It makes us focus on the Australian Flag Debate. The Australian Flag Debate, a periodic question, is a discussion about whether the Australian should change their national flag or not. Especially, the new flag should remove the Union Jack from the canton and to introduce a completely new design which is without the Southern Cross. (Wikipedia 2014) And it has been an ongoing debate since early 1990s. From the history of Australia, we can know that it has many connections with Britain.
Britain and Australia share so much history together; it would be disgraceful just to ditch them. If we were to become a republic, what will change? If that was to happen, only our head of state wouldn’t be a monarch but a president and we wouldn’t have a governor general. Now that’s not much, and there would be so many things affected from this. Maybe if we did become a republic, our national flag might change because of the Union Jack on the top-left hand corner.
Defining political systems is a difficult thing to do as no single system is completely the same at all times, they tend to change depending on things like war and trends in administration, such as the recent rebellion in ‘liberal democracies’ means that the classifications of systems changes over time. The British Westminster system is technically considered to be a ‘liberal democracy’ however in World War II there were several powers performed by the government that do not fit within the context of this system. For example, control was exercised over the media and labour and elections were put off. These powers were used as a result of the emergency situation,with what appeared to be the support of the people. Once the war was over, the situation went back to the way that it was during the “pre-war” era.
Reform of the Federation White Paper, Federation, Australian Leaders’ Retreat, viewed 31 August 2015, This paper studies the aspect how Australian constitution established Australia’s system of government as Federalism has changed over century. It emphasizes the main factors of the transformation; along with the suggestions on how to bring back on track. Australian federal system were the fruit of discussion and peaceful evolution because of which we tend to take our federal system for granted and ignores periodic re-assessment which is affecting our economic and social wellbeing. Author also provides survey factors, examples and statistic value to strengthen his arguments on why reform of Federalism is mandatory. This article provides
He believed he had the support of the English Parliament. Mark Kishlansky states that where previous requests for money and army were pressing, as in the 1620’s, the situation after the First Bishops War was one of “genuine emergency,” and parliament knew this. Parliament was arguing that an invasion of England was not as important as attacks on the freedom of its citizens (Kishlansky, 1997: 140). Kishlansky has highlighted how important the events of the First Bishops War was, Charles was backed into a corner by parliament due to the events in Scotland. David Smith says that it was clear that some members of both houses sympathised with the covenanters and wished to defeat the supply of money in order to encourage a resistance, (Smith, 1998: p111) highlighting that there was a
Major ideological change was also seen after the Russo-Japanese war with the change of Nicholas II’s method of ruling and was important in the change of structure of government and tools, causing leaders to impose new reforms and enforce their legitimacy. In terms of ideology, war created the basis for change in Russian government. World War I caused the most significant change and was the foundation for the transition from Tsarism to Communism. The huge impact that it had on Russia itself meant that it was highly likely that the Bolsheviks would never have gained power without it, and this along with the Civil War in 1917 helped to bring an end to the Romanov Dynasty which had been secured since 1613 and created the World’s first Communist state. It can be seen as of key importance as Russia was not able to keep up with the demands of the war and therefore it was inevitable that social unrest would arise and the already unstable autocracy would fall.
It was highly likely that the British would’ve joined the war at some point because they felt threatened by Germany’s expanding Empire; however, the Schlieffen Plan sped up the time in which the British joined the war. The long term effect of this was that the war changed from a war between France and Germany to a war between most European countries. The Schlieffen Plan was necessary for Russia to mobilise their armies because even though Russia had a large and strong army, it was not ready to use. This is why the German’s assumed it would take six weeks for the
It can be argued that FPTP has created a clear two party system. This can be illustrated because post-war only Labour and Conservatives have been in power. Labour or Conservatives have been the government every election because they have a lot of support throughout the UK, and therefore come first in many constituencies. To form a government, a party must have the majority of seats throughout the UK, which Labour or Conservatives always do. In 2005, the Liberal Democrats had 22% of the overall vote in the UK, sharing, but because of the FPTP system they only won 62 seats out of the 646 constituencies in the UK, this shows this system as clearly an unfair.
First past the post is a plurality system. Each voter gets one vote where they vote for their MP. The winner of a general election is the party who wins the most seats, NOT the party with the most votes. It is usually the case where the party which assumes control do not have the majority of the vote, as seen in the 2005 general election, where Labour got 35.2% of the votes, yet they obtained 55.1% of the seats. Although they got more votes than any other party, only 35.2% of the population actually wanted a Labour government, yet they ended up representing 55.1% of the country in Parliament.
Though the state of a mandatory national service is now up for discussion in America, mandatory military service is a way of life in many countries. Countries with Mandatory Service The proponents of national service have often referenced the success other nations have had with mandatory service. There are numerous nations that require some version of mandatory service for their nation’s youth. A large majority of these nations have limited their national service to military obligation only. For example, Israel mandates that all men at the age of 18