Royalist Fault Lines in Australia
Volatile Fault Lines
The state funded Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC)
ABC News had published, on May 6 2023 on its news web site a video entitled: The
Coronation: A discussion about the Monarchy in 2023.
This video is an abridged version of the live broadcast
which aired on ABC TV that commenced hours before the Coronation ceremony of
King Charles III.
The ABC on-line declared the goal of the video as follows:
“As we approach the Coronation of King Charles, we look
at the role and relevancy of the Monarchy for Australia and the Commonwealth.”
The ABC’s coverage of the Coronation that evening included
two hosts, the journalists Julia Baird and Jeremy Fernandez, and included nine
guests.
The panel guests included Liberal MP and Monarchist Julian
Leeser, Journalist Stan Grant, Australian Republic Movement co-chair Craig
Foster, monarchist and writer Kathy Lette, lawyer Teela Reid, 2023 Australian
Local Hero of the Year Amar Singh, youth advocate Angelica Ojinnaka,
constitutional law professor Anne Twomey, and journalist Juliet Rieden.
In the opening remarks the two hosts made the following
remarks:
“For many around the world including here in Australia
this Coronation attracts interest curiosity and invokes a sense of celebration
and there are others who are not entirely onboard or who consider it a pure
anachronism and some who consider the history of empire a serious blot on the Crown.
It’s not necessarily surprising Australia’s relationship
to its own past remains unresolved but the ties that bind us to the United
Kingdom remain strong.
In the coming hours we will discuss what the monarchy
means to Australians today after successive waves of invasion and immigration
and if the Crown still fits in the telling of our own ancient story of
nationhood.”
Having viewed this discussion, I will say that it was
conducted in a respectful manner even though the participants clearly expressed
their views. I have to say some of the issues raised were discomfiting. Stan
Grant’s, from an indigenous perspective observations and views were the basis
of much of the uproar. Nonetheless the
discussion was worthwhile in terms of national healing and was essential in
itself.
I have attached a link to the abridged version of the
programme in the References section below. I recommend you have a look and
judge for yourself.
Before I discuss the fallout generated by the programme, I
would like to point out that the discordant views expressed in the ABC programme
was not limited to Australia only.
The Daily Mail Australia published an article on May 7, 2023
entitled: New York Times claims King Charles' Coronation 'arrived with
little fanfare and cringing discomfort' (while rest of the world said it went
off rather well)
The article ascribed to MAILONLINE REPORTER opens with the
following observation about the Coronation Ceremony of Charles III:
"Papers from Europe to America and Australia ran coverage
of the pomp and ceremony while international broadcasters beamed pictures of
the pageantry into televisions back home.”
MAILONLINE then makes the following interesting observation
that highlights a deviation from this media narrative:
“But not all of the world's media recognised the profound
and historic event. The New York Times decided to use the seminal moment in
British history to call on 'efforts to cut ties' between the monarchy and the
Commonwealth nations.
In their attempt to sum up today's 1,000-year-old
ceremony, the American paper labelled the Coronation a 'cringing discomfort'
and claimed it 'arrived with little fanfare'.”
These comments in MAILONLINE’s view demonstrates the New
York Times’ “blotting of Britain”. MAILONLINE draws our attention to other
confrontational assaults by the New York Times:
“On a day when Britain's best was put on display for the
world to see - fit with military processions, ancient royal carriages, and
traditions that date back ceremonies - the paper then said Britain's 'history
tends to be romanticised'.”
MAILONLINE provided more examples of the New York Times’
bias:
"The New York Times has sought to paint a bleak picture of
the UK in much of its other reporting too, having previously described the NHS
as on 'life support', public transport 'spluttering' and food banks 'at
breaking point'.”
In decrying the New York Times’ alleged haughty ignorance of
life in the United Kingdom (UK) MAILONLINE is either denying the truth about
the conditions of the people in the UK or it shows how out of touch MAILONLINE
is with the economic reality in the UK as it relates to wages, inflation,
interest rates, the provision public services,
infrastructure and the rise of poverty.
Apart from all this indignation MAILONLINE does mention one
very important aspect of the New York Times’ commentary:
“In an article published ahead of the Coronation…. the
American paper claimed that 'relations between the British monarchy and its
distant realms has come to an end'.”
This article, entitled Why So Many Nations in the King’s Realm
Want to Say Goodbye was published on May 5, 2023 and written by Daniel
Cave. Mr. Cave made the following observations:
“Whether through a hard break or a soft fade in ties, nations that have kept the British monarch as their head of state are moving toward separation.... The era of warm, wave-and-smile relations between the British monarchy and its distant realms has come to an end. Many of the former colonies that still formally swear allegiance to King Charles III are accelerating efforts to cut ties with the crown and demanding restitution and a deeper reckoning with the empire that the royal family has come to represent.”
In the light of Mr. Caves’ observation MAINLINE reported:
“The Times claimed Charles III has been placed in a
'vexing position' that he was on a 'volatile fault line'.”
This brings us back to the controversy over the Coronation
ceremony and the role of the Monarchy that is playing out in one of these “distant
realms”, namely the Commonwealth of Australia. This controversy unleashed
as a result of the ABC is a good example of the, what MAINLINE reports as the “vexing
position” King Charles III is in fact in.
On May 7, 2023 the
Daily Mail Online published an article, written by Jesse Hyland and Olivia Day
(the correspondents) for the Daily Mail Australia entitled: “Furious
monarchist group threatens to 'take action' against the ABC over its coverage
of King Charles III's Coronation – as Neil Mitchell slams broadcaster for
'totally misreading the mood'”
These correspondents reported that on May 6 the ABC in a:
“…. Two-hour
special on Saturday focused heavily on the impact colonisation had on
Indigenous Australians and people of colour.”
The correspondents quote the words of the AML national chair
Philip Benwell:
“Our legal advisers are preparing a formal complaint to
the board of the ABC in regard to the production and airing of Saturday's
extremely biased pre-Coronation programme specifically designed to attack the
Constitution and the Crown.”
According to the correspondents Mr. Benwell complained by
saying:
“So vitriolic are their attacks on the King, the
monarchy, the British settlement and everything that came thereafter that they
forget that they are the very people who want our vote for their Voice to the
Parliament.”
Mr. Benwell’s vitriolic defence of the Crown by drawing our
attention to the “Voice” simply reveals an astonishing level of insensitivity
with respect to Australian Democracy and the attempt by the Australian
Parliament and civil society to address outstanding issues relating to the
status and role of the indigenous communities in Australia.
The correspondents relate how:
“Mr. Benwell said the group welcomed 'pertinent comments from members' [presumably AML members] about the broadcast that would help in compiling their formal complaint. This should include specific comments made during the programme by interviewers and panelists. 'To have only one of four panellists as supporters of our existing constitutional arrangements meant there was little opportunity for a panel discussion that reflected the warmth and respect Australians have for King Charles,' he said.”
The correspondents go on to report “The outrage was also
reflected on social media, with a number of viewers lambasting the ABC over the
two-hour special.”
To support this, they provide a long list of comments taken
from social media that expresses the warmth and respect of Australians for the
Monarchy.
Here is an example provided by the correspondents. They
quote one individual as saying:
“Tried to watch it on #ABCNews but they have on
commentators that are just talking non-stop about the evils of the monarchy
& the wrongs they've done to Australia.”
Then another:
“Can coverage get back to the Coronation please? We don't
want your Voice/Republic propaganda.”
The correspondents however, correctly report on positive
viewer comments such as this comment:
“'ABC coverage of the Coronation has gotten off to an
excellent start by putting First Nations perspectives on colonisation and
empire front and centre.”
The correspondents, quote an ABC spokesperson as saying:
“The role of the national broadcaster is to facilitate conversations that reflect the diversity of views in the community.... Hearing from Indigenous Australians and reflecting on Australia's history is an important part of this, especially as this year Australians will vote in a referendum on whether a First Nations Voice to Parliament should be included in the nation's Constitution.”
There is no doubt that the ABC, as a publicly funded news
media platform is working within its charter in this regard, highlighting the
shrill knee-jerk reactions of Mr. Benwell and a list of social media
commentators cannot detract from this.
As an aside, the ABC published an article, written by
political reporter George Hitch on March 23, 2023 entitled: Voice to
Parliament referendum question and constitutional amendment announced
Mr. Hitch reported that the Prime Minister of Australia,
Anthony Albanese has said that Referendum Working Group has arrived at the
following question:
“A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise
the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?”
Mr. Hitch then went on to inform ABC readers:
“As well as that, it will be put to Australians that the
constitution be amended to include a new chapter titled "Recognition of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.”
Mr. Hitch also related to reader the emotional import of
this as follows:
“Mr. Albanese made a tearful plea to Australians to support the Voice, saying it would help achieve better outcomes for First Nations people.... ‘If not now, when? This is an opportunity that doesn't belong to the [politicians], it belongs to every Australian equally,’ he said.”
In the light of this Mr. Benwell’s lambasting of “…the
very people who want our vote for their Voice” has nothing to do with the
role of Monarchy in the Constitution. Mr. Benwell, on the contrary damages the
reputation of the AML and reveals what looks like a degree of cynicism. I am
surprised that the correspondents did not call out Mr. Benwell’s comment.
The Guardian’s reporting of this controversy is also
interesting:
The Guardian online platform published an article on May 8,
2023 written by Josh Butler entitled: Australian monarchists accuse ABC of
‘despicable’ coverage of King Charles’s coronation.
Mr. Butler does not comment on Mr. Benwell’s comments
concerning the referendum.
Mr. Butler did call out the racist overtones resulting from Mr.
Benwell’s vitriol by reporting some of the more measured comments made by
monarchist and liberal MP Julian Leeser, one of the panelists of the ABC
programme:
“Liberal MP Julian Leeser was also critical, saying only
a quarter of his fellow panelists booked by the broadcaster were monarchists.
Leeser also condemned criticism of journalist Stan Grant [another guest on the
panel], who was the target of racist abuse following his contributions to the
coverage…. But Leeser said he was disturbed about the commentary around Grant’s
appearance. Grant, a Wiradjuri man, received abuse online – much of it
race-based – following criticisms of the monarchy.”
At the end of the day the ABC was working in accordance with
its charter. Unfortunately, the AML’s Mr. Benwell only served to lower the
level of political and democratic discourse in Australia. The MAILONLINE narrative
about the New York Times only serves to highlight the fault lines that Charles
III needs to straddle.
The legitimacy of the Crown, because of the fault lines
described above is under challenge. Monarchist supporters cannot afford to
ignore these discordant voices by seeking to limit the discourse. There is no
doubt that Queen Elizabeth the II positively contributed to the legitimacy of
the British Crown during her Reign. King Charles III needs to maintain this
legitimacy and pass it on to his heirs. Relying on a romanticized past in this
age of instability and rising inequality is not enough. The fault lines are
widening and it is time that King Charles III and his monarchist supporters
demonstrate the relevance of the Crown by showing how this institution could
play a role in healing divisions both in the UK and distant realms. In the meantime,
the discordant voices would continue to question the role and relevance of the Crown
in Australia and other Commonwealth Constitutional Monarchies including the
United Kingdom.
References
The
Coronation: A discussion about the Monarchy in 2023 - ABC News
Why
So Many Nations in the King’s Realm Want to Say Goodbye - The New York Times
(nytimes.com)
Voice
to Parliament referendum question and constitutional amendment announced - ABC
News
Comments
Post a Comment