Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ] |
| Subject: possible names for the FC... | |
Author: Andrew(Canada) | [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] Date Posted: 00:39:44 01/07/05 Fri this is a somewhat trivial matter, but i was thinking of other possible names for the Federal Commonwealth that had a little more pizazz, and i came up with this: The Kingdom of the United Commonwealth. tell me what you guys think?(i realise you've probably talked about this before, but i thought I'd through this out there). [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] |
| [> Subject: throw rather...sorry long day | |
|
Author: Andrew(Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 00:40:54 01/07/05 Fri [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Not bad. | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (London) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 00:59:24 01/07/05 Fri I myself am in favour of Federation of United Commonwealth Kingdoms... Seriously, though, if 'kingdom' is going to be mentioned at all, I think that it ought to be plural. THere is no United State of America or United Arab Emirate, and there is a reason for this: the name of the country has to recognise the plurality of its constituent elements, or people won't buy it. I reckon we could knock ten points off the Celtic separatists' poll ratings if we changed the name of the home country to the United Kingdoms. Another snag comes if we consider that a Commonwealth federation might have to be Republican; or, if not, it might be necessary to go easy on the Royalist imagery and references to bring the blasted republicans on board. That's why I think that a neutral name would be best - something simple like the Federal Commonwealth. We have to tip-toe around people's sensibilities; for the same reason, I don't think that the capital should be London. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Wouldn't a future FC be a single realm though? | |
|
Author: Dave (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 09:39:58 01/07/05 Fri [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: name | |
|
Author: Owain (UK) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 10:21:14 01/07/05 Fri It should be a single realm I think. I think Crown Commonwealth would be fine, republicnas can always come up with ther eown name if they ever succeed in destroying our monarchy. I like Crown Commonwleath becuase it isnt hurrendously long and encourages monarchism. The full name would of course be the Crown Commonwealth of etc etc. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Name of FC | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 12:12:53 01/07/05 Fri Federation of United Commonwealth Kingdoms - good idea, but the acronym spells F.U.C.K. - not a good idea at all! I favour the United Kingdoms of the Commonwealth - the UKC. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: That is, of course, precisely why the joke was made, Jim | |
|
Author: Ian (ironyland) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 12:40:38 01/07/05 Fri [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: ... | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (London) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:38:25 01/07/05 Fri I was going to suggest Federal Commonwealth of United Kingdoms, but then we'd be sued by the clothing company. Reminds me of a debate which we had at Party Conference in 1997 when we were thinking of a new name for the Young Conservatives, and eventually decided on the ineffably naff 'Conservative Futures'. I suggested at the time that Future Conservatives United Kingdom would be the most eye-catching in terms of acromymns, but was over-ruled by a lot of young fogeys who think that politics should not be funny. My other half also once suggested to an Amnesty International beatnik at university - all magic beads and dreadlocks - who was trying to raise money for 'political prisoners' at Guantanamo and elsewhere, that she should establish the "Campaign for Liberation and Integration of Terrorist Organisations and their Rehabilitation Into Society". This, unsurprisingly, was also rejected out of hand. Shame, as they could have printed the most eye-catching t-shirts. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: pizazz? | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 13:20:33 01/07/05 Fri I agree with Ed that it is not a good idea to start excluding republicans (a good proportion of the Australian population) by insisting on a monarchist name. The idea is surely to convince people to get on board with the federation idea, not to push them away. It would also be hard to argue that "United States of America" and "United Kingdom" have any more pizazz than does "Federal Commonwealth", but the countries seem to have done alright without it. Until the idea of the federation actually shows some sign of catching on, I think we can safely leave it with a working title such as FC or CANZUK. The marketing whizzes can be called in at a later date. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> Subject: Kingdom? | |
|
Author: Davet [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:35:34 01/07/05 Fri "The Kingdom of the United Commonwealth. tell me what you guys think?(i realise you've probably talked about this before, but i thought I'd through this out there)." That name only appeals to monarchists, and sounds a bit old fashioned... I like federal commonwealth, it's more open. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> Subject: Bravo | |
|
Author: Ed Harris (London) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 16:47:42 01/07/05 Fri I quite agree. I am a staunch monarchist myself, but a good 35-40% of people in CANZUK are not. No need to antagonise the blighters. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: How about just simply the United Commonwealth? | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 17:43:04 01/07/05 Fri [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> Subject: How about just "the Commonwealth"? | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 20:11:27 01/07/05 Fri The European Union calls itself "Europe", despite the fact that the name also refers to a continent. The United States of America call themselves "America", despite the fact that the name also applies to two whole continents. We could simply call ourselves "the Commonwealth" and let people suffer mild confusion when someone actually refers to the current organisation. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> Subject: Let Freedom ring! | |
|
Author: Curnoack [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 20:13:02 01/07/05 Fri "The European Union calls itself "Europe", despite the fact that the name also refers to a continent." And the English call Cornwall the "west country" in their Grosse Reich. Freedom for Cornwall! Freedom for all subjugated nations in the English empire! [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> Subject: Freedom rang last night while I was at the pub. It left a message on the machine | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 20:19:02 01/07/05 Fri [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> Subject: The Queen of England sacks your elected leaders at will | |
|
Author: Gough Whitlam's ghost [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 20:34:36 01/07/05 Fri Democracy for the Aussie's big Bush. |\*/| | v | [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: There is no such person as the Queen of England | |
|
Author: Jim (Canada) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 20:56:48 01/07/05 Fri [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |
| [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: The Governor-General was right to sack the Prime Minister | |
|
Author: Ian (Australia) [ Edit | View ] |
Date Posted: 21:05:36 01/07/05 Fri Any sensible President would have done the same thing: the parliament was deadlocked, and the G-G was right to give the electors the chance to choose. This is democracy. [ Post a Reply to This Message ] |