Republican Academics on the Attack By James Reed
The material is coming out as predicted, with Republican academics trotting out the usual stuff they teach their students, you know, the evils of British colonialism, as if Queen Elizabeth II had anything to do with it, being born in 1922. Never mind the pragmatic paradox that these academics would have never existed without British colonialism, which led to the settlement of Australia, and otherwise, Australia would have almost certainly have been colonised by China. Now, China is a place that does organ harvesting of prisoners, and has a strong human rights case against it, and that is modern China. What would China of hundreds of years ago have been like? Would it have been sensitive to native title? Perhaps in the future we will see.
As for the woke claim that Australia needs to become a Republic to escape its racist past, how can that be, since for the left whites are by definition racist, no matter what they do. So, I say, why bother?
“Millions of Australians, whatever their views on the monarchy, are united in mourning after waking up to news of The Queen's death, aged 96.
But some could barely wait a few hours to use Her Majesty's death to push their own agendas, or make cheap jokes as her health failed in the last hours of her life.
The Australian Republican Movement, and its chairman Peter FitzSimons, waited just 17 minutes after her death was announced at 3.30am AEST.
After brief condolences, the organisation noted Her Majesty 'respected the self-determination of the Australian people' in a thinly veiled reference to the republic.
Greens leader Adam Bandt had no such tact, waiting just five hours to call for Australia to 'move forward' and become a republic.
The staunch republican, who refuses to put the Australian flag with its Union Jack corner behind him at press conferences, posted a brief tweet at 8.27am. ..
'Rest In Peace Queen Elizabeth II. Our thoughts are with her family and all who loved her,' he began - his entire condolence statement.
'Now Australia must move forward. We need Treaty with First Nations people, and we need to become a Republic.'
Mr Bandt frequently calls for an Australian republic, believing the country needs its own head of state and the royals are too closely tied to colonialism.
His deputy, Senator Mehreen Faruqi, was even less respectful in her own tweet, and also took the opportunity to demand reparations for indigenous people.
'I cannot mourn the leader of a racist empire built on stolen lives, land and wealth of colonised peoples,' she wrote.
'We are reminded of the urgency of treaty with First Nations, justice and reparations for British colonies and becoming a republic.'
She said last year: 'The royals preside over an empire that has enslaved millions of black and brown people around the world. Their racism and colonialism continues.
'If we're truly interested in the tackling racism in our country, we need to break ties with the royals.'
Mr Bandt also backed up controversial indigenous Greens senator Lidia Thorpe who called The Queen a 'coloniser' when swearing her oath of office.
'I sovereign, Lidia Thorpe, do solemnly and sincerely swear that I will be faithful and I bear allegiance to the colonising Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II,' she said.
Mr Albanese is also a republican and appointed a minister for the republic to eventually explore breaking Australia with the monarchy - but not the Commonwealth.
However, he made no mention of this aspiration in his statement or address to the nation, which had nothing but praise for The Queen.
In 1999, Australians narrowly voted against removing the queen, amid a row over whether her replacement would be chosen by members of parliament, not the public.
Polls show most Australians are in favour of being a republic, but there is little agreement on how a head of state should be chosen.
Abbie Chatfield used The Queen's death as an excuse to remind her fans of Britain's colonial history, and said the idea of Charles becoming king made her physically ill.
Without even getting out of bed on Friday morning, she began by saying The Queen's death was 'obviously sad' for the Royal Family, but swiftly moved on to criticising colonialism and the monarchy.
'[It's] obviously sad that someone has died, sad for her family. The colonialism, not great; the monarchy, not my favourite thing in the world,' she said.
'He isn't very kind or competent. I don't really know, and I haven't good things about Charles.'
'Also, it isn't [the] 1700s. "The King"? Ew! Ew! Oh, my God. I knew this day was coming, but I don't like it. "King Charles..."' she added, retching as if about to vomit.
TV presenter Em Rusciano had a more nuanced take, pointing out what The Queen represented was complicated even if she as a person was beloved.
The comedian said people should be allowed to react to Her Majesty's death in their own way, contrasting her late grandmother Denise's love for The Queen with the pain indigenous people felt from colonialism.
'She represented so many conflicting and some unforgivable legacies. Today we must also consider our First Nations peoples and what this represents for them,' she said.
'Much will be debated today and moving forward around her family and what they’ve done throughout the years, and I imagine there will be some policing of people’s grief.
'On both sides, those who mourn her and those who mourn what her institution has done. To that I say, let everyone do it their way.'
Rusciano finished on a positive note by praising The Queen's more than 70 years of serve and the extraordinary example she set.
'The Queen was an extraordinary example of service, stoicism and endurance that we’re not likely to see again,' she said.
'She held on until the UK had a new PM and even met with Liz Truss the day of her death in Balmoral. She reigned so long she attained single name, icon diva status.'
In a similar vein, indigenous professor Sandy O'Sullivan at 7.36am described The Queen as the 'architect' of colonialism who built her wealth on 'pain and suffering'.
The Macquarie University professor of Indigenous Studies wrote that the late monarch failed to intervene to protect Aboriginal Australians from harm.
'For those saying we should be magnanimous about the passing of the queen, a reminder that the queen inserted herself into the lives of Indigenous people here multiple times,' they wrote.
'She wasn't a bystander to the effects of colonisation and colonialism, she was an architect of it.
'Demanding Indigenous people be respectful about the passing of someone who intentionally made our lives worse is outrageous. It's worth considering what she *could* have done - and didn't - to effect change.
'At so many times across the 20th Century, she could have intervened and reset the relationship between Indigenous people and "the crown", because she had more than ceremonial power to do so. She did nothing.'
Professor O'Sullivan also accused The Queen of being an 'active participant in stealing' Aboriginal land.
'Instead of handing back, making reparations from her enormous wealth, her agents (that she had explicit control of, see "The Dismissal") continued to steal land and when they had it all, they stole our children,' they wrote.”
And, that is just a taste of what is to come; just wait to the woke lawyer class get heir hands on the mangled constitution. Nothing will be left. So, it is time for the ordinary person to get active.
Comments