6 ms·
It's not meant literally. Even in Australia our armed forces are still "Royal" but this is just a vestige of the past. i.e our ships are designated Her Majesty'
by jpgvm 5y ago
It's not meant literally. Even in Australia our armed forces are still "Royal" but this is just a vestige of the past. i.e our ships are designated Her Majesty's Australian Ship (HMAS).
What is means in practice is they fight for their country and its allies, just like any other military. While technically the Queen's representative in Australia (the Governor-General) is the chief of Australias armed forces (as defined in the constitution) this has never been used in practice (and would probably be ignored at this point).
- qiskit 5y agoThen don't say it period. Also, isn't the british queen still the head of state of australia? Every time I bring this up, it's always australians, canadians, british, etc making excuses.
- Handytinge 5y ago> Every time I bring this up, it's always australians, canadians, british, etc making excuses. Or, Australians, Canadians, British etc _explaining_ the nuance to you, because they understand it?
- jpgvm 5y agoWhat do you mean excuses? It's just history. It's said for the same reason, because history. I'm sorry it offends you but nobody in Australia is overly motivated to change something that has no practical impact and given you don't seem to be from a Commonwealth country I don't think you are entitled to complain about it either.
- pmoriarty 5y agoSymbolism matters. It's why some people freak out when someone "disrespects" their flag, why judges wear special clothes and why courthouses/government buildings are so frequently built to look impressive. Such symbols perpetuate attitudes of deference and subservience to what the symbols represent... not for everyone, but they are effective on a lot of people, which is why they're still being used.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]