  If we become a republic it increases the possibility that our next head of state will be one of them.

Personally I'm quite happy with the monarchy.  Nothing pleases me more than having my head of state twelve thousand miles away without any immediate intention to visit.  I can't pretend to any sort of great royalist fervour but if becoming a republic is going to cost any money (which it will) then I'm opposed to it.  The queen does a great job; she poses for currency, opens things and gives a fixed smile when the latest collection of diplomatic vermin is paraded before her.  What more do you want?  Well, actually your majesty, if you could contrive to keep breath in your body until after Charles is safely filling a box I think we would all appreciate it.

There isn't any practical reason for Australia to retain the monarchy except that it would cost money to change it.  On the other hand there isn't any practical reason for Australia to become a republic except that it might shut republic advocates up for a while (and no doubt give one of them a job).

I suppose Australia will become a republic one day if only for the reason given above.  I have no problem with a republic or an Australian head of state per se.  I will happily wave our new Union Jack free flag and proudly announce my nationality to anyone who asks.  In short, absolutely nothing will change.  I just don't appreciate spending my money to fix a problem which could be better attended to by its sufferers spending their own money on therapy sessions.