If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Disband the Commonwealth
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Either the Commonwealth possesses some political/economic clout, or it should cease to exist.
Since most Commonwealth nations are third world in status, they would greatly welcome the opportunity to trade freely. The heads of government of the various Commonwealth nations must come together to sign a free trade agreement.
Since most Commonwealth nations are third world in status, they would greatly welcome the opportunity to trade freely. The heads of government of the various Commonwealth nations must come together to sign a free trade agreement.
0
Comments
The Commonwealth is a superfluous organisation without any distinct function.
So, I ask again, how are they prevented from doing so?
Oh, wait. You want to be a politician.... right.....
And we poke holes in those statements to show that you really don't have a mind to speak of...
Hmm, yes the commonwealth could certainly be doing more to help its members. I don't think it should be disbanded, though, as it does help retain the cultural ties of the old empire. What is needed is a commonwealth that delivers more than just an athletics tournament every four years (or however long it is).
Edited to say: The prince of Wales has a forum going on this very topic on his website: http://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/forum/
Well that's wrong. Since all humans have a right to express their opinions, that is what I simply do.
Frankly, it makes you only slightly less tedious than steelgate, solely by virtue of the fact that, on the whole, you tend to be less long-winded.
Damn! :eek:
Nothing like cutting to the chase, now is there?
When did I say they were?
I don't make 'assertions', I make statements. In all my threads, I had simply been confronted with non-arguments and falsehoods. No one to date has seriously challenged my views.
As for any comparison with Steelgate, well I don't think men have ANY right to rape women and I don't subscribe to Marxist dogma.
Actually I have, but your "statements" only exist on a single level, there is no thought behind them and you can never back them up. Instead you reply with some juvenile quip and ignore the real sustance.
See the first few posts on this thread alone. You still haven't said how the countries a prevented from free trade...
The comparison with Steelgate is valid. You are both single level thinking morons. Perhaps a view of the real world would be useful for you both...
I simply said that the Commonwealth must gain some political/economic reason for being or cease to exist. Since most Commonwealth nations are third world countries, they would welcome an opportunity to trade fairly and freely with other nations.
My opinions are based on real world observations. :cool:
Wrong. "So, I ask again, how are they prevented from doing so?" Is that it?
You started this thread by suggesting that the "Third World" commonwealth countries would appreciate the opportunity to trade freely. Suggesting that somehow they don't have this opportunity now.
My question is, don't they already then? Trade freely that is.
If not, what prevents them, is it the commonwealth, or is it something else?
Tell me, why do African nations believe the EU to be hypocritical in its attitude towards President Bush's tariffs? Because they cannot trade freely with the EU!!
I never said the Commonwelath negates free trade, dimwit. I simply said that the Commonwealth must attain some political/economic reason for being or cease to exist.
Why does the Commonwealth exist anyhow? Because some middle-aged prick despairs over the lost British Empire? :rolleyes:
You said, at the start of the debate, that the commonwealth nations should be allowed to trade freely, and you implied that the commonwealth was stopping them doing that, by saying that they could if the commonwealth was disbanded. You are the dimwit, as you cannot even comprehend what you write yourself, not even when it is explained to you by MoK!
Why must the commonwealth have=, in your eyes, a political/economic reason to exist? It already HAS a political one, just maybe not an economic one - and there is nothing to stop heads of states of current commonwealth countries from signing free trade agreements NOW if they wanted to. So, why disband hte commonwealth?
Perhaps this is because you haven't actually explained what you mean...
Look at this...
So, why does this mean that we need to disband the Commonwealth? The last time I looked, the only link between the two was the UK.
What the EU does as an entity is completely separate from what the UK does as a nation state and what the Commonwealth does
And I ask what relevance that was to the free trade argument you put forward. I'm not sure exactly how much you know about the commonwealth, the trade that passes between the member countries, tarrif rates which are affected by membership, the political union between the countries (who is looking at Zimbabwe, is it the UN or the Commonwealth?), in fact I wonder if you actually understood what you wrote in the first place.
It exists so that every four years, we can pretend that we have a athletic comeptition to rival the Olympics :rolleyes:
Perhaps you should do a little reading, and find that one out for yourself, rather than post from a position of ignorance (as usual). You may find that common interests form part of it.
@ nosferato, Thank you, for a while there I thought I was going mad. I'm still not sure that onefatuouscomment really understands what he was trying to say.
Those benefits that did exist would also be very unevenly spread and many would lose out withous strong state management.
Their are few strong or stable states within Africa I believe their will be little economic advancement until this central problem is resolved
Why not disband it? What political reason DOES it have to exist? Is it a supranational body like the EU? No.