To think the Commonwealth has had its day?

[antelopevalley]

The Commonwealth is a colonialist institution based on a history of conquest and slavery.

"The origins of the Commonwealth come from Britain's former Empire. Many of the members of the Commonwealth were territories which had historically come under British rule at various times by settlement, conquest or cession. The administration of such colonies evolved in different ways, to reflect the different circumstances of each territory."
www.royal.uk/commonwealth

The Commonwealth Games have never been held in an African country. Although there have been exceptions, most years it is held in Britain, Australia, New Zealand or Canada. Since 1930 it has only been held three times in other countries. Or seven countries if you include youth games and paraplegic games.

The Commonwealth has no clear role; it confers no trade privileges upon its members, does not coordinate their defence or foreign policy, and lacks both the budget and the executive authority to make a practical difference in the world.

It is a colonialist hangover that has no clear role and should be abolished.
AIBU?

I was not linking the two.

@antelopevalley yet we, and many of the other ex colonies have got rid of those homophobic laws.

The nations that make up the commonwealth are sovereign nations and can make and change their own laws.

Not all Commonwealth countries are colonies. So membership is valued, by some at least, beyond any lingering links to a former colonial power.

And its the largest international organisation (other than the UN) and an example of the benefits of quieter diplomacy. Definitely worth keeping, unless you want to see a more divided world

I watched it, but his argument made no sense. How come the UK doesn't persecute gay people, if it is at the heart of the commonwealth and the originator of the Empire?
How come you can be executed for homosexuality in countries which are not in the commonwealth and in some countries which have never been in the Empire ?
I found his argument to be deeply flawed because there isn't really a link.

In some sports, athletes would never have a chance of winning when competing with certain countries like the USA or China. This gives an opportunity to many athletes to compete and win on an international stage. In some sports, there is already dominance by commonwealth countries and, again, it gives youngsters to compete and progress through rounds to run with heroes of theirs.

The Commonwealth is not British, as the Empire once was. It is a fraternal organisation and all members are free and equal and dedicated to the principles of world peace, liberty, human rights, equality, and free trade. I wonder which of these the OP finds so objectionable. Perhaps similar bodies to which we belong should be abolished or we should withdraw from them such as the Council of Europe (and thus the ECHR), the G7, the UN (including Climate Change) and WHO.

The Commonwealth War Graves Commission does a fantastic job looking after 1.7 million graves all over the world. Graves are marked identically, regardless of the rank, country of origin, race, or religion of the buried. Is this objectionable? Do you want all the non-British to be dug up and interred elsewhere?

Many top athletes are not appearing at the European Championships. Most European countries have a history of colonial conquest and slavery. Europe has no clear purpose so perhaps all European institutions should also be abolished.

One third of the world’s population live in Commonwealth countries.

And that includes some excellent sporting nations, and many outstanding individuals. And the Commonwealth Games (like the Island Games, but rather bigger) gives smaller nations the chance to compete against the very best. Something they simply do not get otherwise.

oh we definitely can vote. I have voted multiple times since returning to the UK in 2017. I have even voted in the EU referendum and voted Remain. And when I was voting in the EU referendum, I only had a 6 month visa and was in the process of applying for my visa (while living in the UK). Was still allowed to vote. I have since voted in every election since including the council elections and london mayoral elections.

commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8985/

A qualifying Commonwealth citizen is someone who is resident in the UK and who has leave to remain in the UK or does not require leave to remain. Electoral registration officers can check the immigration status of applicants from a Commonwealth nation.

So very much second string then?

England spends too much time looking back at its past and not enough looking forward.

Thats the problem with the Commonwealth & of course poor countries want to belong to an organisation headed by a few very rich countries but how many of these developing Commonwealth countries are supporting the UK etc against Putin?

Very few, India is actively supporting Russia with trade that we have banned, as is most of the African states.

Those laws were introduced as a direct result of colonialism.

Really? As they seem to share the same views as the OP amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jul/06/harry-and-meghan-say-commonwealth-must-acknowledge-the-past

Britain generally looks too much at the past and not the future. The Commonwealth is an example of that.

So very much second string then?
Did you actually watch any of it? The athletics? Jam packed with world class athletes.

For people who think it is outdated, do you think the positive things it does (eg election observation, collaboration on education) are insignificant? Or do you think that it would be better if a different membership body did these things (or already does)?

So very much second string then?

Only in the sense that everything that’s not a world championships or the olympics is second string.

Though looking at the size, scope and achievments of the Commonwealth Games compared to those two and other regional games it’s very much

1. Olympics

2. individual sports world championships

3. Commonwealth Games

4. the rest

He meant it at the time though.

I know.
My point was that at some point she must have agreed with it. Also Harry.
Why they altered their thinking is anyone's guess.

So he said. How does he explain Iran, Russia, or any number of hostile nations to his sexuality?
You can blame Britain if you like, but they're not responsible for gays being tortured and executed in nations with which they had no connection.

Of course it's second string to the Olympics or the World Championships. 🙄 So are the European Championships, African championships etc, but it doesn't make them unworthwhile.

The Commonwealth og Nations is not a dictatorship. Countries are allowed to make their own foreign policy decision according to their countries interests. You'd think that people who make it out as a colonial, repressive organisation would be pleased about that!

Britain generally looks too much at the past and not the future. The Commonwealth is an example of that.

OMG. The Commonwealth is the future. It rose out of colonialism but is now an equality of nations. Or do you think these countries are so incompetent or stupid that they're staying in an organisation that is against their interests?

I think it's a bit racist to think that African, Asian and Caribbean countries are too daft to leave the Commonwealth if they wanted to, or that only persecute gays because the British told them to in 1894.

He'd just lost his title and pushed out of the medals by his mates. (Who was stood next to him when he made it)

Hardly the best statement to make at the time. It came accross as bitter.

He certainly didn't think that way when he won later in the week.

In what way does the Commonwealth focus on the past?

And some, which were never part of the Empire, have joined.

I think she went on a bit of a personal woke crusade and confused the Commonwealth with the British Empire. And Harry, hardly the sharpest tool in the box, didn’t bother to tell her they’re not the same