NOTICE OF REVOCATION OF INDEPENDENCE

To the citizens of the United States of America.
In the light of your failure to elect a President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective today.

Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchial duties over all states, commonwealths and other territories. Except Utah, which she does not fancy. Your new prime minister (The rt. hon. Tony Blair, MP for the 97.85% of you who have until now been unaware that there is a world outside your borders) will appoint a minister for America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate will be disbanded. A questionnaire will be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed.

To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:

1. You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary. Then look up "aluminium". Check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it. Generally, you should raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. Look up "vocabulary". Using the same twenty seven words interspersed with filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. Look up "interspersed".

2. There is no such thing as "US English". We will let Microsoft know on your behalf.

3. You should learn to distinguish the English and Australian accents. It really isn't that hard.

4. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as the good guys.

5. You should relearn your original national anthem, "God Save The Queen", but only after fully carrying out task 1. We would not want you to get confused and give up half way through.

6. You should stop playing American "football". There is only one kind of football. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very good game. The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside your borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American" football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead play proper football. Initially, it would be best if you played with the girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American "football", but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body armour like nancies). We are hoping to get together at least a US rugby sevens side by 2005.

7. You should declare war on Quebec and France, using nuclear weapons if they give you any merde. The 98.85% of you who were not aware that there is a world outside your borders should count yourselves lucky. The Russians have never been the bad guys. "Merde" is French for "****".

8. July 4th is no longer a public holiday. November 8th will be a new national holiday, but only in England. It will be called "Indecisive Day".

9. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and it is for your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what we mean.

10. Please tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us crazy.

Thank you for your cooperation.



I didn't write it really! :) Funny though

Greg Moore

Hehehheheheheehe......... Vewwy funny indeed. Imagine what our own monarchists would say to that...... *shudders*

Monarchists??

*ugh* I feel dirty now I've said it... *shudder* :)

Greg Moore

Go Tony Blair!!!!!!! Raise their fuel prices!

US Peops, can you enlighten me how the College system is democratic. Democratic means equal vote to every to me, yet people have an equal vote in their state, but their state doesn't have an equal say on the president. How can that be democratic?????

inwks,

You are correct it is not democratic, nor was it ever intended to be. The founding fathers of our nation saw democracy (majority rule) as a threat to the freedom of the minority. Also, since we had individual states with varying laws there was a fight over states rights verses federal control. As a result our government is a compromise of sorts. It is not a democracy, and I wish the media and politicians would quit referring to it as such. It is misleading. The United States of America is governed as a representative republic of federated states. Each state has certain rights. A pure democracy would essentially disinfranchise the residents of smaller states since political leaders and candidates would be able to ignore them and cater to the residents of the states with the population base that they need to be elected. Essentially, in a pure democracy there is a real possibility that rural america (areas with low population concentrations) would be ingnored, and the rights of the people in those areas would not be represented in any way in the governing process.

Under this republic form of government the USA has stood for nearly 225 years. This is longer than any pure democracy of which I am aware. I think one should think long and hard before changing something that has worked so well. It is not without its difficulties, but nothing that is going on in this election has not happened before. Rutherford Hayes was elected by winning the electoral college after loosing the overall popular vote around the beginning of the 20th century. It took many court battles for that election to be hashed out, but the country survived because there was a constitutional process that provided for just such a situation just as there is now. I am confident that a president will be named in the next few weeks. There is no crisis here. It is simply the United States of America's constitutional process at work. Frustrating? Yes. Crisis? No.

Just my take on the situation.

[Edited by Marty on 11-15-2000 at 09:41 AM]

Thanks, wasn't a dig, mearly a need to understand.... especially since the current situation seems like a farce to us non US peops

Did not take it as a "dig". Just tryed to explain it clearly as I could, although it often sounds confusing. I guess in some ways it is confusing. Part of the confusion, in our country, I believe is the result of the fact that everybody, politicians (in both parties) and media people, keep referring to a "democracy" when we are not one.

NOTICE TO THE PEOPLE OF THE BRITISH ISLES

Check your facts as they are faulty, colored by your imperious tone and recollections of your colonial days.

You did not give us independence, We took it from you. Our citizenry bet your red-coated armies and chased your British bums all the way back to the British Isles.

Thus, you have nothing to revoke.

1. You should look up the history of your own language where there are several spellings and pronunciations for the same word, even names. It's no wonder George Bernard Shaw said the English people were a people divided by a common language.

However, the fact that your own people don't speak the same language the same way that doesn't stop you form telling others how they should speak. How terribly British of you.

You need to realize that nations that broke away from you have advanced far beyond you and play a greater role in the modern world than you do. Get over it!

US English is the international language of business. Tough luck for you, you'll have to deal with it.

American football is also played by our Canadian neighbors (with slightly different rules). American football exemplifies part of the American spirit, that dogged determination that kicked your "civilized and proper" British bums off back to Britain. You can keep your rugby.

In your long history and battlesd with France, you were unable to defeat them, even though they conquered part of England. it must stick in your craw and now you wqnat us to do it for you. Nothing doing. We don't live in the past like you do.

That's why we don't refer to July 4th as "Kick the Brits in the hiney day", though we could. We've gotten past the past. Don't you think it's time you did?

is no longer a public holiday. November

In any discussion of cars, let us not overlook British cars. We know why Brits drink warm beer, they have Lucas refrigerators!

Aw geez... do we really have to drag the British into all this?

You know, they really don't govern any better (or perhaps worse) than we do.

They just screw things up with a little more class.

I thought it was funny, too... The image of Liz II with her classic "Hello, I'm partially embalmed" hand-wave dealing with the American political scene paints an hilarious picture.

Marty,

Yor knowledge and definition of democracy and the U.S. system of government is as apalling as it is erroneous. The U.S. is indeed a democracy, something the rest of the world acknowledged and many nations have emulated. The Greeks originally conceived of it and then lost it. It is the founding fathers of the United States who introduced the concept of democracy to the world in this millenium.

Demo - from the Greek for "the people" cracy - "rule" Democracy - rule by the people.

Democracy was a radical concept at the time, but once they settled on it, they clearly intended it to be a democracy. They had had enough of kings and queens and ruling classes. The fledgling United States was definitely intended to be a democracy, not a monarchy, plutarchy, or oligarchy.

There's a reason we have a bicameral Congress. It ensures that the power of the more populous states does not dominate the smaller ones to their exclusion. While the House of Representatives does represent states according to their population, with larger states having more representatives and thus, more votes, the Senate has but two senators for each state, regardless of population, ensuring a constant size of 100 senators.

Since any resolution must be reconciled with a similar resolution from the other part of Congress, it helps further in ensuring that smaller states are not incidental to the process of democracy.

The United States is a democracy. It has inspired other countries to follow suit and, as a consequence, there are more democracies on planet earth than ever before in our history.

Actually, the United States of America is not a Democracy, it is a Republic.

My 10th grade history class still is fresh in my mind, even though it's been ummmm 20 some years since then.

Regards,

I thought it was an aristocracy? Hmmm... :)

Chicken, I thought it was an oligarchy...

Duster, the United States is and always has been a federated republic of states. It is not a democracy.

A republic and a democracy are not mutually exclusive. The U.S. is a democracy.

Democracy

Democracy means the rule of the people (in Greek). That is where each individual person has a vote about what to do. Whatever the most people vote for wins. There is no king or tyrant, and anybody can propose a new law.
http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/government/democracy.htm


Republics

In a republic, instead of voting directly about what they want to do, as in a democracy, people instead vote for people to represent them, and those people decide what to do.
http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/government/republic.htm

Duster is 100% correct, where did you people go to school? The US IS a Democracy.


A republic means you can't vote - The Republic of China. Pick up a history book and read it if you do not know this.

A democracy is NOT the only type of government controled by the people. A "true" republic does as well.

The communist system has a type of republic elections as well. The old Soviet Union used to have mandatory elections every so often (unsure of the term). It was mandatory that all of it's citizens vote. The winners of these elections would then be the people in the government making the decisions. The only thing, there was only one name on each ballot that you could choose from. I do not know if China uses this system with their brand of communism.

As far as picking up a history book, my previous post has links to just that, giving information on on both.

Regards,

You know, that idea of having only one candidate on the ballot might simplify recounts...

You guys might want to try history and definitions for grown ups instead of kids. You'll find that most of the real world acknowledged the U.S. is a democracy. The majority isn't always right, but they are in this case.

We elect representatives for most issues, though some issues we vote on directly.

In the real world, we don't look for absolutes. Thus, while we refer to our economy as a free market economy, it isn't completly free. Government regulations are part of the reason the economy is not totally free.

Likewise, while the populace does not vote on each and every issue (what a cumbersome process that would be), we can freely elect representatives (who can be removed from office) to represent our views on many issues. On other ones, the populace votes directly to the issue.

That, folks, is a practical example and definition of democracy.

Originally posted by Duster
Likewise, while the populace does not vote on each and every issue (what a cumbersome process that would be), we can freely elect representatives (who can be removed from office) to represent our views on many issues. On other ones, the populace votes directly to the issue.

But Duster, THAT is what a "True" democracy is, where the people vote on many issues, like a town hall meeting and votes are cast on each issue.

A Republic has the people vote for their candidate who then votes on each issue.

People seem to get confused on the word democracy and a newer conotative meaning has been created over the years to where it is used to describe any form of government that is chosen freely by the people. And that is not correct in using the denotative meaning of the word "democracy".

http://citizens.reagan.com/right/no-irs/republic.htm
A Republic is representative government ruled by law (the Constitution). A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority (mob rule). A Republic recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals while democracies are only concerned with group wants or needs (the public good).

There are lots of websites that show the differences between a republic and a democracy.

In the words of my dear mother: "...I don't want to argue, because I know I'm right!"
:)

To heck with the history books and dictionaries. Read the founding fathers themselves.

Federalist Paper No. 10 - James Madison

"A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.

The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended."

Federalist Paper No. 48 - James Madison

"In a democracy, where a multitude of people exercise in person the legislative functions, and are continually exposed, by their incapacity for regular deliberation and concerted measures, to the ambitious intrigues of their executive magistrates, tyranny may well be apprehended, on some favorable emergency, to start up in the same quarter. But in a representative republic, where the executive magistracy is carefully limited; both in the extent and the duration of its power; and where the legislative power is exercised by an assembly, which is inspired, by a supposed influence over the people, with an intrepid confidence in its own strength; which is sufficiently numerous to feel all the passions which actuate a multitude, yet not so numerous as to be incapable of pursuing the objects of its passions, by means which reason prescribes; it is against the enterprising ambition of this department that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions."

Federalist Paper No. 58 - James Madison

"Ignorance will be the dupe of cunning, and passion the slave of sophistry and declamation. The people can never err more than in supposing that by multiplying their representatives beyond a certain limit, they strengthen the barrier against the government of a few. Experience will forever admonish them that, on the contrary, AFTER SECURING A SUFFICIENT NUMBER FOR THE PURPOSES OF SAFETY, OF LOCAL INFORMATION, AND OF DIFFUSIVE SYMPATHY WITH THE WHOLE SOCIETY, they will counteract their own views by every addition to their representatives. The countenance of the government may become more democratic, but the soul that animates it will be more oligarchic."

And Lastly,

Federalist Paper No 51 - Author either James Madison or Alexander Hamilton. Actual author unknown.

This is the clearest as it refers to America directly as a repulic. It does not hand wave, it simply says we are a republic.

"In a single republic, all the power surrendered by the people is submitted to the administration of a single government; and the usurpations are guarded against by a division of the government into distinct and separate departments. In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself. Second. It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure. There are but two methods of providing against this evil: the one by creating a will in the community independent of the majority that is, of the society itself; the other, by comprehending in the society so many separate descriptions of citizens as will render an unjust combination of a majority of the whole very improbable, if not impracticable. The first method prevails in all governments possessing an hereditary or self-appointed authority. This, at best, is but a precarious security; because a power independent of the society may as well espouse the unjust views of the major, as the rightful interests of the minor party, and may possibly be turned against both parties. The second method will be exemplified in the federal republic of the United States. Whilst all authority in it will be derived from and dependent on the society, the society itself will be broken into so many parts, interests, and classes of citizens, that the rights of individuals, or of the minority, will be in little danger from interested combinations of the majority."

I'm done.

Q.E.D.

Originally posted by etLux
You know, that idea of having only one candidate on the ballot might simplify recounts...

Why do I get the feeling this wouldn't be the case (BAH-HAHAHA!) I'm sure we can take what seems simple, and make it complicated. :)

Oh, one thing I forgot.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands- one nation under God, indivisable, with liberty and justice for all."

By the way, the President is the only thing for which a national vote is held, and this is not guaranteed in the constitution. A state could chose its electoral votes through any means that the people of that state deem appropriate. Outside of the President there is nothing that the American Citizens vote on as a whole. Everything else is relegated to our representatives, and in reality so is the election of the President, through the electoral college. That is a practical and very real example of a Repulican (not to be confused with the political party of the same name) form of government.

God bless America.

[Edited by Marty on 11-16-2000 at 11:47 PM]

All that said, do you think Chicken still has a chance to win?

Oh of course he does. See this was his plan all along. Now that those other two guys are fighting in court, they won't even notice Chicken has taken over until the first state of the union address.

Marty

Get ready for:

I pledge allegiance to the chicken of the United States of America, and to the chicken for which it stands- one nation under chicken, indivisable, with liberty and CDS for all.

I don't know if I like that part about being "under chicken" -- but the rest of it sounds okay...

'Under the totalitarian rule of Chicken' then?

No, no, no -- I meant I didn't want to be underneath a chicken...

I have this thing about getting covered in guano.

It's a bit naive to think that what a country calls itself translates into its form of government. By that reasoning, the People's Republic of China should be a repreesentative government instead of a totalitarian Communist regime. The defunct DDR (Democratic Republic of Germany) [East Germany] was not the free nation suggested by its name.

Democracy is rule by the people. On that point we have no disagreement. It clearly differs from a monarchy, aristocracy, plutarchy and oligarchy.

Even the quote on democracy on the historyforkids indicates one of the problems with it:
Most men have work to do, planting their grain, making shoes, fighting wars or whatever. They can't be always voting. So most democracies sooner or later end up choosing a few men who will do most of the voting, and the rest only come when there is a really important vote. It is hard to decide how to choose these few men, and different cultures did it different ways. Athens did it by a lottery. If you got the winning ticket then you were on the Council of 500. Men served for a year.

The details in the administration of a ruling system can vary greatly. England still had a monarchy after the signing of the Magna Carta, thought it resulted in a shift in power and rights. There is only one remaining monarchy today even though a few countries still have kings or queens.

In the strictest definition, the U.S. is not a democracy. Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that it is a republic founded on largely democratic principles. It is still the people who rule, albeit indirectly in most cases.

In a broader sense, what most of us think of, the U.S. is a democracy in that it is rule of the people, for the people and by the people. We have no monarchs, ruling class, nobility, barons, or any of the limitations of the Old World. One need not be of a particular lineage, born into nobility, wealth, or anything else to either vote or be elected to represent voters.

The fact that there are no extant national democracies (in the strictest definition) only exacerbates the point about the overall principle of self government by the populace, even if by representatives elected from that populace.

Oh geez... somebody in here is exacerbating again. Chicken almost shamed for pleasure for that the other day...