The Greens

[Baltimore Jack]

If plain truth-telling is “radical”, then guilty as charged, Your Honour.

People saying the timing was highly inappropriate. Seemingly expecting us to ignore the fact of wall-to-wall examination of her legacy from every media outlet in the Anglosphere, and presumably plenty others as well.

If we’re going to discuss her legacy, and we clearly are, then let’s discuss it.

My guess is most sensible Australians are well over the performative mourning already.

The only thing we owe the dead, is the truth

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

And this is precisely why the world is up sh$# creek. There's another time to discuss peoples infamy in history than the day they die.

The Queen's powers are largely ceremonial - of course she has influence over the colonial agenda and benefits indirectly from stolen generational wealth (alongside several hundred million other mainly white people on the planet including me), but holding her culpable for British colonial wrongs (as terrible as they were especially by todays standards) is a big stretch especially when most of it happened before the Queen was even born.

My grandfathers were white anglo saxon, and benefitted financially from their ancestry and additionally both were racists by todays standards. Do I acknowledge this now? Yes. Did I announce their racism in the newspapers the day they died? No.

If you want to rate people on the basis of how evil they are, who is worse? The Queen or the current PMs/Presidents of China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, Pakistan, Brazil? You could possibly argue the Queen stoked sectarian violence simply by being the Queen but she hasn't actively advocated and ordered violence and economic theft like those others mentioned.

Couple of things. Not sure anyone is “holding her culpable” for the actions of her ancestors. Merely reminding us of how her mind-boggling wealth and privilege was a direct consequence of those lamentable actions.

And no, I’m sure you didn’t fill the newspapers with examinations of your grandparents’ outmoded attitudes, but I’ve no doubt those same newspapers weren’t packed to the gunwales with microscopic examination of their legacy either. If the media are going to run so hard on examining her life, people can’t complain when others join in with a few home truths.

 

[Gralin]

So you have no response then? Attacking me and not my argument?

That was a response to your argument

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Couple of things. Not sure anyone is “holding her culpable” for the actions of her ancestors. Merely reminding us of how her mind-boggling wealth and privilege was a direct consequence of those lamentable actions.

Correct. Not to mention colonialism was still happening during her reign. Her coronation predates the independence of every African country, and the Chagos Islands were stolen and its people permanently deported as late as 1969.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Correct. Not to mention colonialism was still happening during her reign. Her coronation predates the independence of every African country, and the Chagos Islands were stolen and its people permanently deported as late as 1969.

And her direct involvement in Iran, Iraq and Egypt

 

[sherb]

I find that tweet highly defensible.

i don't. And I voted Greens in May - and am not a monarchist either.

 

[sherb]

If plain truth-telling is “radical”, then guilty as charged, Your Honour.

People saying the timing was highly inappropriate. Seemingly expecting us to ignore the fact of wall-to-wall examination of her legacy from every media outlet in the Anglosphere, and presumably plenty others as well.

If we’re going to discuss her legacy, and we clearly are, then let’s discuss it.

My guess is most sensible Australians are well over the performative mourning already.

It was. You can at least let someone's body get cold before you go down the route that Bandt has gone, certainly in the case of someone who was loved by millions and was a symbol of the problem rather than being or causing that problem.

 

[sherb]

You think this is appropriate...



The Greens have to demonstrate they are a mainstream party. That's the tweet of the radical fringe considering the context (timing is everything).

Gotta call it the way you see it.

And I'm a strong supporter of financial repatriations and addressing the genocide committed by white Australians against First peoples. And as I said a lifelong Greens voter.

I align with this woman's views on a number of topics.

But "a racist empire built on stolen lives, land and wealth of colonised peoples."??

She is correct, but if that is what she objects to, is she not aware that by living in modern Australia she is benefitting from the same thing? Especially, if the Twitter feed is correct, she has three investment properties?

 

[Gralin]

I align with this woman's views on a number of topics.

But "a racist empire built on stolen lives, land and wealth of colonised peoples."??

She is correct, but if that is what she objects to, is she not aware that by living in modern Australia she is benefitting from the same thing? Especially, if the Twitter feed is correct, she has three investment properties?

She's correct but a hypocrite yeah?

 

[Gralin]

It was. You can at least let someone's body get cold before you go down the route that Bandt has gone, certainly in the case of someone who was loved by millions and was a symbol of the problem rather than being or causing that problem.

This erasure of modern British history to put all the colonialism in the past is pretty bad.
As is suggesting she was just some innocent figurehead who just happened to end up rich from other people's evils.

If the media coverage of this wasn't so clearly propaganda you'd have less need for people to be pointing out truths directly.

 

[Schneebly11]

It’s funny reading this thread.

The general vibe is “yeah what the Greens are saying is true, but they should be more politically correct and censor themselves”

The RW doesn’t have this problem. If they get a controversial loudmouth spouting off talking points ala Sky after dark then it’s “free speech, don’t be offended snowflake, telling it like it is, triggered”

 

[sherb]

She's correct but a hypocrite yeah?

She's appalled by a system that she is more than happy to benefit from, whilst criticizing others for.

So, yeah, I'd question her consistency on the subject.

 

[sherb]

This erasure of modern British history to put all the colonialism in the past is pretty bad.
As is suggesting she was just some innocent figurehead who just happened to end up rich from other people's evils.

If the media coverage of this wasn't so clearly propaganda you'd have less need for people to be pointing out truths directly.

Again, you can let someone's body get cold before going off on the wider implications of their life.

I have no issue with the comments made other than the appalling timing.

 

[Father Jack]

i don't. And I voted Greens in May - and am not a monarchist either.

Why? Condolences were offered, along with a bit of perspective. I think they've got the right to put their feelings out there, along with those who go over the top with their worship the monarchy.

 

[sherb]

Why? Condolences were offered, along with a bit of perspective. I think they've got the right to put their feelings out there, along with those who go over the top with their worship the monarchy.

Firstly, the rest of tweet make the "condolences" in the opening line look empty and insincere.

Then she rails against a system that she is more than happy to personally happy to be part of and, even worse, to benefit from.

Finally, my personal view is that immediately following the Queen's death is not the time to be discussing any wider issues.

 

[Schneebly11]

If plain truth-telling is “radical”, then guilty as charged, Your Honour.

People saying the timing was highly inappropriate. Seemingly expecting us to ignore the fact of wall-to-wall examination of her legacy from every media outlet in the Anglosphere, and presumably plenty others as well.

If we’re going to discuss her legacy, and we clearly are, then let’s discuss it.

My guess is most sensible Australians are well over the performative mourning already.

Definitely over it my friend and work group already. It was so inevitable it’s like “finally we can get all the news articles out of the way with”.

No grieving, no care.

What has pissed some off is parliament being given a two week break. C’mon, you only get two days of bereavement leave for a close family member, but two weeks for someone on the other side of the world we never met?

Australia is a far less British country now, about 95% Anglo Saxon heritage in the 50’s to about 50% and declining today. The monarchy is an anachronism and give it a year or so for this to settle down and the republic will be back on

 

[Johnny Bananas]

She is correct, but if that is what she objects to, is she not aware that by living in modern Australia she is benefitting from the same thing?

Of course she is. I'm sure she'd say that if she was asked. But what more do you expect her to do about Australian society in its present state? She's already trying to change things from within the existing political structure, towards a more just outcome.

Is this one of those arguments were people demand others leave the country if they want to criticise the country? Or that they must give up all wealth if they want to say anything about material injustice?

Especially, if the Twitter feed is correct, she has three investment properties?

Yes, she should sell at least one of those, given how it contributes to major societal problems (although I think one of her properties is in Pakistan). There's a lot of ill feeling about that, even from other Greens politicians.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02PhRuAGxep1CWKpp5qNcgSp9aQKLtdNUfYokr25KggwqoFyzs9fawxAZbU21ERwEDl&id=100044567673594

That said, it doesn't invalidate her point.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Again, you can let someone's body get cold before going off on the wider implications of their life.

I disagree, it's the best possible time, because that is the time people are talking about her legacy. Who says that this legacy must always be discussed in positive terms?

 

[sherb]

I disagree, it's the best possible time, because that is the time people are talking about her legacy. Who says that this legacy must always be discussed in positive terms?

Certainly not me, if you had read my posts.

 

[Gralin]

Again, you can let someone's body get cold before going off on the wider implications of their life.

I have no issue with the comments made other than the appalling timing.

Nope it's part of her legacy, if you're fine with the propaganda but not the truth that's a you problem.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Certainly not me, if you had read my posts.

Okay, then why did you say "Again, you can let someone's body get cold before going off on the wider implications of their life."? Or should people not discuss even the positive aspects of their legacy either?

 

[Gralin]

Of course she is. I'm sure she'd say that if she was asked. But what more do you expect her to do about Australian society in its present state? She's already trying to change things from within the existing political structure, towards a more just outcome.

Is this one of those arguments were people demand others leave the country if they want to criticise the country? Or that they must give up all wealth if they want to say anything about material injustice?


Yes, she should sell at least one of those, given how it contributes to major societal problems (although I think one of her properties is in Pakistan). There's a lot of ill feeling about that, even from other Greens politicians.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02PhRuAGxep1CWKpp5qNcgSp9aQKLtdNUfYokr25KggwqoFyzs9fawxAZbU21ERwEDl&id=100044567673594

That said, it doesn't invalidate her point.

The greens are still a capitalist party in general, they've got their share of tree tories and other capitalists.

 

[sherb]

Of course she is. I'm sure she'd say that if she was asked. But what more do you expect her to do about Australian society in its present state? She's already trying to change things from within the existing political structure, towards a more just outcome.

Is this one of those arguments were people demand others leave the country if they want to criticise the country? Or that they must give up all wealth if they want to say anything about material injustice?


Yes, she should sell at least one of those, given how it contributes to major societal problems (although I think one of her properties is in Pakistan). There's a lot of ill feeling about that, even from other Greens politicians.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02PhRuAGxep1CWKpp5qNcgSp9aQKLtdNUfYokr25KggwqoFyzs9fawxAZbU21ERwEDl&id=100044567673594

That said, it doesn't invalidate her point.

Getting out of politics would be a good start, where she is one of the elite, rich and/or privileged - ie a symbol of the very system she seems unhappy with.

(Ironically, she also had to swear an oath of alliegence to you know who as a politician).

Plenty of good work can be done towards societal change from the ground up, you don't have to be in politics to do that.

As I said, I actually voted Greens in May (in the lower house, second in the upper house) and this woman is coming increasingly across as a first-class fraud to me.

 

[sherb]

Okay, then why did you say "Again, you can let someone's body get cold before going off on the wider implications of their life."? Or should people not discuss even the positive aspects of their legacy either?

What i said (bolded) did NOT imply that "this legacy must always be discussed in positive terms?"

How the hell did you draw that conclusion? "Wider implications of their life" would clearly cover ALL implications - both positive and negative.

Geezus.

 

[sherb]

Nope it's part of her legacy, if you're fine with the propaganda but not the truth that's a you problem.

I said I had no issue with the comments made, only the timing. You are deliberately lying about my position.

Piss poor for a moderator. Do better.