Re: In defence of Monarchy

Alan E & Carmel J Brain wrote:

> This WOULD be off-topic, except that I haven't decided exactly what
type
> of government the OU has. For that matter, is the House of Windsor
still
> (at least titularly) head of the NAC? If not, perhaps the OU could
have
> them... :) That would certainly be a good excuse for Oz splitting from
> the Commonwealth.... that, and the flood of Revanchist US refugees who
> liked the good old US constitution signed in Philedelphia, and none of
> this newfangled Redcoat stuff from Up North.

I 'think' John, in the either the FT2 or DS2 rulebook, said that the
Anglican
Confederation was formed around the crown. But on the other hand, who is
to
say that a scion of the royal family DIDN'T go to Oz? IIRC, didn't the
UK
transplant members of King Hussein's family to be soverigns over Iraq?
So
there is a something of a tradition there...

As for the US, I don't think 'constutionalists' would leave the US
(ruled by a
crown) to join up with a nation with another crown. Might happen if the
OU was
republican based though.

Scott