First Australians

[AnnaB]

Thanks for this MrB.

David Marr is on my list of voices to listen to.

[joele]

Sad that I am very sure this will fail.

At least if I am pessimistic I can be pleasantly surprised I suppose.

Just so much FUD out there, even in Victoria, though pretty sure we will get over the line here..

I was very angry that libs on q&a were saying we should legislate one first before putting in constitution (as a trial). But we have done that multiple times and new governments abolish it and sometimes make their own.. They can still kind of do that with the voice proposal, all they will be blocked from doing is having none at all.. But even Labor are so bad at explaining that.

/vent

[stylofone]

Sad that I am very sure this will fail.

At least if I am pessimistic I can be pleasantly surprised I suppose.

Just so much FUD out there, even in Victoria, though pretty sure we will get over the line here..

I was very angry that libs on q&a were saying we should legislate one first before putting in constitution (as a trial). But we have done that multiple times and new governments abolish it and sometimes make their own.. They can still kind of do that with the voice proposal, all they will be blocked from doing is having none at all.. But even Labor are so bad at explaining that.

/vent

A council worker outside my house noticed my badge and wanted to talk. I said "I like indigenous people and I want to do something good for them, which is why I support the Voice." He said "I'm not racist my son's fiancee is quarter-caste, but I think we're all Australian and we all get treated equally. And what will happen if all the different immigrant groups want their own special thing." I let his historically racist terminology pass, and I said, "every immigrant group has a backup... the Italians have Italy, the Indians have India, I've got England and Ireland... but indigenous people are different, they don't have that, they've just got right here." I said a whole bunch of other stuff that he didn't respond to, he just repeated his original "one Australia" position.

Another thing I said was, "it looks like No is going to win, so the question is, what are we going to do about poverty and health and life expectancy, because I'm sure "No" voters believe in a fair go." There was also silence in response to that question. It has left me despondent because the reality is that, inherently, passively, by default, "No" voters actually DON'T believe in a fair go, or to be more formal, in human rights, and are quite happy to let indigenous children grow up with disadvantage and bad health outcomes and poverty and all the rest of it. So what we are heading towards is a referendum result which proves we are a racist country. I think we have actually got worse in the last decade or so. Historically I know it's not a shock that referendums fail, they usually do. But to me personally the brutality of a "No" vote is like the emergence of Trump in 2016, saying that everyone has permission to be racist and sexist and stupid and selfish. Richard Dawkins expressed faith in the zeitgeist as a a positive thing, but it looks like he's wrong, the zeitgeist can go the other way too.

[joele]

He said "I'm not racist

He would have lost me by starting the sentence with those magical three words.. At least he left out the "but"..

[Irrev-Black]

He said "I'm not racist

He would have lost me by starting the sentence with those magical three words.. At least he left out the "but"..

Still, he didn't fail to bring in the "I have friends/family" appeal to borrowed authority.

[nibble]

I too fear and feel that this will end up with a NO.

Aussies are too conservative and dare I say it too simple to grasp what the voice is about and therefore will vote no.

When I ask people how they're going to vote, I get the usual "well they get billions a year from the govt. what more do they want etc.." Totally missing the friggen point. My eyes roll and I just move on.

Oct 14 will be a sad day for our nation.

[Irrev-Black]

Public Service Announcement:

No matter if you are for or against the Voice, don't wear your views on a shirt when you go to vote.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-12/ ... /102964108

[stylofone]

Public Service Announcement:

No matter if you are for or against the Voice, don't wear your views on a shirt when you go to vote.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-12/ ... /102964108

I've never heard of this being an issue before. I understand the reason behind the rules, but if they become an issue and have to be enforced more strictly then it seems like a diminution of civility in our society.

[Irrev-Black]

Public Service Announcement:

No matter if you are for or against the Voice, don't wear your views on a shirt when you go to vote.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-12/ ... /102964108

I've never heard of this being an issue before. I understand the reason behind the rules, but if they become an issue and have to be enforced more strictly then it seems like a diminution of civility in our society.

I have encountered cases of people with "Vote <Whatever>" shirts being required to cover them, in previous elections.

[pipbarber]

Yeah it's standard. When you're handing out how to vote cards you have to take the t-shirt off, or any other party paraphernalia, before entering the voting area. It's connected to the secret ballot concept probably, and so as not to intimidate other voters. A bit archaic perhaps but everyone is treated the same, so it's nothing to be annoyed about, in my opinion.