Should the United States of America join the Commonwealth of Nations?

Asked by: DebateTime
  • Yes America should.

    Https://www.Facebook.Com/RoyalistPartyUSA We commit ourselves to the establishment of a constitutional monarchy for the United States of America. It is our belief that to create a true sense of trust between the governed and the government, our nation's leader must be above the politics of the day, beholden to no special interest group, and free to do what must be done for the good of all Americans, not just the party he or she leads.

  • The USA would be a welcome addition to the Commonwealth

    America used to be part of the British Empire so would be, I believe, eligible to join. It would be good for Britain to acknowledge that all that unpleasantness about the tax on tea was justified, although the subsequent revolution was, I think, a bit of an over-reaction. Still, it’s time to let bygones be bygones and welcome America back into the fold.

  • The Commonwealth bank

    The Commonwealth bank is a growing bank that is in the top 10 banks in the world, if more people joined in then the bank would get stronger at a much faster rate. Plus the commonwealth could help with the balance of power over corrupt governments (yes i am aware that the commonwealth is a bit corrupt )

    But going to the reason why the US should join is that they could help there own economy with the commonwealth.

  • Associateship/Honorary Membership of the Commonwealth

    Several Members have left in sad circumstances;others have been expelled and rejoined. Two countries have joined that were never part of the British Empire;it has not been called "The British Commonwealth" for many years. ; several Members had Freedom Fighters before independence.It is a fluid organization and there is no compulsion to stay or join. What is required is an adherence to certain principles,similar to the UN Declaration of Human Rights.The other countries of the Anglosphere all belong. No way would it be expected that there should be any kind of allegiance to the British Monarchy - constitutionally she is " a symbol of free association ",that's all. Even if the US could not accept Associateship or Honorary Membership, she might formally state that she is a Friend of the Commonwealth. Historians debate,and politicians argue, and myths often reach the status of Known Truths.....But a mature and seemly declaration of common principles would hurt nobody.

  • Yes, of course!

    If the United States joined the Commonwealth, we would not have to recognize the Queen as head of state, as republics are allowed too.
    Commonwealth membership would allow American citizens to move freely about the other nations of the commonwealth, and other commonwealth citizens to live in the USA.
    The commonwealth would open up more diplomatic opportunities for the United States. It would create a better United States.

  • Joining the Commonwealth further promotes liberty, freedom and justice for all.

    I suggest that the western culture of tolerance, liberty and justice for all would benefit from the United States joining the Commonwealth. Much like the UN the US would NOT give up our sovereignity nor make the queen their head of state rather a club of western nations, all of whom use English as their primary language.

  • For strategic advantage

    Geopolitical dyamics and evolving debate around climate change indicates USA should consider joining the Commonwealth of Nations.

    This should reaffirm the faith of american citizens in the strength of USD and the belief that people around the world have placed in the american dream and its political structure over years.

  • For strategic advantage

    Geopolitical dyamics and evolving debate around climate change indicates USA should consider joining the Commonwealth of Nations.

    This should reaffirm the faith of american citizens in the strength of USD and the belief that people around the world have placed in the american dream and its political structure over years.

  • In the future, it should be

    Just in case if Isis ever takes over the UK, (e.G., London), which is now a commonwealth. United States could, or should also become a commonwealth, similar to the UK years ago, Canada, or Australia. If Isis ever takes over the UK, and if people flee that country [UK] if an Islamic holy war occurs there, and if it becomes a dangerous country to be in, like what happen in Syria and Iraq, United States should become a safe place, or even a safe haven for britons, including the royal family.
    If United States ever becomes a commonwealth, it should help reduce crime, and create more economy.
    If that happens, a palace, similar to Buckingham Palace, should be constructed, e.G., somewhere in Washington, or in Boston, or in Albany, NY, since that State [New York] is named after a royal family member.

  • Yes - it'd be a great way of celebrating our nations.

    Yes. What'd be great would be, if the US joined the commonwealth, and as a quid pro quo, the composite countries of the UK joined the US as honorary states. It'd be pretty much a figurehead role, rather than anything with real power. It'd be a great way of promoting friendly ties between our nations, without reducing the rights of the citizen of each.

  • No! No! No!

    When the U.S. broke all ties with the Crown in 1776, it was a permanent end to a tumultuous relationship that led to the 13 Colonies declaring themselves independent. The fact that the British Monarch is the head of the Commonwealth would make the country's forefathers roll in the grave. While we do have great relations with the UK, the U.S. does not have to belong to an organization that glorifies Britain's former colonial empire. The U.S. and Ireland should stay out of this organization due to their Wars of Independence against the present monarch's ancestors and resulted in plenty of bloodshed.

  • The situation has changed

    The majority of land that comprises the United States is land that was never under the control of the British Empire and the majority of United States citizens have no ancestral ties to the Commonwealth. Over the past two centuries the United States has developed it's own cultural identity that is arguably incompatible with the Commonwealth. To suggest that the United States join the Commonwealth is akin to suggesting that Britian forego their cultural, historical, and technological development and join a reunified Roman state.

  • We need a 100% Democracy

    A monarch having a say in the American Government would be outright disgusting and a disgrace to our country, our founding fathers would be disappointed if we even considered such a thing. Plus, much of what is now Amerca today was ruled by France and Spain at the time, and both of the former were allies to America in the war. Also, many modern-day Americans aren't even of British descent. I'm mainly of Swedish descent with some French descent. Although joining the might Commonwealth help the USA economically, it is still a disgrace to our strictly Democractic nation.

  • It wouldn't make sense

    The American Revolution ended in 1783 and since that point, many new ethnic groups have immigrated to our shores that share no connections to Great Britain or to the former British Empire, i.e. the Commonwealth.
    Furthermore, only thirteen of the fifty states that make up the U.S.A. were every under British rule anyway...What reasoning is there for California, New Mexico, Alaska, Texas or Kansas to join the Commonwealth? Also, many Americans descend from groups that arrived here for the sole purpose of starting new lives free of Monarchial influences, most notably Irish Americans, among others. While our governmental system, language, and culture are all products of our British heritage (of which we should be proud) and while we are closely aligned with Britain and the other Commonwealth nations (Canada, India, New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, etc.)...It would disrespect the legacy of our Founding Fathers and all American patriots who died fighting for independence, should we join the Commonwealth.

  • The Commonwealth is not worth U.S. involvement.

    While the Commonwealth of Nations has good intentions, it lacks the competence to even pique U.S. interest.

    The Commonwealth is generally a talk show; it is incapable of enforcing its ideals, its members have no obligations toward each other, and it offers no benefits of any sort to said members. The U.S. would prefer more productive and reliable alliances such as NATO or the UN.

  • No, we are in enough clubs.

    No, the United States of America should not join the Commonwealth of Nations, because there are already enough country groups that the United States is in a part of. The United States already pretty much funds the United Nations. We have enough opportunities to speak with other nations without joining yet another group.

  • Give people a choice.

    The us doubt need the commonwealth, and I could eat also the commonwealth doesn't need the us. Now we have 2 friendly global powers, one parliamentary and one a republic. Let's see how they evolve, expecially as the Brexit reinforces the pattern. Not everyone has to be the same. Give people who are loyalists the commonwealth, play rugby, are against gun ownership, a sence of history, money Python, read Shakespeare and enjoy the English language a place of their own. Let the US be US. Let those who are NOT loyal move to the US. We can all thrive without the backsliding.

  • Did we learn nothing from 1776?

    Suggesting that the great United States of America become part of the British "Commonwealth of Nations" is an insult to our history and is basically spitting on our Independence as a country. It sounds like another way for the British to try to get their "lost colonies" to bow to the British crown once again. I have no problem with British people. I am not a xenophobe against British people. I just think it is insulting to the people of the USA.

  • A monarchy is intrinsically repressive.

    While the US has a shared language, culture, history, and close economic, political, and military ties with the commonwealth; leadership under a monarch (who leads the Commonwealth), even nominally, sends the message that we support the establishment of monarchy. The monarchy benefits a single free-loading family whose members are born into privilege without any necessary test of merit. Monarchy is the antithesis of a democratic republic, and its embrace would be a step backwards in governmental evolution.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
DebateTime says2013-09-21T18:39:17.003
Http://www.Debate.Org/debates/United-States-of-America-should-join-the-Commonwealth-of-Nations/2/ We commit ourselves to the establishment of a constitutional monarchy for the United States of America. It is our belief that to create a true sense of trust between the governed and the government, our nation's leader must be above the politics of the day, beholden to no special interest group, and free to do what must be done for the good of all Americans, not just the party he or she leads.

Our mission is to replace the office of Head of State with our Sovereign Queen. Her Majesty, or her representative in the United States, the Governor-General, would assume the original, Constitutional powers of the President of the United States, and would serve as a non-partisan and impartial arbiter of our Constitutional government.

Legislative powers, powers of war and peace, and power of the purse"among others"would all return to the United States Congress as was set out in our Constitution.

The Royalist Party would also see the United States join the Commonwealth of Nations, in the interest of forming stronger cultural, trade, and political bonds with nations who share our heritage in the English language, British liberty, and peace among nations.

Like many of you that may read this, I too have become disgusted with the current state of affairs in American politics. The squabbling, backroom deals, special interest groups and the pandering thereto. It really is enough to make one's stomach turn. To think that our forefathers fought, and died to prevent this sort of corruption from occurring only to see it propagated in their name is a sad fact.

However, there is still hope for America, and her citizens. Time and time again, men and women have rallied around banners, causes and individuals and united to save something, or accomplish something so great that they are recorded down in history. The Battle of Thermopylae. Battle of Gravelines. The Battle of Moscow in 1812. We are continually reminded that history is fraught with examples of extraordinary monarchs and autocrats that were not besieged by special interests groups, political parties or other distracting bodies and organizations. They were honorable, dutiful patriots who had a love for their country and a zeal for their people's prosperity.

This is what America needs in her darkest hour. A true American patriot with the courage, morals and ethics to do not what is politic, or popular. We need a leader that will do what is right. One who is not afraid to do what must be done for the sake of the nation, and to rid the country of it's corrupt two party "republic" that has failed consistently over the last 50 years. We are help to fulfill the growing need for an alternative political solution in a climate where so many individuals are turning their back on politics altogether. The supreme goal of the Royalist Party, USA is not the restoration of a medieval political theory. But a reinvention of a proven and successful form of governance. A form of government wherein the bickering, stagnation and consistent corruption inherent in democratic and republican forms of government is absent. We aim to accomplish this through:

Repeated exposure to the American public to join the Commonwealth of Nations and return to just, Royal Government, and its various forms, and benefits.
Leading by example, and refusing to participate in the American political system at present, either in part or in whole. This means we refuse to give weight to any political party, or organization other than our own, by voting or protest. To do so would be to legitimize their partisan political system.
Appealing to like minded Americans who share a deep mistrust of the government, and other forms of republican or democratic governance.
Building a grassroots community encompassing all ethnic groups, faiths, and individuals of all walks of life to help build a better alternative for tomorrow's America.

The national Facebook Page can be found here: https://www.Facebook.Com...
We're an American political party aligned with the following principles:
i) Toryism
ii) Traditionalism
iii) Agrarianism
iv) Distributism
v) Culturism
vi) Pan-Anglo Identity
pamelaewen says2017-02-27T18:26:02.150
I am a Canadian citizen and was asked whether or not the US should join the Commonwealth of Nations. I wanted to know the advantages and disadvantages. I read a few in the, "Yes", column and got some information but needed something more solid from the, "No's", not just referring back to 1776 etc. I think the advantages would be freedom of travel between the commonwealth nations and things like sports initiatives like Prince Harry's Invictus Games. I am shocked to see people in the states who actually would like to have the Queen as their head of state! I don't think that will happen, especially in the present, "administration" which appears to be in disarray. There are some in the commonwealth who fear that the US, being such a large, powerful nation would be a disadvantage to the commonwealth. I feel that I am for the US joining, but the nuts and bolts would have to be on the table and discussed. Pamela