> So doesn't Australia have any process to compel the government to comply with the constitution?
Australia has the most volatile politics of any English speaking country. The two ways for a government to be forced to follow the constitution is for the Queen to fire them, or for a military coup.
>So far, your claim about less informed people is essentially just "other people voted for a government I don't like so they must have been less informed than me".
My claim is that an Australian government is acting outside the constitution and responsible for the deaths of thousands. Not sure what you're trying to do with your strawman argument.
OK, so the constitution's optional. No problem violating it then.
If you don't like what the government did, I don't mind you sharing your opinion. But how does it logically connect with my comment that you replied to? I thought you were giving an example showing that voters are not well informed and I pointed out that it's not objectively wrong, just different from what you want.
So just wait for that to happen then elect a new one and repeat until he/she stops violating it. Voters can still vote for a prime minister who violates the constitution if they want. That's their right, and it's a good part of democracy. Hopefully the country has other institutions to prevent that but it sounds like Australia doesn't because the queen isn't doing her job, so it ends up de-facto allowed if the voters want it.
Australia has the most volatile politics of any English speaking country. The two ways for a government to be forced to follow the constitution is for the Queen to fire them, or for a military coup.
Both were considered during the last time the government was in deadlock: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional...
>So far, your claim about less informed people is essentially just "other people voted for a government I don't like so they must have been less informed than me".
My claim is that an Australian government is acting outside the constitution and responsible for the deaths of thousands. Not sure what you're trying to do with your strawman argument.