King charles Heckled in Australia

[Albaamy121]

Did anyone see that King Charles was heckled in Australia this week by an Australian senator, Lidia Thorpe.

She shouted at him "you are not my King, this is not your land, you have stolen our land".

Any thoughts?

I didn't see any thread on it, so I started this one.

I think it does matter because it's untrue and it's used all the time as a gotcha in these kinds of discussions. "Look how racist Australia is, they even called aboriginal people fauna". There's plenty to be critical of in the colonisation of Australia - for both Britain and Australia - without bringing in things that didn't happen.

It's difficult to have a nuanced conversation about this because it's so complex. Colonisation is brutal process, it's effects are felt down the generations. But Britain's colonies were generally more politically stable and economically succession than most, they gave us the Westminster system and our justice system which created a wealthy democracy. Those things don't cancel each other out, obviously, and it's not much comfort to indigenous people that French/Belgian/German colonies were even more brutal. It's a difficult and painful discussion but my view is that activists like Nova Peris do more good than a million Lidia Thorpes.

I don't know what your point is with this thread, other than to call Australians racists. But if he is a direct descendent of the people who slaughtered the First Nations people of Australia and its surrounds, aren't you, also?

But who is supposed to be apologizing to the British people for their suffering under colonialism?

Is there a point in time - a before / after where countries/decedents are responsible for apologizing and reparation?

Yes, but his and his family’s unearned privilege seems to flourish.

You appeared to tell me further up that my claim that indigenous people were not included in the census prior to 1967 was not true. I refuted that using a government website which clearly says their citizenship was clarified.

They might not have officially been classified as fauna in a scientific way but the fact their citizenship of Australia had to be clarified as late as 1967 Is bizarre, considering they have been here for tens of thousands of years.

The royal family have destroyed themselves from the inside. Queen Elizabeth was the last really. Seems like the beginning of the end to me.
The indigenous people of Australia were completely destroyed by colonisation, we did terrible things to them including taking away their children.
This tour feels all wrong.

Yes we have racism and a serious amount of work to do to heal as a nation, ‘close the gap’ with health, advance Indigenous people. Many of these issues were born from colonising Australia and horrors such as massacres and assimilation of Aboriginals by stealing their kids.

I don’t apologise because I’ve done this to Aboriginals, I apologise because I live and walk on land that has come at an enormous price to them. I don’t apologise to our fallen soldiers but I apologise that they lost their lives so I can live in a country safely and freely. I acknowledge and apologise for other people’s loss and I don’t pretend that something so significant is in the past - we don’t just forget about the Holocaust either because it’s important as humans to acknowledge where we have gone wrong & the impact on future generations of that culture - eg inter generational trauma.

King Charles isn’t just a representative of Britain but the British royal family. He is the head of state of Australia and visiting here and sitting in parliament as a King because of colonisation which came at an enormous price to our Indigenous people and their beautiful culture. Actually gentle people contrary to what a previous poster said.

Does having a head of state, a King who elevates British colonial history and reinforces dominant white culture, help us heal ? No it doesn’t, he is coming here to wave the Union Jack and in doing so gaslights us of the truth, the massacres and stolen children enmasse.

Fuck me, all I saw was people of all backgrounds thrilled to meet the King and Queen, and watch them turn the snags over in a local sausage sizzle. None of the indigenous people who met them seemed to have a problem with the visit, and neither did those who performed smoking ceremonies for the King.

It’s worth noting that atrocities towards Indigenous Australians were being committed in the name of the crown in very recent history. Post WW2 and right up to and including the 1970’s. So these atrocities exist in the memories of living humans and were whitewashed from our taught history until very recently. Most white Australians know exactly zero indigenous Australians and have absolutely no idea that for most, English is a second, third or possibly fifth language. Indigenous Australians have some of the highest domestic violence rates, infant death rates, preventable child and adult disease rates, MH and Substance Abuse rates in the world as a result of the policies now known as the “White Australia Policy” that became the blueprint for South Africa’s Apartheid Laws. There has been virtually no accountability.
As a white Australian of many, many generations - I think she was very restrained.

A satire column said 'elderly couple having free holiday in Australia'

He is down under for this:

Excitement in Samoa as King Charles III and other world leaders fly in for CHOGM - ABC News

It would be rude to be in the area and not drop in.

@EverybodyLovesString

None of that says that indigenous people were counted as fauna which is what you and the previous poster claimed. The word fauna does not appear in the link you provided.

Indigenous peoples were not counted in the census because the commonwealth did not have the power to do so until the referendum. Nothing to do with a "Fauna and Flora Act" that never actually existed.

Here is the ABCs RMIT fact check on the urban myth of Flora and Fauna: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-01/fact-check-1967-referendum-flora-and-fauna-voice/1027989500*

I didn't claim anything about an Act. However, the indigenous people were considered on much the same level as fauna. Here is an 'Letter to the Editor' excerpt from 1909:

The story of the platypus is very interesting, which I have watched for many years in Clerk's Creek, named after Edward George Clerk, Clerkness Station, Bundarra. Cope's Creek, New England was noted for these very useful, harmless animals. They were very numerous, and now there is only a few to be seen now and then. Unfortunately for New South Wales,
they were looked upon as of no value, in the same manner as the fauna, native birds, flora, trees
(Eucalypti), saltbush, and the aboriginals.

As she should be. However, her English ancestry cannot be totally brushed aside, she is a product of it and it exists, however much she sees herself as indigenous.

Well yes, it would be okay. No-one should be vilified because of what their ancestors did.

The monarchy’s representative in Australia, the Governor-General, sacked our democratically elected prime minister in 1975. He did this with the support of the late Queen and then-Prince of Wales.

If that’s not having power over Australia, I don’t know what is.

They should be if their power and role is large part because of what their ancestors did and they continue to carry on that role.

*Indigenous Australians have some of the highest domestic violence rates, infant death rates, preventable child and adult disease rates, MH and Substance Abuse rates in the world^

Why are those outcomes not a reflection on Australians who have more impetus and ability to help fix them?

I mean you are there and can pass policy to do as you want, including becoming a republic if a visit is too much

Except he's sitting on the wealth and status from what his ancestors did.

The whole notion of the Royal Family is bizarre to me. I'd heckle the bugger.

This. All of it.

Teaching in a school where we have a high percentage of First Nations’ students, I feel immense pressure. Not just pressure from the government to close the gap, but also to acknowledge that the education they receive from me is a western education. No matter how many indigenous perspectives I can teach in a lesson or how many First Nations stories I have within my classroom will ever erode the fact that this is a white person’s education set up in a system designed by western white people. We sit in buildings designed by and for westerners. Our pedagogy is designed by and for westerners. Even by implementing First Nations pedagogy, that’s still been designed to align with a system created by and for westerners. They have had to adjust SO much to conform and fit in with a society they did not ask for, that goes against every fibre of their being. Even First Nations peoples in a position of power, are seated in establishments created by westerners to suit their world perspectives.

What is sad too is there are so many road names and statues associated with James Cook. He didn’t even bloody discover Australia. Indonesian travellers had a very long relationship with the First Nations peoples for over a hundred years before colonisation. Portuguese and Dutch ships had already discovered and visited Australia. Yet some arrogant, self serving man called James claimed the land for Britain and spent the rest of his days being praised for it. Anger bubbles.

You seem to think you know an awful lot about what people living in other countries do or don't want

Under the constitutional model that the UK and Australia and other countries use, the Prime Minister is appointed by the head of state. By convention the head of state appoints the person who has the support of the majority of Parliament.

If it isn't clear who has support, the head of state takes advice and makes a decision on who to appoint. This is how Churchill became PM in 1940 rather than Lord Halifax.

Someone wins, someone loses.

Not exactly Trumpites storming the Capitol.

Yes, I'm well aware of the dismissal. I was asking the OP because I knew that they did not know.

Voters in Australia have more power to change any of this than anyone in the UK. You can have change but it’d take responsibility rather than heckling a visitor every decade or so

Where did I say that you made a claim about a fauna act?

I was responding to a pp who specifically linked the 1967 referendum to aboriginal people being classified as fauna.

One letter does not prove that indigneous people were officially classified as fauna - an urban myth rejected by indigneous scholars - which is the point I have been making the entire time.

Exactly, but every westerner here has been educated by a system that has rewritten history. They then end up with a perspective that “oh aboriginal people sniff petrol and get drunk, why should I apologise”. It’s only recently (like very recent) that schools have implemented a systematic change where history will no longer be whitewashed. It’s going to take a generation or two to see those changes filter into society.

Heckling a visitor has opened up conversations. Conversations are what is needed. No point voting when the majority of voters are misinformed or do not completely understand. It’s not their fault, it was designed to happen like this to further marginalise First Nations peoples.

And editing to add: it may already be too late. Australia is now fully westernised. First Nations peoples are either having to adapt to society or be shunned. Eg if their kids do not attend a western style school (which is all we have) then they do not receive an education. They have to conform to the laws imposed upon them despite never having authority to vote in those laws. It’s not about voting, it’s about educating them and us. Reeducating people who have been through schools and learned only one side of history. Opening up positions in parliament for them to have a voice.