NathanJ

I very much doubt that either senator will moderate their behaviour as a result of the censure motions – in fact, given the nature of their ideologies and supporters, they probably welcome the explicit disapproval of more conventional and decent politicians. Transgressive contrarianism is part of both of their political brands, albeit from different parts of the ideological spectrum.

However, in both cases their behaviour deserved to be condemned. The censure motions were appropriate. Censorship – trying to prevent them from expressing their opinions – would be an entirely different thing that I would fiercely oppose.

I think one of the problems in our political discourse is that we have lost sight of the difference between things we ought not to do – in this case, the despicable behaviour of both senators – and things we ought to be prevented from doing, which is what censorship would entail. So let’s censure, not censor, offensive behaviour.

My only concern abut the motions is that, apparently for reasons beyond their control, neither senator was present to defend themselves. Natural justice would suggest they should have been there to present their sides of the argument.

Hi AC,

I think it awful that you copped a lap full of Fanta and were treated rudely. I hope the kid learns a few manners and skills. On the positive side I am amazed at how places like KFC and Maccas can be run by a bunch of kids.

.

Dear Paaul,

.

You wrote :

« What is disrespect? It implies subservience to some higher authority eg 'The child was disrespectful to its mother." if you don't recognise that authority to begin with, how can you disrespect it. Then there is "disruptive", disruptive in what way? Upsetting the social order. This whole episode reeks of class authority and class distinction, which I don't hold with. providing Thorpe was not violent, although she could well argue that Charles represents a regime that was extremely violent towards her people, then there is nothing to worry about.

… if I met Lidia Thorpe I would congratulate her for the courage she shows in attempting to highlight very important issues, that are not being properly addressed by "polite" society »
.

Once again, Paul, I sympathise with your indignation, and I understand Lidia Thorpe’s revolt.

She is, and, apparently, always has been a particularly virulent activist. Her father says she is a “very racist person” even though she has English and Irish ancestry as well as Aboriginal.

She describes herself as “a straight shooter, straight talker”.

“So, you know, we all have our own lives and our own complications, but I’m a loving person, and I’m genuinely wanting to bring this country together”.

"What do you want me to be like? Do you want me to be like Pauline Hanson, do you want me to be like Jacinta Price? You know, what’s a good model politician that you want me to be like?" she said in the interview posted on Anzac Day."

“They want me to resign, and this is what they do to people to shut them down. I'm not going to be shut down. I'm there for five years and I came into that place because I want to get justice, real justice for Blak fellas in the country.”

She has been condemned by her peers for disrespectful and disruptive behaviour. That is the least they could do. In my opinion, it is also all they could do.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

Allow me, simply to disagree with your definition of disrespect and your qualification of the incident as an episode of “class authority and class distinction”.

It seems to me that disrespect does not necessarily imply subservience to some higher authority as you suggest. I consider that a mother may be just as disrespectful to the child as the child may be disrespectful to the mother. I don’t see disrespect as a question of authority but of discourtesy and lack of consideration for others, of their rights and quietude.

Nor would I qualify the episode as “class authority and class distinction”. I see it as a volent protest of the foreign invasion and confiscation of her Abriginal peoples' sovereign territory committed by the British.

.

At first I thought that the Thorpe / King spectacle was not at all a good look.
As time passes however, the less I care.

By default, I have to stand up for Australians not foreigners, so if Lidia wants to take some foreigner to task in defence of Australian interests, then it really doesn't have anything to do with me.

The royals have become so pathetic that anything to do with them reeks of a paid-for publicity campaign to keep them relevant, it's sad.

And I think what she did would've earned her a lot of clout.
Every indigenous in the country will be saying:
'We're grateful for what you've done for us standing up to the king like that sis'
She probably earns more respect amongst her own for her 'stuff the system' attitude, rather than being someone who passively tries to work within it.

Hi BP,

I agree with several of your remarks, I don't deny Lidia Thorpe is racists, racism isn't based on colour, its based on prejudice, and Thorpe is certainly prejudice in favour of her people. I also agree with;

“So, you know, we all have our own lives and our own complications, but I’m a loving person, and I’m genuinely wanting to bring this country together”.

That's the ideal, but any cause of significance needs those on the fringe to be jumping up and down and demanding action to receive justice. I believe the "No" vote at the referendum did more to harm the advancement of justice for Aboriginal people than any number of bigoted white racists could ever do. Saying that, I don't believe the majority of "No" voters would see themselves as racist, just the opposite.

"Disrespect" I watched that whole episode on telly and for me it reeked of what I'll call "classism". No matter how one paints it, no matter the amount of feel good platitudes extended, King Charles personifies class distinction within society, and class distinction is a root cause of racisms.

cont