Jamaica 'to cut ties with British monarchy'

[Princess Luna]

Jamaica's new prime minister has said that it is time for her country to cut ties with the British monarchy and declare itself an independent republic.

Speaking at her inaugural address on Friday, Portia Simpson Miller, said her government would "initiate the process of detachment from the monarchy", establishing a republic with a president as head of state, and breaking off links with the former colonial power.

Jamaica is a constitutional parliamentary democracy and also a Commonwealth realm.

"I love the Queen. She's a beautiful lady and apart from being a beautiful lady a wise lady and a wonderful lady. But I think time come," Simpson Miller said.

Currently under Jamaica's constitution, Britain's Queen Elizabeth II is the head of state, and the prime minister is formally appointed by the governor-general, who represents the queen.

The announcement comes ahead of celebrations to mark 50 years of the country's independence from the UK.

Economic crisis

Simpson Miller, taking over for her second term as prime minister, won a landslide victory in an election last week that largely pivoted on public discontent with Jamaica's ailing economy and massive debt.

The unemployment rate currently stands at about 13 per cent, up from under 10 per cent in 2007, when the centre-right Jamaica Labour Party, the previous ruling party, won power.

Its public debt stands at $18.6bn of gross domestic product.

"In the short and medium term, we will use all state resources to stimulate employment through the Jamaica Emergency Employment Program," Simpson Miller said after taking the oath of office.

"We will do so in a transparent and non-partisan manner."

Nearly half of all Jamaicans (43 per cent) live under the poverty line of $2.50 per day, according to an International Monetary Fund (IMF) report.

Reaching a new agreement with the IMF on Jamaica's debt is one of the new government's top priorities, Omar Davies, the official in charge of the transition, told reporters on Wednesday.

New talks with the global lender are set to begin on Monday, with Jamaica represented by Peter Phillips, the country's new finance minister. Phillips has held several cabinet posts in previous administrations.

In the December 28 election, Simpson Miller's People's National Party secured 41 seats, two-thirds of the total, in the House of Representatives.

She succeeds Andrew Holness, 39, the youngest-ever prime minister of the country
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/americas/2012/01/2012175138834303.html

[ColonelCossack]

I hope this continues to other commonwealth countries. But will Jamaica still do the commonwealth games?

[Rafiq]

When I went to Jamacia I was told they had 49% unemployement.

[Bronco]

PJ Patterson said when he was Prime Minister that this would happen by 2007 so don't hold your breath

[Искра]

And what diference does it make?

[Tim Finnegan]

And what diference does it make?
If it was Canada or Australia, I'd say none whatsoever, but given that we're talking about a population who are overwhelmingly people of colour breaking their ties to an institution which was the historical pinnacle of imperial white supremacy, I wouldn't hold it against them. Superficial, inarguably so, but at least very vaguely benign.

[Agathor]

Fair enough. Although membership of the Commonwealth is not the issue for Jamaicans. Distracting people from their misery and poverty with bloated appeals to the national identity is an old, cynical trick.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

When I went to Jamacia I was told they had 49% unemployement.

I think it's probably even higher than that.

[Seth]

It doesn't really mean anything. Old-fashioned colonialism is dead and has no teeth. The Queen may rule Jamaica on paper, but Jamaica like every other country has its own ruling class and corresponding native institutions. Neocolonialism is already the main relation and will continue to be.

[Red Commissar]

I hope this continues to other commonwealth countries. But will Jamaica still do the commonwealth games?

Membership in the Commonwealth doesn't necessitate recognizing the British crown as head of state much less monarchies. Technically most countries in the Commonwealth of Nations are actually Republics and some monarchies that don't recognize the crown in any form in their government.

AFAIK this doesn't mean severing ties with the Commonwealth of Nations that many former British subjects are still in- including most of the former African colonies, Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh. It just means that Jamaica won't be considered a commonwealth realm any longer.

You can look at a list of all those still holding the crown as head of state here-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commonwealth_realm#Current_Commonwealth_realms

Of those, the only ones with significant populations are Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Papua New Guinea. Jamaica follows those in population before you get to various small Caribbean and Pacific island states, as well as Belize. As far as things are concerned it's more of a symbolic move- Jamaica will still retain many other (economic) ties to the UK and things will continue as normal, except with less pictures of the Queen in government and public buildings I guess.

[Le Rouge]

I hope this continues to other commonwealth countries. But will Jamaica still do the commonwealth games?

LOL It will NEVER happen in Canada if we keep our current Prime Minister. He is currently establishing a cult of personality of Queen Elisabeth 2nd....:lol:

[The Dark Side of the Moon]

your face died in a fire.

good for them

[red1936]

GOOD FOR JAMAICA! I really hate having the ties to the monarchy that the country in which I take residence in (Canada), I would like to see Canada become a republic some time. :)

[Renegade Saint]

Now we just need the British people to cut ties with the British monarchy.

[Comrade J]

GOOD FOR JAMAICA! I really hate having the ties to the monarchy that the country in which I take residence in (Canada), I would like to see Canada become a republic some time. :)

“People think they have taken quite an extraordinarily bold step forward when they have rid themselves of belief in hereditary monarchy and swear by the democratic republic. In reality, however, the state is nothing but a machine for the oppression of one class by another, and indeed in the democratic republic no less than in the monarchy.”

- Friedrich Engels

[Искра]

If it was Canada or Australia, I'd say none whatsoever, but given that we're talking about a population who are overwhelmingly people of colour breaking their ties to an institution which was the historical pinnacle of imperial white supremacy, I wouldn't hold it against them. Superficial, inarguably so, but at least very vaguely benign.
Ok... I didn't say that I'm against, I just think that nothing will CHANGE... Jamaican working class will still live like shit with Queen or Marcus Garvey

[Q]

I'd argue it does change something (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis). Although I'm sure the bourgeoisie will find new legal tricks.

[Q]

“People think they have taken quite an extraordinarily bold step forward when they have rid themselves of belief in hereditary monarchy and swear by the democratic republic. In reality, however, the state is nothing but a machine for the oppression of one class by another, and indeed in the democratic republic no less than in the monarchy.”

- Friedrich Engels

You should finish the quote (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1871/civil-war-france/postscript.htm):


... and at best an evil inherited by the proletariat after its victorious struggle for class supremacy, whose worst sides the proletariat, just like the Commune, cannot avoid having to lop off at the earliest possible moment, until such time as a new generation, reared in new and free social conditions, will be able to throw the entire lumber of the state on the scrap-heap.

Engels was a huge supporter of the democratic republic, being the only form in which the dictatorship of the proletariat can be established (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1891/06/29.htm), in which he specifically meant "the concentration of all political power in the hands of the people’s representatives."

But yes, it is obvious that the dictatorship of the proletariat is a class-repressive machine too, be it against all non-proletarian classes.

[Ismail]

If it was Canada or Australia, I'd say none whatsoever, but given that we're talking about a population who are overwhelmingly people of colour breaking their ties to an institution which was the historical pinnacle of imperial white supremacy, I wouldn't hold it against them. Superficial, inarguably so, but at least very vaguely benign.This. It's still being done for shallow bourgeois nationalist purposes though.

In Canada and Australia (not counting the 1970's) it appears that "republican" movements are staffed by right-wing conspiracy theorists. Communists will obviously replace constitutional monarchies with democratic republics anyway (which is what Yugoslavia, Hungary, Albania, Bulgaria and a bit later Romania did back when monarchs had actual power), so there's no need to ever tail such movements.

[danyboy27]

i say good for them. I live in canada and this sorry excuse for a human being we have has a prime minister love the monarchy so much, he replaced several painting in public building for the queen portrait and asked to all embassador to have the queen picture in their office.