Australian senators have voted to censure an Indigenous colleague who yelled at King Charles III during a reception in Parliament House last month.

Summary

Australian senators censured Senator Lidia Thorpe for her outburst against King Charles III during his visit, calling him a colonizer and demanding land and reparations. Thorpe defended her actions, stating she would repeat them if Charles returned.

    • stoly@lemmy.worldEnglish
      61·
      2 months ago

      They are not independent. They are under the rule of the crown. 4-5 years ago the governor of Australia, who reports to the crown, dissolved parliament.

      • Not a replicant@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        2 months ago

        The G-G dissolves parliament every time the Prime Minister (PM) advises them to do so. I think you don’t grok the situation here, constitutionally speaking.

        1. The King (or Queen) of Australia has powers defined in our constitution. They can’t issue commands at will.
        2. The King appoints the Governor-General (GG) on the advice of the PM
        3. The King delegates their powers to the GG
        4. The GG acts on the advice of the PM, to approve legislation (royal assent), and to dissolve parliament when the time comes. Also, awarding honors and some other non-political stuff. Head of state duties like greeting and hosting other heads of state.
        5. The GG does not seek permission or even advice from the King. Delegation of powers doesn’t mean the GG may exercise those powers, it means they must exercise those powers. That’s an important difference.
        6. There are reserve powers, “break glass only in emergency” powers. One of those is to sack the government. It’s happened once in living memory, in 1975, when the elected government couldn’t pass funding bills and the government was about to run out of money (sound familiar?). That’s one of the few triggers where the reserve powers can be used. They can’t be used for just anything. Sacking the government also means a full election, upper and lower house.
        7. The GG doesn’t report to the crown (King or Queen) in the sense you mean. There’s no “list of things I did today” and the King then sends back an “approved” stamp.
    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
      105·
      2 months ago

      No one said he had any power.

      That doesn’t mean he’s deserving of the title of king over the people who’s land was taken from them. I’m not sure why you are insisting he is.

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyzEnglish
          72·
          2 months ago

          He could simply not go play king in Australia. If you don’t want to be king of a country your ancestors forcibly colonized, you can just not. None of this is an obligation.

            • Zaktor@sopuli.xyzEnglish
              32·
              2 months ago

              That other villains exist in the story of the British empire doesn’t matter to whether he has to play king in Australia. It’s not a duty and he’s not a put upon civil servant. If he actually agreed that his position was illegitimate he could simply say so and stop performing it, with no meaningful loss to the world. But he’s a rich douche who’s happy to ride on his inherited privilege and claim to bestow his special personage to people across the world. People calling him illegitimate is the right and proper response to him pretending he has some special place in Australian society.

                • Zaktor@sopuli.xyzEnglish
                  2·
                  2 months ago

                  You can always blame the monarchy for perpetuating the monarchy. “They didn’t, as a whole, proactively reject our bullshit” doesn’t mean they have to keep doing the bullshit. Everyone has agency, stop pretending one of the richest and most privileged people in the world just doesn’t have any other choice.

                  He doesn’t have to abdicate, he can just stop pretending he’s special. Tell them “no thank you, I don’t think my role as king of a colony is appropriate”. Let’s see that democracy you think loves monarchy pass a measure to depose an absent king and choose a successor. The monarchy exists because people are lazy and just let it keep existing, not because they’re deeply devoted to maintaining this dumb farce. But he’s not going to do that, not because he cares about democracy, but because he believes he’s special and is happy to tour “his” colonies.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  31·
                  2 months ago

                  If Aussies want to get rid of the monarchy then they can.

                  Quiz question: are indigenous people the majority in Australia?