United Commonwealth Society

[Luke]

The proposals page on the UCS website is bare and lacking in actual proposals. When I assumed the role of UCS Chairman I made it a personal goal of mine to try to rectify this, and with this debate I fully intend to get it done.

The proposal debate won’t start properly for a few days yet. Instead, I would like you all to write a brief summary of what you believe the UCS is about, what it should stand for and list a few proposals you believe the UCS should adopt. It doesn’t have to be too long, just a short paragraph or two and a list. Once everyone has done this that’s when the fun begins!

As soon as everyone has explained their positions in a clear manner the debating will begin. It should be simple enough to do. Debate each other’s ideas and proposals and attempt to come to an agreement.

However, I must give this warning. Due to its potential to get rowdy and heated, this discussion will be heavily moderated and an eye will be kept on it at all times. No insults or flaming will be permitted. Any unacceptable language will result in a warning. Tangents, though natural, will be discouraged but you won’t be punished if you do go on a tangent. Instead a moderator will steer the discussion back to the topic at hand. But don’t let this deter you from speaking your mind! This is simply to make sure language is kept to an acceptable and civil standard and that everyone will respect the opinions and beliefs of others.

DH Lawrence and I have made a reading list for anyone interested in doing a bit of research whilst we do this debate. The list includes some political documents and treaties, but mainly books. We have provided links so you can have a look at these books on the British and Canadian Amazon sites. The reading list can be found here: special-announcement-the-plan-for-the-proposals-page-vt1085.html

I hope as many of you as possible, old and new members alike, will take part in this debate and help contribute to a solid set of proposals for the United Commonwealth Society.

[Nimrod]

You really should have mentioned the 'brief' introduction aspect before, Mr. Seaford. In any case, here are my proposals.

Nimrod’s proposals for a United Commonwealth

The policies of the UCS, and the ultimate vision of a United Commonwealth, encompass three primary objectives, and it is the compromise and confusion of these three objectives which has led, in my view, to the absence of any clear proposals within the UCS itself.

The three objectives are:

Economic

Cultural/Aesthetic

Political

This is a fairly arbitrary definition of the UCS policy, and there are many areas in-between these categories, but these will be dealt with later. I will discuss each of them individually in an abstract and theoretical sense, before laying down a ‘foundation plan’ of where the UCS should begin in its Commonwealth reform.

1: Economic policies.

This is the ‘imperative’ or essential objective of the UCS. The entirety of the Economic policy of the UCS must be geared toward providing economic, environmental, and military security to the entire Commonwealth. These are all absolutely essential staples for the greater good of all Commonwealth subjects, and all Commonwealth policy should be geared toward these.

Currently, we throughout the Commonwealth live in a ‘global market’ where products from across the world, both staple and consumer, vie for places in the homes (and stomachs) of Commonwealth subjects. More often than not, especially in the UK, this has led to Commonwealth products losing out to cheaper foreign imports. In Britain at time of writing, the nation has a trade deficit in goods of over 7 billion pounds. As there is resource, landmass, and ingenuity enough to provide for Commonwealth subjects from within the Commonwealth, it is dangerous for the security and independence of Commonwealth states to rely on external production. It therefore falls to a reformed Commonwealth to establish agricultural and industrial Autarky within the Commonwealth itself.

More recently in history an American-led attempt to create global ‘free trade’ has led to the disastrous squandering of resources in the corporate race. Britain’s natural assets have been almost exhausted by this economic marathon, and the environment of the entire world has been adversely affected by this mass industrialisation. The British Empire is partly to blame for this process, and the establishment of industry as the be-all and end-all ‘manifest destiny’ of the western world [Henceforth Westernesse] has brought on an artificial change in this planet’s climate. This change, whose effects we already beginning to observe, is highly controversial, and the ultimate result of it is still being debated. It is doubtless, however, that said result will be cataclysmic and only a colossal decrease in worldwide carbon dioxide emissions will stave off environmental ruin. With this in mind, it falls to any reformed Commonwealth to reduce Commonwealth environmental damage to zero.

I suspect that due to this environmental situation, the peak of resources that has precipitated it, and the economic collapse which began in July 2007 and, in my view, will result in semi-permanent recession worldwide, the world will be a far less secure place than it has ever been by the mid-21st century. At any time, it is a logical justification for a military force that every country should be able to defend itself. Currently this does not ring true for any individual Commonwealth country. In the event of war against a militarised state with a large navy and air force, it is doubtful that even Britain could defend herself without resorting to Nuclear weaponry. Presently, the combined military forces of Britain, Canada and Australia could potentially field roughly 547,000 troops, including reserves, which is numerically less than the military of Egypt. Were South Africa and India added to this, the number of soldiers would rise to 3,087,000, with 4,915 tanks. This barely rivals the United States of America, upon whose military support the present Commonwealth, indeed the whole of NATO, has relied since the Second World War. If the UCS is to have a defence policy, it must constitute a plan to give the Commonwealth the military resources to defend itself in any theatre, from any threat.

2: Cultural /Aesthetic policies

It is this concept of 'Pan-Brittannic' culture, and the image of the Brittannic world, which I suspect draws many of the proponents of a reformed Commonwealth. The imagery of a united British Empire has always been romanticised, and certainly the appeal exists to this day. Some nations have responded more than others to the draw of the Pan-Brittannic world, notably Great Britain and Canada, who both share a good deal of political space with the United States of America, whose own aesthetic is considered incompatible with a Brittannic one by many within the UCS as well as non-members. The ancient sports of Cricket and Rugby are often a link (or, conversely, a division) between Great Britain and the other Commonwealth states, notably Australia and South Africa, and the Commonwealth Games are often regarded as a public test-bed for the Olympics. Most importantly, fully seventeen nations of the Commonwealth are ruled by the British Monarchy, at time of writing headed by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, with an able and accomplished Charles, Prince of Wales as heir to the throne. Many members of the UCS regard Her Majesty as an infinitely more viable head of state(s) than any elected official, and it is this which can also inspire to work toward a more closely-knit Commonwealth.

Presently the Commonwealth has a mightily powerful communications tool, often underestimated, in the form of the English Language. After two centuries of dominance, this tongue remains the lingua franca throughout the world, even now, as Chinese economic power waxes and that of Westernesse wanes. The English language has been the vehicle for many of the world's greatest writers and artists, including William Shakespeare, Charles Dickens and J.R.R. Tolkien in Britain.

Currently the individual cultures in the Brittannic world are very strong. While certain cultural ties with Britain have remained, all of the former colonies have created vibrant and diverse new cultures as independent nations. In Britain, the diversity of cultures, both native British and post-Imperial immigrant communities, has become very interesting. This is all to the good. The British Empire was a diverse entity, and the Commonwealth is even more so. The plethora of cultures rubbing shoulders together in a common union should be celebrated.

However, many people in Brittannic countries have become fearful that their own cultures and creative traditions will be subsumed into an amorphous, 'globalised' society. In Britain the threat is seen as coming from the USA, and more recently, the European Union. In the last few years strong reactions against elements of the British population have taken a turn toward extremism as well: In England, this manifests as aggression towards the immigrant population, and has its political representation in parties like the BNP, who are still largely disregarded. In Scotland and Wales, some extreme anti-English racist elements have gained positions of power as the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru.

The fact is that the Commonwealth will tread some very dangerous ground in her cultural mission. the UCS must promote the massive diversity of the Commonwealth - Commonwealth art, Commonwealth writing, Commonwealth theatre, etc. must be promoted in the media, both in national media and in private life. I believe that the best way to achieve equilibrium between the extremes of nationalism and hemogeny (and it is a very, very wide gap) is to keep in mind the genesis of the various Commonwealth cultures. What brought them together is the British Empire, and what still maintains the connection is the Commonwealth itself. The British Empire must be given an adequate space in national education, and children across the Commonwealth should have a proper knowledge of the ideals that led to their own independence and the dark shadows that those ideals often cast. In short, The UCS must lobby for greater priority being given to Commonwealth media. Similarly, it must also make proper provision for the education of the next generation.

The Monarchy is arguably the single greatest cultural link between the Commonwealth nations that currently exists. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II is the acknowledged head of the Commonwealth and as a result, a good quarter of the world has a central rallying point. Her Majesty functions as the capable head of seventeen countries, performing ceremonial roles all over the world and acting as the highest-level ambassador for the Brittannic peoples. Prince Charles, the future King, has an excellent record of standing up for environmental issues since before the threat of climate change became apparent, and works closely with a myriad of charity and entrepreneurial organisations. Prince William, second in line to the throne, seems to be showing promise as a public figure as well. In the Windsors, the Commonwealth has a healthy dynasty who remain receptive to public issues and tend to use their influence for favourable purposes.

Unfortunately, the Monarchy is frequently undermined by national media groups in Britain who choose to target the more unsavoury activities of junior members of the Royal family. Across the Commonwealth, notably in Australia, Republicans have been able to argue, not without justification, that the distance of the British Monarchy from their realms makes them an unsuitable choice as heads of state.

It is pointless to restate the Monarchy-Republic debate here, as there are enough sources for either side to find both on the Internet and in the national media. I, however, believe that as an organisation, we of the UCS must support the British Monarchy as a uniting symbol. However, I freely acknowledge the problems which a far-away monarchy causes, socially and politically.

I believe that the United Commonwealth Society must support the British Monarchy and the principle of Monarchy both within the Crown Commonwealth, the present Commonwealth, and across the world in nations where Monarchy has been supplanted by a republican ethos, more often than not without discernible effect on the well-being of that nation's people. A mass media drive, combined with a negative campaign against the Republican system, will encourage the restoration of dynasties, modelled around the successful Commonwealth model. This success has been observed in Spain, and should be allowed to flourish elsewhere. The system of elected Republics is often seen as 'modern' and 'democratic', but this is a fallacy. The truly progressive system, that of Parliamentary Democracy beholden to a ceremonial Monarch, has proved a steadier and stabler system than most Republics, save only some states in Europe and the Americas.

In conclusion, some strong steps must be taken in the international media, and the Internet, to promote the Commonwealth 'aesthetic' if we wish to make any headway in a world where the Brittannic countries, divided, have begun to become self-conscious and introverted. The Monarchy must be preserved, both in principle and in practice.

3: Political Policies

These are bound to be the most controversial policies, due to their nature of discussing the way in which a reformed Commonwealth would function as a political entity. I will here lay down my vision of what the United Commonwealth society should adhere to, although with the caveat that there is plenty of room to debate and lots of options. This is the most flexible and least vital aspect of the UCS, and as a result it is a more debatable subject.

The present Commonwealth Secretariat functions largely 'behind the scenes' of government, and due to poor media coverage its effects on policy on a national scale are often unquantifiable. There is some truth in the principle that an organisation is only powerful insofar as its power is observed, and that is why the Commonwealth is largely considered a peripheral organisation in the public eye, at least in Britain.

That said, the Secretariat is an excellent infrastructure on which to base a future Commonwealth Parliament.

A United Commonwealth Parliament is the key, I believe, to implementing the policies outlined in sections 1 and 2. This executive body would herald a total and complete alteration in the governance of individual Commonwealth nations.

The Commonwealth Parliament would function as the supreme government of a 'Commonwealth Federation' wherein individual Commonwealth countries would form the member states. The United Commonwealth government would be responsible for inter-Commonwealth trade, a United Commonwealth Defence program, humanitarian development, and implementing the proposals detailed below. The Commonwealth Parliament would act as the supreme authority within the Commonwealth and create its own law in parallel with that of the United Nations.

The Commonwealth Parliament would be composed, as with Parliamentary systems across the Commonwealth, of two houses: The lower House of Professionals, responsible for proposing, debating, and voting on legislation, and the Higher, Representative house, whose responsibility it will be for approving or vetoing such legislation.

The Political House (the Commons?) will be elected by the population of the Commonwealth. Every Commonwealth nation will have a number of representatives reflecting the size of their population: equal constituency sizes, in other words; if Jamaica were to have one MCP, Canada would have 11 and The United Kingdom 23.* Representatives will be drawn from individual political groups within member states, voted on in elections based on the principle of proportional representation.

The Upper House of the Commonwealth Parliament (the Lords?) would be populated via Chaocracy: a random appointment taken in a similar way to jury duty would provide the representatives of the Commonwealth population. The sheer volume of citizens in the Commonwealth would make for a truly 'fair' representation of the population - while freak results might throw themselves up, the law of probability should ensure an honest and democratic reflection of the will of the Commonwealth. This body of true 'commons' would have full, unrevokable veto powers on any legislation that the lower house passes.

The final stage of the legal process would be the ceremonial approval of proposed legislation by the Monarch of the day. The present assumption is that the principles in section 2 hold true and that the Queen or King of the Commonwealth is still acknowledged head of the Brittannic World. In the same way as it presently does in Britain, the Royal approval would be purely ceremonial, although a restoration of veto power as a means of social protection could be considered.

All legislation voted on and passed in the Commonwealth parliament would automatically become law in all Commonwealth states. This would make for an effective and decisive body, but also a cruel and arbitrary one, so it must become necessary to establish clear limits on what subjects the Commonwealth Parliament could legislate on.

I believe that without a Commonwealth parliamentary body to take decisions, the entire principle of a United Commonwealth becomes pointless. With a Commonwealth Parliament, however, there is the possibility to enforce real change and maintain a secure and prosperous Commonwealth. Provided that all Commonwealth nations can agree on the exact nature and powers of a Commonwealth legislative arm at the outset of creating it, there should be no later quibbles as there have been in such supra-national organisations as the UN or EU. It is no longer possible for the British government to administrate the Commonwealth, and thus any attempt to repoliticise the former Empire must be done with caution.

*The already arbitrary process outlined becomes a nonsense when the possible integration of India into a United Commonwealth is considered. The colossal population of the subcontinent would utterly dwarf the other states of the Commonwealth (by the mentioned scale, the number of Indian MPs would number in the hundreds), making the Brittannic states effectively dependencies of India. The system of propotional representation would have to be totally rethought in this situation.

Proposals

In this section I will outline a series of practical initiatives which an empowered UCS would execute at the individual, society, and pan/governmental level in order to achieve the above objects. These will range from initial projects which can be implemented immediately, to suggestions for future legislation and national polcies.

Alpha: Initial (phase 1) policies.

A1: The United Commonwealth Society must publish an international manifesto. While the trappings of the revolutionary pamphlet may be reagraded as crass in some quarters, it is essential that the UCS present a clear political statement to the international community. If we are to campaign as an international organisation, then we must do at a national level. Lobbying a modern-day government with ideas that will be regarded as archaic by some modernist theorists will only end in failure, as it has with nearly every other international pressure group, even when the objectives have been positive. The UCS manifesto must state political objectives which have some worth in their respective countries - although it will be up to the national groups to decide what their policies are. I would opt for a secular, environmentalist, inclusive though socially traditional and pro-monarchy stance for a British wing of the UCS, although other members must feel free to question this. Any manifesto must be published on the basis that the political success of the UCS is not necessarily the objective of the Society, rather laying emphasis on the necessity of a United Commonwealth by any means. We must be prepared to acknowledge that we do not have the monopoly on enlightenment, and that our idea of a United Commonwealth may not be the most effective or useful.

A2: The United Commonwealth society must promote itself (and its political manifesto) through any and all mediums. Given that the UCS in its current form is unlikely to be able to establish a central pool of funds, it is up to individual members' discretion to advertise, promote, and gain entry (forced, if necessary) into national political life. Open public forums and debates, national radio, and the Internet are all potential mediums in which to advertise UCS principles.

A3: The United Commonwealth Society should attempt to forge alliances with existing political organisations. This will only be an effective policy if the Society is careful of quality intake from the very beginning. It would be far too easy for the society to join forces with the first enthusiastic organisation they encounter - we must be careful that any links we make are not with extremist, racist, or militant organisations, as these will be the first to agree with what is, in truth, a potentially major political upheaval. The UCS is unlikely to make it on its own, but similarly we must not make our job any harder by attaching ourselves to political liabilities. That said, if an organisation is in sympathy with the UCS and will help to promote our views without compromising our fundamental message, then it should be embraced, provided the above conditions are observed.

Beta: Gaining Power (phase 2) policies

Individual Members of the UCS should consider that national political power is the key to gaining a United Commonwealth. As an intellectual fraternity with minimal resources, the UCS currently has the enviable position of flexibility in the way we approach this. a series of options now present themselves:

B1(a):The UCS could form its own political organisation as per the principles laid down in policy A1. Unlike the previous concept, which implies an ideological movement that does not necessarily imply political infrastructure, this policy would be to create a "United Commonwealth Party/Order/Alliance" Which would attempt to gain parliamentary seats in general and local elections within the host nations. This attempt to start from scratch is courageous, but could easily prove hopeless. So many fringe parties die by the wayside due to their negligible resources and inability to command wide support. While not abandoning this policy, the logical progression then moves to:

B1(b): The UCS could exist as a pan-political coalition in potentia, advocating similar views in terms of Commonwealth unity while accepting individual political differences. The key here would be for individual members of the UCS to attempt to gain high positions and acclaim within existing national parties in their respective nations. This allows for a healthy political variation within the Society, as well as being far more likely to yield tangible results in the long term. The Society would act as an ideological guide and a uniting force within national policy in this case, although there is an obvious risk that individual members could become jaded during the climb to power and lose faith in the principles of the UCS. The ultimate objective of policy B1 is that the UCS, having gained positions of government in all of the constituent realms of the Commonwealth,

B2: The UCS could attempt to spread its message through purely external means, attempting to influence governmental policy by gaining public noteriety through the media or through entrepreneurial efforts. This policy would constitute individual members engaging in media punditry, aiming for celebrity status, or becoming industrialists, humanitarian leaders, or indeed anything else which could function as a lever on power. The end objective to the policy would be to command enough popular support for policy, or economic influence, to persuade national governments to acceed to UCS proposals. Of the two options, the 'soft' or media-oriented approach is more morally acceptable as it expounds the fundamental Commonwealth ideal of democracy. However, the 'hard' or economic approach is historically more effective and will be more likely to yield results despite its oligarchical overtones. It is up to the Society to decide which path to follow.

B3: In the present environmental and financial climate, the risk of national destabilisation is greater than it has been for some time, particularly in rich countries whose economic success has depended on the financial markets, or is at risk of ecological collapse e.g. Holland, Iceland, Ireland etc. Should the unthinkable occur and a country fall prey to civil war or anarchy, the UCS could consider taking leadership as a stabilising measure. Thismethod of attaining power is not recommended, and is historically innefective. Armed insurrection is often disastrous for both the cause of any oragnisation and for the people of the country. Unless a genuine opportunity presents itself, the UCS should avoid all use of force in gaining political power.

Gamma: National Governance (phase 3) policies:

This section is a set of legislative proposals for UCS members once they have attained executive status in the national government of any Commonwealth country. As such, they are very specific at this stage and by no means consitute a complete manifesto, or indeed reflect the political views of any other than the author - however, none of the following proposals are unrelated to what has been written before, and all can be taken as a continuous progression from the Alpha and Beta stages.

G1: The pro-UCS government should favour commerce between Commonwealth States. This should involve dropping import tarriffs on Commonwealth goods and Fairtrade goods both within and outside the existing Commonwealth.

G2: The pro-UCS government should fund arts and creative projects which reflect and promote the diverse cultures within the Commonwealth. While there should be no attempts to restrict or control the media, the Commonwealth should become a cultural priority. particularly in Britain there have been moves toward a more pan-European approach to the arts and communication, which is not optimal for a UCS agenda.

G3: A pro-UCS government should invest in renewable energy and so-called 'green' technologies, such as wind power, tidal power, and hydroelectrics. This should be mirrored by the phased dismantling of fossil-fuel powered and nuclear technology.

G4: The pro-UCS government should invest in airships, sail-powered seacraft, and other environmentally-friendly devices which can replace existing technologies. Research, development and science should be given priority.

G5: A pro-UCS government should recognise the Republic of Somaliland as an independent nation. Somaliland, having formed a functional government, disbanded its militias, formed a parliamentary government and maintained itself with no support from the United Nations. They have lived the ultimate dream of the Commonwealth: namely re-applied British principles to a failed state, successfully. They should be therefore honoured with political recognition.

G6: A pro-UCS government should introduce a Commonwealth facet to the national curriculum. Commonwealth history should be taught from the age of fifteen in compulsory education.

This is merely an introductory selection of issues which a pro-UCS government should look at discussing. An exhaustive list would evidently be impossible at this early stage.

Delta: A United Commonwealth (phase 4) policies:

This section is, like the preceding one, merely an agglomeration of ideas. In the event of the society's eventual success, it is absolutely necessary to decide the direction of policy which the UCS will attempt to pursue.

D1: The Commonwealth Parliament should be established in Bermuda or somesuch neutral ground, in line with the propositions outlined above. The parliament should be democratically elected and should attempt to balance an element of central control and administation with the independent legislative powers of member states. Any Commonwealth Parliament shall not be accountable to the United Nations or any such other supra-national authority.

D2: The United Commonwealth should attempt to build a fully integrated 'fairtrade' system of commerce, in the style of the World Trade Organisation. This elective body would be responsible for co-ordinating aspects of Commonwealth trade and investments, both within and outside the United Commonwealth. Disregarding corporate giants in favour of small local farmers and buisinessmen in the Commonwealth realms, the Commonwealth Trade Coordinator would represent work equity and fair treatment of indigenous peoples, and would therefore be accountable to the Commonwealth Parliament. Non-Commonwealth members should be allowed to integrate with this organisation where possible.

D3: A United Commonwealth should establish an International Court, similarly in an appropriate location. This court would act as a higher appeals court for criminal law in Commonwealth Member states and would supersede The Hague as the International Court of Justice for Commonweath member states. Such a court would, like the Parliament, be unnaccountable to the United Nations.

D4: The Commonwealth should attempt to forge a defence network worldwide, with intelligence and security cooperation between Commonwealth states being given priority in all situations. All US or other foreign troops on Commonwealth territory must be ejected. Commonwealth military action should be coordinated by such a defence network in preference to UN or NATO representatives. The Commonwealth must work to become the dominant maritime power on Earth, as Human Trafficking and piracy have both markedly increased since the withdrawal of the Royal Navy from the planet's oceans.

D5: Commonwealth states should coordinate the provision of electricity through renewable means to the entire Commonwealth. What this would mean in practice is that Commonwealth states with massive renewable resources (Solar in Australia, Hydroelectric in Canada, Wind in the UK, Tidal in Papua New Guinea etc.) should be prepared to export electricity generated thus to Commonwealth states in exchange for goods, technology or services. A campaign to totally eliminate Nuclear Power and Fossil Fuels from Commonwealth states must be undertaken.

D6: A full emergency plan for the dangers posed by climate change to Commonwealth states must be prepared. This includes provision for refugees, evacuation facilities, and reconstruction contingencies. Regardless of the nature or cause of Climate Change, the fact remains that such change will wreak havoc on human society and Commonwealth states will certainly have to deal with the results, even if members are unaffected.

D7: The Commonwealth should, for the ease of travel and decrease of human environmental impact, work toward building a worldwide transport network based on airship and sail power. Existing technologies are unsustainable and totally outmoded, and the Commonwealth should be at the forefront of technological and scientific excellence during the 21st Century.

D8: The United Commonwealth should make every effort to eliminate Cholera and Malarial outbreaks in Africa and the tropics. That these diseases and other contagions have been eliminated in the 'Crown Commonwealth' is evidence that they can be eliminated altogether from all Commonwealth and non-Commonwealth states.

D9: The United Commonwealth should be prepared to admit new members from outside the existing Commonwealth and the British Empire should the appropriate Pan-Brittannic criteria be met. Nations with British connections which could be considered are Greece, Cyprus, Cuba etc.

Concluding notes:

The above plans, policies and suggestions on the future of the United Commonwealth Society are obviously far from complete. The real decision that must be made is what the basic philosophical ideas that underlie a future United Commonwealth really are. Are we to be a nostaligic, pro-imperial organisation driven by palingenisis? Are we to reflect the modern ideals of democracy and justice which the Commonwealth represents in the world today? Do we wish to create a Pan-Brittannic superpower or are we concerned with International Justice and human rights?

When the core morals and ideals have been dealt with, we must work towards achieving those, ideally within the next generation. The present world situation is certainly no better than it has ever been, and if the Brittannic peoples of the world are to have a stake in the 21st century we must undoubtedly act now.

[PatQ]

What a good read and very informative by Nimrod, there are many proposals I agree with and some I dont but a very good start to the debate. I would like to chip in with some ideas but at a later date after some thought. Can anyone advise me on how to become a member of the UCS and not just a forum member or are they both the same thing?

[DHLawrence]

Members of the forum/Facebook group and members of the Society are one and the same. There's an option to become a member on the main web site, but it does not serve a function just yet.

Drop in any time you like to give us your thoughts!