Your comment illustrates to me even further why a detailed article on the topic is very much needed because there are some very basic misunderstandings about what a “Confederacy” is and what a “Constitutional Republic” is and how the two come together.

This is not me having a go at you as many people (especially in Australia) respond like you when I first utter the phrase “Constitutional Confederate Republic”.

Confederacy is such an American word.

It’s actually not at all. The term/concept existed long before the CSA (Confederate States of America) which is what you know as “the Confederacy” came into existence.

No way can we have an Australian Confederacy, whatever that might mean, because the word is so horrible.

How about the CCRA (Confederate Constitutional Republic of Australia)? Is that better?

The name does not matter. Only the substance does. Call it “Old mate’s Republic” for all I care.

And we have good reason for always rejecting becoming a republic. Who do you want as your president?

That very much depends on what powers that President (or whatever the role of the head of state is called) has.

Again, it’s a very nuanced discussion which cannot be done effectively in such an exchange. I will discuss that in great detail in my article.

Australia does not DO statesmen any more

Again, this fails to take into account what powers said “statesmen” have and how they are exercised.