In Australia, it is customary to begin many formal occasions with an Acknowledgment of Country or Welcome to Country ceremony. These rituals honor the Traditional Custodians of the land and pay deep respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elders, recognizing their crucial role as carriers of wisdom and cultural knowledge. As part of this process, respect is routinely offered to Elders past, present, and emerging. This concept of reverence for Elders is an integral pillar in many Indigenous cultures, including those of Australia, and is extended as a courtesy across generations.
However, recent events have stirred the waters of this cultural protocol, highlighting a potential contradiction in how respect for Elders is applied across different cultural or racial groups. On October 21, 2024, Senator Lidia Thorpe, a vocal Indigenous rights advocate, launched an expletive-filled tirade against King Charles III, an Elder in his own right by virtue of his role as the reigning monarch of the United Kingdom and a figure respected by many around the world.
The Outburst and Its Implications
Senator Thorpe’s outburst towards King Charles occurred during a public event, where she reportedly referred to him in highly derogatory terms, expressing anger at his role in colonial history and its lasting impact on Indigenous peoples in Australia. While the Senator’s advocacy for Indigenous rights and her critique of colonialism is well known, the tone and nature of her attack on King Charles, himself an Elder in his cultural context, seem to conflict with the broader principle of offering respect to Elders.
Is there a contradiction here? If respect for Elders is central to Indigenous cultural values, why was that same respect not extended to a figurehead from another culture, albeit a controversial one for some?
Cultural Reverence – Selective or Universal?
The Welcome to Country and Acknowledgment of Country ceremonies highlight the universal importance of respect, extending it to all who visit or inhabit the land. Elders are given a place of honor in these ceremonies, whether they be Indigenous or not, based on the broader concept of intergenerational respect and wisdom.
Senator Thorpe’s actions, however, suggest that this respect may not be equally extended to all Elders, especially those associated with institutions tied to colonial oppression. This raises the question: Should the respect for Elders be bound by cultural or historical context? Or should it transcend these boundaries and be applied universally?
Broader Support for Thorpe’s Approach
Senator Thorpe’s confrontational style is not without its supporters. Certain Aboriginal leaders and activists share her perspective, viewing her boldness as necessary to disrupt the status quo and call attention to the harms caused by colonization. For them, King Charles III, as a symbol of the British monarchy, represents an ongoing reminder of the colonial subjugation of Indigenous peoples.
Figures such as Senator Thorpe argue that respect must be earned, particularly from those who represent colonial powers. In their view, the monarchy has yet to reconcile fully with the damage inflicted upon Indigenous communities, and thus figures like King Charles should not automatically be granted the respect due to Elders until there is meaningful restitution or acknowledgment of this history.
Leaders who align with this approach often advocate for a more radical form of activism, one that does not shy away from uncomfortable confrontations with authority. They see this as a necessary step in the broader fight for justice and equality for Indigenous Australians.
A Delicate Balance
While these perspectives are valid in their own right, they nonetheless highlight a contradiction that is difficult to ignore. If respect for Elders is fundamental to Indigenous cultural values, should that respect not extend across cultural divides, even when difficult historical legacies are involved? Can the act of withholding respect from one Elder in order to champion the cause of another weaken the moral foundation of the argument itself?
As Australia continues to grapple with its colonial past, the tension between these ideals of respect, justice, and activism will likely remain part of the national conversation. Senator Thorpe’s actions remind us that the application of cultural values is not always straightforward, especially in a country still wrestling with its complex history of colonization and reconciliation.
But as we seek paths forward, it is important to ask: How can we balance the need for respect across different cultures while still holding those cultures accountable for their actions, both past and present? And can the principle of respecting Elders remain strong in a world where historical grievances, no matter how justified, sometimes cloud our ability to treat others with dignity?
In conclusion, Senator Thorpe’s actions may reflect a deeper struggle within Australian society over how to approach its colonial legacy. While her supporters see her as a necessary disruptor, others may view her treatment of King Charles III as a contradiction of the very values of respect and acknowledgment that are so often championed in Indigenous culture.