by ALEXANDER VOLTZ – WHEN we consider which eminent citizen amongst us we might place our trust in if Australia were ever to become a republic, I can think of no better candidate for the office of President than Senator Lidia Alma Thorpe.
Thorpe is the model Australian. She is articulate, mature, humble, and her arguments are reinforced by an indomitable intelligence and enlightened moral compass.
- The Greens are a gaggle of narcissistic, pseudo-moral mediocrities, charlatans and sycophants.
- The central tenet of its hateful ideology is the accumulation of power.
- They are the first political Party in our nation’s history to weaponise compassion.
Having only declared bankruptcy once, and having first been elected to the Australian Senate without a single vote cast in her name, her achievements speak for themselves. She is, unquestionably, without equal, and the finest of us all.
Or at least she was until she pulled her latest stunt.
PRAYER
Last Monday, senators were sworn into the Parliament of Australia – a new practice for some, a familiar protocol for others. Debutante President of the Senate, Labor’s Sue Lines – who only recently showcased impartiality by advocating for Parliament’s abolition of the Lord’s Prayer – called forth Senator Thorpe to swear the Oath of Allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, her heirs, and her successors according to law.
Conscious of the great constitutional duty she was about to undertake, Thorpe pumped a fist into the air and waddled down to the clerk.
Initially, I thought that this fisted gesture, which was to be maintained throughout the entirety of Thorpe’s recitation, was offered uncontrollably: Thorpe was so overcome by the prospect of swearing loyalty to our great Sovereign that her appendage erected in ecstasy.
How wrong I was.
With such performance as to shame even the Royal Shakespeare Company, Thorpe declared, “I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to the colonising Queen Elizabeth the Second”.
The Senate cameras record parliamentarians nervously glancing toward Sue Lines.
“Senator Thorpe, you are required to recite the Oath as printed on the card,” the president instructed. If she was issuing a reprimand, it wasn’t a very stern one.
After hesitating and with a final countenance that if exhibited in the corporate world would result in dismissal, Thorpe eventually completed the Oath.
Apparently, people want more integrity in the Parliament of Australia. It seems to me that such might be achieved by reminding elected representatives that when they swear the Oath of Allegiance, they should bloody well mean it.
Even more reprehensible, however, was a sympathetic comment made during Thorpe’s hesitation from Labor’s Louise Pratt: “None of us like it”. Meaning, “None of us like swearing allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II”.
SWEARING
So, Senator Pratt, you don’t like swearing the Oath of Allegiance to your Sovereign and, thus, the head of the democratic assembly you serve?
You don’t like engaging in the practices and traditions of the Parliament of Australia? Then get out. Get out and go do something else – that is if you can find an employer willing to tolerate your ignorant, entitled ingratitude.
Let’s go through things one step at a time.
Firstly, on the accusation levelled against Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, By the Grace of God Queen of Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth: I addressed this only recently.
Elizabeth II’s closest actual brush with colonisation was her tuning in for Neil Armstrong’s stroll on the moon.
On the principle of the matter expressed by Senator Thorpe, I state for the benefit of all, King George III’s 1787 instructions to Governor Arthur Philip:
“You are to endeavour by every possible means to open an Intercourse with the Natives and to conciliate their affections, enjoining all Our Subjects to live in amity and kindness with them. And if any of Our Subjects shall wantonly destroy them, or give them any unnecessary Interruption in the exercise of their several occupations. It is our Will and Pleasure that you do cause such offenders to be brought to punishment according to the degree of the Offence.”
No one with any academic credibility would be so audacious to accuse the most progressive, humanitarian civilisation in modern history of racism.
We’re talking about a society that was not only the first of its kind to outlaw slavery, but a society that then spent fifty years sacrificing its own peoples to bring an end to the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade.
As a colonial nation, the Commonwealth of Australia is predicated upon Britain’s Anglo-Saxon laws and customs, as well as Judaeo-Christian morality.
In so doing, it has achieved, as best it can, common wealth for all its peoples.
And I say peoples, plural, because this country is multicultural – but that doesn’t mean it should become a republic, or start enshrining ethnic minorities into its Constitution.
As far as I can tell, Lidia Thorpe and her followers think Australia is a greedy, racist, sexist, homophobic, genocidal nightmare that should be dismantled – but if we’ve supposedly got it so wrong, can someone please explain to me why immigration is at an all-time high?
Let me be absolutely clear: Thorpe is a disgusting representation of a very loud, very dangerous minority within our country.
Underpinning this minority is not race, gender or any other physical or cultural trait, but rather a Fabian-style manifesto that is, at its core, anarchistic.
This minority cares for nothing other than its self-preservation. It has no respect for the past and for what afforded it the great privileges that it so ignorantly enjoys today.
The central tenet of its hateful ideology is the accumulation of power, so that with that power it can not only achieve material success but a platform to secure its future through indoctrination.
One needs only consider the appalling state of Australia’s education system to comprehend this reality. The ideological and commercial abuses of the tertiary sector are vile.
It is a minority that is embodied in the Federal Parliament by the Australian Greens, a gaggle of narcissistic, pseudo-moral mediocrities, tyrannical demagogues, charlatans and sycophants, all of whom are purely focused on winning elections, virtue-signalling and inflating their own egos.
If there is any genuine authenticity amongst the Greens’ ranks, it is lost to the never-ending charade of hypocrisy and victimhood that the Party perpetuates.
WEAPONISE
The Greens are the first political Party in our nation’s history to weaponise compassion. For that alone, they are an unequivocally abhorrent institution.
Offended, Adam Bandt? I don’t care. It’s time to call a spade a spade and say what this country needs to hear.
As for Senator Pratt’s comment – “none of us like it” – she should speak for herself. There are half a million Australians who have served or are currently serving in our defence forces, and virtually none of them are protesting over swearing loyalty to Her Majesty.
I suppose it stands to reason that an Oath of Allegiance might mean something more to those Australians who fully recognise it could get them killed.
On the question of the Lord’s Prayer, there is no justifiable reason to abandon its recitation in Parliament.
Yes, Australia is not a theocratic State, but it is as I have already written predicated upon Judaeo-Christian morals and teachings.
Virtually every Western legal code in practise has, at its heart, the Ten Commandments.
We also can’t ignore the unique Preamble to the Constitution:
“Whereas the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the Constitution hereby established.”
The Lord’s Prayer doesn’t just metaphorically link the business of Parliament to our Constitution.
More importantly, it reminds politicians that they must do good, ethical work for their constituents, that they must be merciful, and, above all, that they are fallible and corruptible.
CHRISTIAN
It doesn’t matter if you’re a Christian or an atheist; the meaning of the text remains the same.
Cosmetic reform must be set aside. The government and the opposition have to work together to defeat the real enemy in the room: The Australian Greens and the minority from which it stems. Both the Australian Labor Party and the Liberal-National Coalition have proud histories and strong values.
Remember those values, serve your constituents, reengage in honest and erudite debate, and unite to destroy the Green threat against our Constitution and our democracy.
And as for Lidia Thorpe, I simply say this: How dare you, of all people, attack the character and legacy of Queen Elizabeth II.
Who do you think you are? You should at the very least resign.
Take Pratt and your spiteful attitude, which is of no benefit to our democracy, with you.
The taxpayer has no interest in funding your juvenile, ill-informed behaviour.PC
– Alexander Voltz
Australian Monarchist League
Mr Voltz outlines the shenanigans surrounding the errant Senator very well. It is rather extraordinary that some commenting others (a certain Mr Jones for example) apparently have no notion of how, in practice, Australia is in fact governed, zealously overwhelmed as they are by ignorant prejudices. In any argument it helps to start with facts, one of which is that an a-political, spotlessly neutral, practised and experienced sovereign suitably distanced from day to day political scrummage can act as a unifier to all shades of societal life and by sheer existence retain control over the structure of government through the protection of the Constitution. Our armed forces, our judiciary etc and, we would hope, our politicians swear loyalty to this neutral figure so that they can argue and fight their political corners within the rule of law.
The intemperate outbursts of blinkered bigots against this system are but noises off. Argue by all means but don’t shout nonsense. Thank you Mr Voltz.
Great let’s get some facts straight.
To whom does the Monarch’s representative answer, if not the monarch?
This insult to us all is elected and tax payer funded and she flys all over and sits in Qantas Members Lounge , wears flash leather outfits and is an insult to all Australians and like The Greens she and they are Domestic Terrorists and nothing more .
What it insulting is a foreign monarch reigning over us, and you gutless so called Australians telling us it’s all we deserve.
But what is amusing is ponding how you monarchists will update your lines, given the Crown’s despicable collaboration with Morrison.
Will you still squeal about a ‘Politicians Republic’?
Will you still claim it is ‘Not Broken’?
Don’t try to be satirical – you’re not a good enough writer. The points you make don’t need it. Just make them.
Something to think about, that the High Court of Australia replaced appeals by Australian citizens to the Privy Court in the UK a long time ago.
Privy Council (court).
The crown is meant to be a check and a balance.
It has immense powers.
But those powers have become totally illegitimate, because both the monarch and her appointed representative are unelected and unaccountable. So politicians abuse the powers, and get away with it, while the crown whimpers it’s not their fault because they must do as they are told by politicians.
Such is life in the Politician’s Monarchy.
Well, well, well. Hasn’t this Morrison fiasco shown up the crown.
The unelected representative of the unaccountable monarch was too gutless to stand up to a politician.
So was played the fool. And seen the integrity of the crown trashed.
Such is life in the Politician’s Monarchy.
This fiasco has exposed the crown as a pathetic joke.
I wonder, what does the so-called Queen of Australia think?
Let me guess:
Not my fault. Not my problem. Just like 1975.
Governor General David Hurley has confirmed Mr Morrison administered additional ministries during the last term of Parliament.
In a statement to Sky News Australia, a spokesperson for His Excellency said the appointments to the three extra portfolios were “made consistently” with Section 64 of the Constitution.
“It is not uncommon for Ministers to be appointed to administer departments other than their portfolio responsibility,” the spokesperson said.
“These appointments do not require a swearing-in ceremony – the Governor-General signs an administrative instrument on the advice of the Prime Minister.
“Questions around appointments of this nature are a matter for the government of the day and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
“Similarly, the decision whether to publicise appointments to administer additional portfolios is a matter for the government of the day.”
Nineteen seperate countries have abandoned the British crown during the current monarch’s (apparently fabulous) reign. Zero have joined.
But it’s not just the British monarchy that is collapsing.
No new monarchies are being created.
No new countries are joining existing monarchies.
No country has ever discarded monarchy then returned.
It is all one way traffic.
Research: Commonwealth of Nations, the former British Empire, and the member nations now in 2022.
The republics in the Commonwealth of Nations are the sovereign states in the organisation with a republican form of government. As of June 2022, 36 out of the 56 member states were republics. Elizabeth II, who is the reigning monarch in the Commonwealth realms, is also still the titular Head of the Commonwealth (but not the head of the members of the Commonwealth) in a personal capacity. This role does not carry with it any power; instead, it is a symbol of the free association of Commonwealth members.[1]
Except for Gabon, the former Portuguese possession of Mozambique and the former Belgian trust territory of Rwanda, and Togo, they are all former British (or partly British) colonies or self-governing colonies that have evolved into republics. Most of the Commonwealth’s members achieved independence while keeping the British monarch as their own individual head of state (in a form of personal union) and later became republics within the Commonwealth by abolishing the monarchy. In some other instances, the countries became republics after achieving independence from other former British colonies (as, for example, Bangladesh did from Pakistan in 1971 as a result of the Bangladesh Liberation War).
Wikipedia
UMM the UN,WHO WEF ???? They are the NWO monarchy that many have and are joining and it is not good for any of us .
“Both the Australian Labor Party and the Liberal-National Coalition have proud histories and strong values.”
I guess that’s why 30% of Australians either voted informally at the last election or simply didn’t turn up.
Most countries get nowhere near a 70% voter turn out you tool.
We are not talking about “most countries”; we are talking about Australia.
(I know it’s very difficult for you, but please try and keep up).
Most countries do not have compulsory voting and many, UK for example, have no preferential system of voting, first past the post or primary votes only required.
If is primary school straw man debating tactics- pick a ridiculous person, then claim we must not change because [ridiculous person] might get the job.
It is so juvenile.
But worse, it is yet another example of the monarchist’s main argument: that Australia is too to stupid and can not be trusted without a foreign monarch.
“[…] Australia is too to stupid and can not be trusted without a foreign monarch.”
If we took you as being an exemplar of the average Australian, we would conclude that Australians are too stupid to be allowed to vote, never mind any considerations regarding foreign monarchs.
If the system works, and it works in Australia, don’t change it. The Monarchy is symbolic, it has no residual power. The Australia Act of 1986 removed all legal significance of the Monarchy.
The problem in Australia – and every other Western nation – are the left who are commies and traitors and should be treated as such. Problem is their great march through the institutions has been too successful and the MSM is now 90% leftie.
Your comments are ridiculous. The Monarchy has no legal input. Read the Australia Act. The value of the Monarchy is symbolic; they represent the great set of values we inherited from the British. Name one thing creatures like Thorpe have contributed.
Lurking behind all monarchist arguments is a gutless refusal to back Australia.
A foreign monarch is all we deserve. We cannot be trusted. We are too stupid.
Left to our own devices, we would pick a radical such as Ms Thorpe. That’s why we must outsource Australia’s sovereignty to a family of English aristocrats and allow a foreign monarch to reign over us as a birthright.
It is so utterly pathetic.
Nothing wrong with constitutional monarchy and a sovereign nation Australia.
You’re nuts. Thorpe is a commie and traitor. The Monarchy has no legal input and only has symbolic value since the Australia Act of 1986.