In recent weeks, Senator Lidia Thorpe has faced mounting criticism and calls for her resignation after a highly publicized protest against King Charles at the Australian Parliament House. During the King’s speech, which was intended to address key issues of national unity and reconciliation, Thorpe interrupted the proceedings with a heated outburst. She shouted, “You are not my king!” and “Give us our land back!” Her words, aimed at challenging the legitimacy of the monarchy in Australia, have sparked intense backlash, with some labeling her actions as “disgusting” and inappropriate for a member of Parliament.
Thorpe’s protest was seen by many as a bold stand for Indigenous rights, highlighting longstanding grievances related to land ownership and the treatment of Indigenous Australians. As a well-known advocate for Indigenous issues, Thorpe has often used her platform to bring attention to the struggles of her community. Her supporters argue that her actions, while controversial, were a necessary reminder of the painful history of colonization and the need for meaningful recognition of Indigenous sovereignty in Australia. They see her protest as a courageous act of resistance against an institution that has historically ignored the voices of Indigenous peoples.
However, her critics argue that there is a time and place for such protests, and many believe that interrupting the King’s speech was not appropriate. They contend that her actions were disrespectful and unbecoming of a senator, especially in a formal setting like Parliament. Several political figures and media commentators have condemned her behavior, describing it as a stunt that disrespects not only the King but also the institutions of democracy. Some have gone so far as to demand her resignation, claiming that her conduct undermines the dignity and decorum expected from an elected official.
The calls for Thorpe’s resignation have added fuel to an already heated debate over the role of monarchy in modern Australia and the place of Indigenous rights in national discourse. Many see this incident as part of a larger, ongoing conversation about Australia’s colonial history and its impact on Indigenous communities. The controversy surrounding Thorpe’s protest has brought to the forefront questions about freedom of speech, the right to protest, and the limits of acceptable behavior for public officials.
While the backlash has been strong, Thorpe has remained defiant, refusing to apologize for her actions. In interviews, she has reiterated her stance, emphasizing that her protest was a call for justice and an attempt to hold the monarchy accountable for its historical role in the colonization of Indigenous lands. Thorpe’s supporters continue to rally behind her, emphasizing the importance of keeping these issues in the public eye, even if it means challenging norms and traditions.
This incident has also highlighted the deep divisions within Australian society regarding the legacy of the British monarchy and the ongoing struggles of Indigenous Australians. To many, Lidia Thorpe’s protest was a necessary act of defiance, a reminder that the wounds of the past are still very much a part of the present. To others, however, her actions represented a step too far, crossing the line of what is considered respectful discourse in a democratic setting.
As the debate continues, it remains to be seen whether the calls for Thorpe’s resignation will gain traction or if her protest will instead ignite a deeper conversation about the future of Australia’s relationship with the monarchy and its responsibility toward Indigenous peoples. What is certain is that Lidia Thorpe’s actions have left a lasting impression on the political landscape, forcing many to confront uncomfortable questions about history, power, and justice.