A possible way forward for Australia...

Post Reply New Topic

I am an Australian by nationality, and I have been hearing of the debate between monarchists vs republicans. I have oft-considered the possibility of a third option.

That third option is the idea that Australia signs a unification treaty with the United States of America. This would, naturally, effectively place Australia under American authority.

Now, I do expect to be flamed endlessly for this one, but let it be known that I am of a neutral position of this issue. Sometimes a little controversy is needed.

I want to set the ball rolling with this possibility of a USA-Australian unification, and I want opinions from both the yes and no side of the coin, from both Americans and Australians. Please, try and be intelligent about this discussion, otherwise I don't exactly want the post in this thread. I will leave the poll open for thirty (30) days.

Apologies in advance for any offense, but I would like to raise this possibility of discussion.

i love the aussies and i wouldn't want them ruined by becoming the 51st state. too good for US.

but the flag could potentially look a lot cooler.

How about Each state/territory of Australia with a population of 60,000 becomes a state?

Australia becomes States 51-58.

Edit: The flag pictured is propsed when/if Puerto Rico becomes a state. Also, from things I've seen, it looks like the D.C. statehood movement may have revived itself. Its somewhat likely that when/if Puerto Rico becomes a state, Washington D.C., becomes one soon thereafter. Meaning we go from 50 to 52 like we went from 48 to 50 in 1959.

Does Australia really want to be annexed by the US? And make no mistake, it would not be a "unification" between the two countries but an annexation (and subsequent domination) of Australia by the US. Also, I think there would be a lot of opposition to adding more states to the Union. Most people won't admit it outright, but 50 seems like a nice number and it's be a shame to mess that up by adding any more states.

60k? too small! even wyoming has 500k people.

In the US Constitution, there is no limit as to how small a state can be. So, I would assume that it is plausible that the Articles of Confederation would apply on size, as it explicitly says 60k. Also the fact that a combined theoretical state of Guam and Northern Marianas Islands is only around 254k, and that there has been grumbling between the two island areas combining and making a run for statehood, combined with the fact that the two insular governments think that this could actually work, lends some amount of credence to my arguement. Nonetheless, it look like we may go from 50 to 52 stars in the next 20-30 years.

Besides, some states are bloated to huge size. Why not break a couple of them up. Like California, Texas, New York, and Florida.

I don't like the idea. The US is in a HUGE mess right now, and will be for a long time.

It would also ruin my plans to flee to Australia.

It would be interesting to see Australia enter the union as one or more states... (hell, the United States media is controlled by an Australian, so it wouldn't be too farfetched either...)

However, I am against anything (Washington DC included) being a US territory. That goes against the "no taxation without representation" that started the American Revolution. (I especially think it's ironic because the DC license plates say "taxation without representation" on them...)

I can't imagine why Australians would want to hand over their sovereignty to the US.

I say the same. Make every territory with more than 60k a state. And then, get rid of those little singular islands, like Wake Island.

To be completely honest, I don't know either...

Firstly the UK is the 51 state.

Secondly we have our own expansionism plans, starting with NZ and moving through the rest of the pacific islands.

Thirdly I hear the US is up for sale, going cheap; perhaps we should go into partnership with China and buy up bigtime.

It wouldn't be an advantageous situation for the Australian people.