The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
Voice Telethon ...is interrupted by Today's Voiceless Headlines
Political Crisis
Lidia can't be restrained by such a tiny restraining order!
Clive is counter suing his restraining order
Voldemort will have more to say during next week's Reffo.
Jacinta's eyebrows were ruled too loud for her Black Band.
Rolling Media Strike.
Channel 9 plan to wheel out their Ai John Farnham to Hum the Voice outta his ....(censored)
Murdoch exempts his Sky News reporters from Media Blackout
Voters are advised to lower their TV volume for Lidia's interpretive Voice Rant.
Albo's Stuntman admits his hands were tied during his rolling gag order.
Extinction Rebellion protesters have called off their rolling strike until Media Blockade moves on.
Health Crisis hits homeless hard
Homeless Voters are served up reconstituted soup...Cold hearted Blanket Ban is to blame.
Covid Strain
AEC Loophole allows Melbourne's current Lockdown to be extended thru to Dutto's Reffo lockdown.
TGA : Temporary Gag Order affords us time to clean more Covid Saliva Tests for the Xmas Wave!
Premier: Don't be alarmed...Last Week's Covid Experts have already censored this week's Vocal Strain.
Highest Court Judges have placed a Gag Order on Shock-jock's Mad Monday Vomitron Tidal Wave.
Sports Mad Ban
Wallabies are Sin Binned until after the Reffo ...they won't be makin' any Noise...quiet as church mice!
We Qldurr Footy Boofs voiced our opinions 1/2/3/4x times last week but we can show ya how to lose!
swellnet drum circle exemption : Band has a beer & cracks jokes with Ai Drummer...he seems nice!
How to Vote
AEC are issuing double demerit points for ticked off Voters defying their Suppression Order.
Reffo Prohibition orders Voters to wear ear muffs for their Silent Blind Auditions.
Huey waves the whispering for Hodad Dave to cruise his Surf Guitar on last wave in...
Brilliant journalism from a former Howard staffer; thanks ifocus
@ harrycoopr
“In early anthropology people couldn't understand why blackfellas always said "yes" to a question when they obviously meant "no"... The yes was so that the person asking wouldn't feel let down or hurt by a no! Even if they knew it was a lie they didn't want to hurt yr feelings!!”
Hi Harry, thanks for your reply. You’re handling the sesh’s really well, without reaching boiling, I love to breathe deep yoga breaths, and it does wonders for tempering heated situations.
And I crack up your little side bouts of humour, much appreciated!
Your Anthropology quip, apparently it is a similar way in Tonga where they avoid a confronting discussion by agreeing with someone even if they don’t agree, they will articulate their way by voicing in a positive light and turn the conversation somehow in order to get their message across and respectfully, pretty good! They usually always start their conversation with a “Yes”
They’d be helpful here in this referendum hey?
But I think there’s high relevance to both of our observations. And I try not to be presumptuous nor talk for them or over them that those indigenous ones are (as those are in the rest of the population) being fed some kind of crafted brainwashing ideology from the detractors.
We’re up against the same lot who voted in the LNP back in 2019. To these people, that vote was catastrophic for our nation, Here's a chance to vote yes for what I perceive to be the best managers on this land,
Have trust in them they are brilliant!!
Cheers Harry…go well!
I focus wrote:Daming article by Savva... que rants of leftest propaganda.
Niki Savva:
"When Peter Dutton ran for the Liberal leadership in 2018, he twice asked Ken Wyatt to vote for him. Dutton told Wyatt he wanted him on his frontbench. Wyatt told Dutton both times that he would not vote for him. Furthermore, he told him that if he became leader, he would not serve under him, he would quit the ministry.
Beyond expressing concern for the sexual abuse of children, Dutton showed little interest in Indigenous issues, according to Wyatt.
When we spoke a few days ago, Wyatt was as unsurprised as he was unimpressed by Dutton’s conduct of the No campaign in the referendum.
Wyatt dismissed the fevered commentary about Jacinta Nampijinpa Price becoming prime minister. He reckons for a leader to succeed, she – or he – must be capable of, and be seen to be working for, all Australians. He believes neither Dutton nor Price has shown they can do that.
Going down in history as two of the people most responsible for destroying a referendum which Wyatt is convinced would help Indigenous people is no qualification for national leadership in Wyatt’s view.
Born on a mission station to a mother who was forced to hand over her wages to bureaucrats then ask for money back to buy essentials, Wyatt was the first Indigenous person to become Indigenous affairs minister under Scott Morrison. He quit the Liberal Party in protest in April.
Clinging to hope that Yes would triumph, Wyatt worried defeat would deter future governments from considering new approaches. He accepts Anthony Albanese would have no mandate to legislate a Voice but pledged he and fellow Yes warriors would not give up fighting for better ways to address Indigenous disadvantage.
In the post-mortems which will inevitably continue for decades, we can and we will blame No campaigners for playing filthy dirty, for putting politics above everything else, for using loudhailers to whistle up the neo-Nazis, racists and bigots with lies and misrepresentations.
The demons unleashed by tactics to foment conflict, for short term political gain at the expense of vulnerable Australians, will live on long after Saturday’s vote.
We can and will blame the Albanese government for choosing the wrong time or the wrong words or for mismanaging the campaign, for doing it now, or even for doing it at all.
The miserable fact is that no matter the wording, the content, or the timing, we were always destined to get to this point. A few Yes campaigners, including Wyatt, firmly believe this.
There was never going to be bipartisanship. Releasing exposure draft legislation would only have given the Noes more ammunition. Legislating the Voice alone would have once again been whitefellas telling blackfellas what was best for them. Delaying the referendum until the next election would have guaranteed the loss of both the election and the referendum.
Yes advocates say the Noes tapped into a deep well of racism, others that the referendum has created a hell of a mess.
The Noes blame Yes for dividing Australia, which is a bit like claiming black is white. They claim it’s the biggest change to the Constitution ever proposed. Wrong. That was the republic. Their most potent argument against that was if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Those same people, notably Tony Abbott, know this system is broken, offer no solution and instead seek to destroy the Voice by claiming it will encourage “separatism.”
As if such a modest change to set up an advisory body creates a new apartheid. Confronted by tough questioning, they scream bias. In fact, they have had a good run. Too good.
As the most prominent, the most effective and most polarising participant in the black-on-black conflict, Price has called the shots for the Coalition. She says up front what many of them think but few dare to say. The photo of Price acting as barista in a Perth cafe with Dutton smiling awkwardly behind her like a mobile coffee caddy, says it all.
Not only has she has given white folk an excuse to vote no, she has absolved them of any guilt or shame for past wrongs by insisting colonisation had benefited Aboriginal people. Read David Marr’s excellent book Killing for Country and judge for yourself.
Another of the many low points of this campaign was when the media and others perversely condemned Indigenous leader Marcia Langton for calling out racism, rather than condemn the racism itself. We live in dangerous times when Ray Martin cops more abuse from the Noes for using words like dinosaurs and dickheads than does a neo-Nazi who threatens to kill a senator.
Dutton questioning the integrity of an institution as highly regarded as the Australian Electoral Commission was inexcusable. It opened the door wide for conspiracy theorists to harass and abuse the commission and its staff.
This is a defining moment for Australia. Almost every other country on earth has reached an accommodation with its original inhabitants. We should at least be honest enough to admit that if we don’t, this debate will have simply exposed what lurks just beneath the surface. Blaming Albanese for that is bizarre. Ultimately, responsibility for the result and everything which delivers it resides with us.
The central issue, as it was on the republic, is not what the world thinks of us, as important as that is. It is what we think of each other.
Come Sunday, we will either see ourselves as measured, generous people, ready to set aside the daily woes of our lives – only for a few minutes – to consider the place and state of Indigenous Australians, prepared to say yes to something which will cost us nothing, but could measurably improve their lives.
Or as a frightened, resentful people unable or unwilling to see through the scares and the lies, prepared to use the ballot box to punish the government and in the process punish Indigenous people trapped in cycles of poverty and abuse."
One thing that has really stood out for me over this whole debate is how it has highlighted what a dreadful person Peter Dutton is. Yes/ No aside.
He has obviously not got Australia's best interest in his heart or mind. Opportunist Grub basically.
By trying to stir up Australia over the tradgedy going down in the ME he just cements this view in my book.
People scared to go out in Melbourne due to black gangs etc playbook, create fear and division.
Sure there are not so nice people and good people on all sides of politics, but Dutton is dangerous.
May he never get close to being PM.
I focus wrote:Daming article by Savva... que rants of leftest propaganda.
Niki Savva:
"When Peter Dutton ran for the Liberal leadership in 2018, he twice asked Ken Wyatt to vote for him. Dutton told Wyatt he wanted him on his frontbench. Wyatt told Dutton both times that he would not vote for him. Furthermore, he told him that if he became leader, he would not serve under him, he would quit the ministry.
Beyond expressing concern for the sexual abuse of children, Dutton showed little interest in Indigenous issues, according to Wyatt.
When we spoke a few days ago, Wyatt was as unsurprised as he was unimpressed by Dutton’s conduct of the No campaign in the referendum.
Wyatt dismissed the fevered commentary about Jacinta Nampijinpa Price becoming prime minister. He reckons for a leader to succeed, she – or he – must be capable of, and be seen to be working for, all Australians. He believes neither Dutton nor Price has shown they can do that.
Going down in history as two of the people most responsible for destroying a referendum which Wyatt is convinced would help Indigenous people is no qualification for national leadership in Wyatt’s view.
Born on a mission station to a mother who was forced to hand over her wages to bureaucrats then ask for money back to buy essentials, Wyatt was the first Indigenous person to become Indigenous affairs minister under Scott Morrison. He quit the Liberal Party in protest in April.
Clinging to hope that Yes would triumph, Wyatt worried defeat would deter future governments from considering new approaches. He accepts Anthony Albanese would have no mandate to legislate a Voice but pledged he and fellow Yes warriors would not give up fighting for better ways to address Indigenous disadvantage.
In the post-mortems which will inevitably continue for decades, we can and we will blame No campaigners for playing filthy dirty, for putting politics above everything else, for using loudhailers to whistle up the neo-Nazis, racists and bigots with lies and misrepresentations.
The demons unleashed by tactics to foment conflict, for short term political gain at the expense of vulnerable Australians, will live on long after Saturday’s vote.
We can and will blame the Albanese government for choosing the wrong time or the wrong words or for mismanaging the campaign, for doing it now, or even for doing it at all.
The miserable fact is that no matter the wording, the content, or the timing, we were always destined to get to this point. A few Yes campaigners, including Wyatt, firmly believe this.
There was never going to be bipartisanship. Releasing exposure draft legislation would only have given the Noes more ammunition. Legislating the Voice alone would have once again been whitefellas telling blackfellas what was best for them. Delaying the referendum until the next election would have guaranteed the loss of both the election and the referendum.
Yes advocates say the Noes tapped into a deep well of racism, others that the referendum has created a hell of a mess.
The Noes blame Yes for dividing Australia, which is a bit like claiming black is white. They claim it’s the biggest change to the Constitution ever proposed. Wrong. That was the republic. Their most potent argument against that was if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Those same people, notably Tony Abbott, know this system is broken, offer no solution and instead seek to destroy the Voice by claiming it will encourage “separatism.”
As if such a modest change to set up an advisory body creates a new apartheid. Confronted by tough questioning, they scream bias. In fact, they have had a good run. Too good.
As the most prominent, the most effective and most polarising participant in the black-on-black conflict, Price has called the shots for the Coalition. She says up front what many of them think but few dare to say. The photo of Price acting as barista in a Perth cafe with Dutton smiling awkwardly behind her like a mobile coffee caddy, says it all.
Not only has she has given white folk an excuse to vote no, she has absolved them of any guilt or shame for past wrongs by insisting colonisation had benefited Aboriginal people. Read David Marr’s excellent book Killing for Country and judge for yourself.
Another of the many low points of this campaign was when the media and others perversely condemned Indigenous leader Marcia Langton for calling out racism, rather than condemn the racism itself. We live in dangerous times when Ray Martin cops more abuse from the Noes for using words like dinosaurs and dickheads than does a neo-Nazi who threatens to kill a senator.
Dutton questioning the integrity of an institution as highly regarded as the Australian Electoral Commission was inexcusable. It opened the door wide for conspiracy theorists to harass and abuse the commission and its staff.
This is a defining moment for Australia. Almost every other country on earth has reached an accommodation with its original inhabitants. We should at least be honest enough to admit that if we don’t, this debate will have simply exposed what lurks just beneath the surface. Blaming Albanese for that is bizarre. Ultimately, responsibility for the result and everything which delivers it resides with us.
The central issue, as it was on the republic, is not what the world thinks of us, as important as that is. It is what we think of each other.
Come Sunday, we will either see ourselves as measured, generous people, ready to set aside the daily woes of our lives – only for a few minutes – to consider the place and state of Indigenous Australians, prepared to say yes to something which will cost us nothing, but could measurably improve their lives.
Or as a frightened, resentful people unable or unwilling to see through the scares and the lies, prepared to use the ballot box to punish the government and in the process punish Indigenous people trapped in cycles of poverty and abuse."
Thanks for the article I focus , very well written and on the money.
basesix wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:This shit is getting even weirder and we still have tomorrow to go.
no, @indo, it is not exciting, it is not a sportgame. people are calm and accepting, as befits something that is foregone now, whatever it is.
How on earth did you get the above from the below post?
Calm and accepting ...Bahhhaaaa....you have to be kidding me..
BTW. I see the weird media explanations and theories have already started before the results even dropped oh well i guess its just going to be part of the parcel
indo-dreaming wrote:This shit is getting even weirder and we still have tomorrow to go.
People now want to hold my head under water.
Ideas people are voting No because of Covid or against the government.
And strange ideas that people are voting No to somehow punish FNP.
I will say one thing though, I do think there has been a push back against, big business, sporting bodies, celebrities, musician's, or anyone with a big profile, jumping on the Yes vote and telling us how to vote often in a preachy guilt trip way and then add to that the barrage of TV advertising and other advertising shoved down our throats.
Probably just reinforced soft No's to hard No's though and many undecided to No's .
It’s little wonder some are confused …….. Voice opponent Lidia Thorpe backtracks after saying she would support legislated Voice if referendum fails https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-12/lidia-thorpe-backs-indigenous-voi...
When is Lidia up for re-election in the Senate - not on a Greens ticket?
Keeping it simple:
Wallabies struggling and in the national spotlight.
Coach Eddie Jones reveals his big new plan to turn things around.
He announces a plan to form a Players Committee to report to and advise the Board
Response from players and public?
- wild enthusiasm?
- sceptics labelled idiots and followers of misinformation?
velocityjohnno wrote:When is Lidia up for re-election in the Senate - not on a Greens ticket?
Im pretty sure she has said she wont run again as would need to be as independent, i think she is just saving herself the embarrassment as she would have alienated her Green supporters and have little support from elsewhere.
BTW. Her view in Supa's link isn't really that odd, her and her movement are against the Voice being in the constitution for sovereign related issues, obviously she wants much more radical change, but its really no surprise she would still support a legislated in policy voice as myself and many No voters also have no issue with.
“ BTW. I see the weird media explanations and theories have already started before the results even dropped oh well i guess its just going to be part of the parcel”
You do realise that the author of the excellent article posted above by @ifocus worked for Howard? No, off course you wouldn’t nor would you remotely understand the gravity of her rightful criticism @info dipshitter
frog wrote:Keeping it simple:
Wallabies struggling and in the national spotlight.
Coach Eddie Jones reveals his big new plan to turn things around.
He announces a plan to form a Players Committee to report to and advise the Board
Response from players and public?
- wild enthusiasm?
- sceptics labelled idiots and followers of misinformation?
Bad idea frog, that'd be divisive.
Eddie Jones should just assume he knows best and push on regardless.
GuySmiley wrote:“ BTW. I see the weird media explanations and theories have already started before the results even dropped oh well i guess its just going to be part of the parcel”
You do realise that the author of the excellent article posted above by @ifocus worked for Howard? No, off course you wouldn’t nor would you remotely understand the gravity of her rightful criticism @info dipshitter
A bad opinion is a bad opinion no matter who it comes from, just because she was part of the Howard government means shit, or do you suddenly agree with or give weight to the views from previous Labor people like Gary Johns, Mark Latham, Warren Mundine?????
People are all free to have different views and people are also free to change views.
Like ive said before you have written off Jacinta for years claiming she will be nothing, even if this is her peak, she has proven you wrong, im sure she would say kiss my arse Guy.
…. and there you go, no understanding no awareness and another one goes through to the keeper
Ha ha whatever dude the irony im sure will go right over your head.
The same one i clearly live rent free in.
#alwaysanothercomment
indo-dreaming wrote:Ha ha whatever dude the irony im sure will go right over your head.
The same one i clearly live rent free in.
#alwaysanothercomment
No discussion, no reflection, no nuance just mindlessly hammer, hammer, hammer.
Sniveling cunts ahoy!
soggydog wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:Ha ha whatever dude the irony im sure will go right over your head.
The same one i clearly live rent free in.
#alwaysanothercomment
No discussion, no reflection, no nuance just mindlessly hammer, hammer, hammer.
Sniveling cunts ahoy!
It's pretty simple really, if you dont want to engage with me, ignore me, but if you diss me, im sometimes going to bite back.
And yes i have a lot of you people wanting to engage with me being the vocal token conservative here, i ignore a lot of the post aimed at me, but some i dont and yeah i do have a number of people like Guy or you and a few others that follow me around (Guy being the worst he is basically my pet rarely will a post of his not involve me)
And clearly a lot are currently pretty butt hurt, because the penny has dropped that the referendum is not going to go the way they hoped.
If that's you instead of trying to engage with me and take your frustration out on me, maybe take a break from the thread until the smoke of this Voice thing clears.
BTW. I post plenty of post that are not negative replies to people i post articles and share views, just above on this page is friendly reply to velocityjohnno answering a question.
Anyway i think we will all be happy when this divisive voice thing is over and this thread takes a back seat.
The Constitution is a racist document. It was written under the White Australia Policy. Rectify the Constitution.
Never underestimate the racism in this country.
Never underestimate the fascism of The Spud.
Never underestimate the stupidity of #boycottindo
“Anyway i think we will all be happy when this divisive voice thing is over and this thread takes a back seat.“
If NO gets up which is likely the “voice thing” will not be over for decades and Dutton and Price will be as “fondly remembered/treated “ as John Kerr was after the dismissal. People who think otherwise are just as fucking dumb; say no more
If anyone needs incentive to vote yes then this is it . Andrew Bolt admits he almost resigned over Voice proposal ….. https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/andrew-bolt/andrew-bolt-admits-he-alm...
Supafreak wrote:If anyone needs incentive to vote yes then this is it . Andrew Bolt admits he almost resigned over Voice proposal ….. https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/andrew-bolt/andrew-bolt-admits-he-alm...
That village is still missing someone?
Supafreak wrote:It’s little wonder some are confused …….. Voice opponent Lidia Thorpe backtracks after saying she would support legislated Voice if referendum fails https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-12/lidia-thorpe-backs-indigenous-voi...
Why is this confusing?
Another day another round of pointless insults thrown at Indo.
You blokes are acting like spoilt children.
Calling the hypocrite SouthernRaw....... please call AndyM & HarryC out for breaking forum rules and ask for their heads from the overlords Stu, Craig & Ben.
Or does that only apply when you're not in favour?
Did Velocityjohnno order an Attack Class Bushmaster...for about 5 years from now!
30th June 2028 @ Upper House Jumpy Castle via the slip'n'slide escape chute route.
Slip the driver $20 in advance...just rock the portaloo @ nearby abandoned Embassy & ask for Albo!
https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Senators/Senators_by_service...
indo-dreaming wrote:basesix wrote:it is not exciting, it is not a sportgame. people are calm and accepting, as befits something that is foregone now, whatever it is.
Calm and accepting ...Bahhhaaaa....you have to be kidding me..
just letting you know what is happening in the real world @indo. I'm sure sock-puppet theatre is milking all it can from blue-screen posting frenzies. I see none of that around me. Since nice, friendly polling booth interactions, people are getting on with their day to day, hopefully wondering about what we can do to make things better here on in.
An interesting perspective I hadn't come across yet, in an academic paper by a law professor at UQ, concluding that The Voice has the real possibility of (further) undermining our system of federalism by concentrating more power in the Commonwealth at the expense of the states:
Nicholas Aroney & Peter Congdon wrote:...scant attention has been devoted to the potential ramifications of the proposed constitutional amendment on the distribution of powers between the Commonwealth and the States.
...we find that the proposed constitutional alteration has real potential to expand the Commonwealth’s legislative powers vis-à-vis the States.
Of course this would be undesirable since a central idea underpinning our overall system of government is the dispersal or decentralisation of decision-making power
indo-dreaming wrote:GuySmiley wrote:“ BTW. I see the weird media explanations and theories have already started before the results even dropped oh well i guess its just going to be part of the parcel”
You do realise that the author of the excellent article posted above by @ifocus worked for Howard? No, off course you wouldn’t nor would you remotely understand the gravity of her rightful criticism @info dipshitter
A bad opinion is a bad opinion no matter who it comes from, just because she was part of the Howard government means shit, or do you suddenly agree with or give weight to the views from previous Labor people like Gary Johns, Mark Latham, Warren Mundine?????
People are all free to have different views and people are also free to change views.
Like ive said before you have written off Jacinta for years claiming she will be nothing, even if this is her peak, she has proven you wrong, im sure she would say kiss my arse Guy.
Written off Jacinta for years? nobody new who she was in regards to politics before the announcement of the referendum, then she’s catapulted in her first term to the front bench. I’ll concede she is very articulate. But again you clutch at straws, Adios Snivelly
Vote Yes for the hope of a better future :)
Although it's looking like it won't get up.
The No crowd have attacked
- the AEC
- Labor
- the formation of the Statement From the Heart
-Indigenous Australians
- the character of Yes proponents
- concepts of Aboriginality
- the idea the Indigenous people as a culture are disadvantaged
- the idea that colonisation has been bad
- the concept of private property post-Yes
etc etc.
What an ugly little chapter in Australia's history this has been, the lies and twisted misinformation seem to have got through.
With the Voice referendum just days away, John gives a final outline of his position on the voice. Arguing as to why, although he supports constitutional recognition, he and many others are concerned about the potential outcomes of the Voice to Parliament. pic.twitter.com/HWxbqnnU6Z
— John Anderson AC (@JohnAndersonAC) October 13, 2023
What is there to say one day out from Australia’s historic referendum on the Voice other than this instance of a nation examining its soul has been a wee bit fucked. There has been love and courage and truth and hope, yes, but the air is thick with bile and bullshit, and it will linger.
Yes or No on Saturday, the Uluru Statement from the Heart was a staggeringly generous offer from Indigenous Australians, the easiest of olive branches to clasp, moral and justifiable legally, economically, philosophically; a course of action with precisely fuck all negative consequences for anyone except mining companies and the sick fucks that still get a kick out of Indigenous subjugation. I sincerely hope we accept this opportunity in good faith, with open hearts and minds. I am worried we will not.
The love, hope, generosity and goodwill of the YES campaign has moved countless Australians deeply. Far more minds and hearts have opened to the unreconciled bedrock of Australia, the violent and enduring truth of dispossession, than had we not had this discussion – and that in itself is a win. But Australia has a giant, flashing FEAR button buried deep within its soul and we now have an uncomfortable clarity on how staggeringly low Australia’s establishment right-wing is willing to go to push it. Whether Australia chooses to acknowledge it or not, there is so much intergenerational pain here, and even more intergenerational fear and denial.
We are playing a different game from here on out – nastier, more adversarial, less cooperative, more American, and considerably dumber. Whatever the result tomorrow, the discussion around the Voice should trigger alarm bells for the future of reality-based conversations within our democracy – in that they just won’t fucking happen all that often anymore.
The NO campaign, powered by the Liberal and National parties and steered by an array of right-wing think tanks with links to America’s whacky Christian right, has flooded the airwaves with shit. It has lied, it has confused, it has obfuscated the truth. And it has done this because it has had to. Logic is not on its side. Fear is. Chillingly effective but scummy-as-all-fuck modes of political communication appear to be the most powerful shapers of history today.
The NO campaign was effective in truly hideous ways. It very carefully ensured it was Indigenous people saying the most offensively stupid and racist things, like Jacinta Nampijinpa Price’s assertion that colonisation had no negative impacts whatsoever – a claim contradicted by every single economic or health measure we record. From this starting point of unreality, repeated uncritically in the broken echo chamber of mainstream media, trolls of a lesser stature can then twist words around until they are all but meaningless. All of a sudden listening to Indigenous people would be a racist thing to do, they shriek! This is apartheid! This is division! This is the globalist UN seizing our 5G vaccine mandates or whatever it is you need to say to get stupid people scared and upset. The details do not matter – everyone has their own facts – only the prodded emotion is king.
The conversation has been discombobulated to the dizzying point that Pauline Hanson, racist Queen of the Racists, the OG racist from way back in the day, a stupid person who has been racist-ly racisting it up, racistly, since I was in primary school, claimed my support for the Voice was racist.
Pauline “we are in danger of being swamped by Asians” Hanson thinks consulting Indigenous Australians on matters that concern them would be “racially divisive”. Words don’t mean anything anymore!
For the record, Poooooorline deleted this tweet because of the typo and then tweeted it again, the underlying inaccuracy and stupidity still intact. I can say from the perspective of an editor, sometimes it’s not about the typos and the problem with a piece of writing is that the underlying argument is just too fucking stupid to entertain. This was one of those, Pauline.
Yes, there is a “progressive NO” vote, but there was also a progressive NO vote for Brexit, and that was quite clearly a victory for xenophobia, not for ultra-left socialists critical of the EU corporatocracy. Running out of affordable food isn’t exactly a victory for the working class. A NO vote for Australia will only embolden or worst impulses.
Peter Dutton’s disgusting role as wrecker in this historic lurch towards a brighter, more reconciled future should not have come as a surprise to anyone. But it did, for some reason. The man’s public life is synonymous with his enthusiastic cruelty to desperate people with darker complexions as Minister for our Offshore Gulags and race-baiting dog whistles like his claim Melbournians can’t go to restaurants because of African gangs. I can’t go to restaurants because next month broccoli will cost three hundred thousand dollars!!
And yet the media establishment, and the ALP, chose to treat Dutton as though he was a participant in this debate in good faith. Both institutions need to consider just how seriously they take themselves, because Australia’s political right is on a suicide trip to the depths of the American Republican Party. We will not adopt the personality cult aspect of it, because we are too cynical of tall poppies for that, but the unceasing hostility, uncooperativeness, weaponised misinformation and prodded stupidity is here to stay. It will be grim, and journalists and citizens alike have a grave responsibility to pierce the bullshit at every opportunity.
If you have concerns about missing details before your vote tomorrow, they are out there. If you feel you might have been sold some nonsense and want it unpacked, it’s highly likely that this is true, so try this. If you are feeling any degree of shame around your decision to vote NO, don’t run from that: examine it. Unpack it. Be brave and face it, don’t run from the queasiness in your gut. One day your grandchildren might ask you about it, and I’m sure you’ll want to feel comfortable with your answer.
If an issue has been muddied to the point that up feels like down, left feels like right, and the future is unclear and clouded, know that that is a deliberate strategy of the NO campaign. When seeking True North, look to who stands alongside you for clarity. There is no greater moral compass than the company you keep. On the YES side of the fence you will find roughly 80% of Indigenous Australians, Australia’s health experts, Cathy Freeman, Patrick Dodson, Noel Pearson, Marcia Langton, Adam Goodes, Paul Kelly, John Farnham, Senator Briggs, Jimmy Barnes, the Greens and ALP, Midnight Oil, the overwhelming support of corporate Australia (minus mining and the media), and Collingwood Premiership captain Darcy Moore. On the NO side you will find Pauline Hanson, Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, Peter Dutton, Kamahal (occasionally), Anthony and Warren Mundine, News Corporation and every casually racist asshole in the country. At the very least, ask yourself which BBQ you’d rather go to.
On Wednesday Pat Dodson spoke to the National Press Club. I will finish with his words. Be kind to each other tomorrow.
“[Voting No or Yes] is a division based on whether you understand our history, that this nation was colonised and Aboriginal people were forcibly subjugated, that they were denied the opportunity to have a say in how they were going to be impacted, or whether you think it’s all cosy and we were picked up in a truck and taken to a winter wonderland, and we lived there forever in a rose garden”
“We’re not living in the garden of Eden here.
“Why have so many of our kids been taken away? Why is there so much domestic and internal violence? Why are we living in poverty? Why are we still suffering from mental health problems?
“If we’re in the promised land, like so many like to pretend, then why are Indigenous people lagging behind on so many social indicators?
“Are we going to be at the table? Or are we going to be picking up the crumbs?”
by Dave Milner
One of the best posts I've read on this thread.
geez, zen, with all that stiff competition?
zenagain wrote:One of the best posts I've read on this thread.
Will have to read Westofthelakes post a bit later but
How wonderful to embrace Aboriginal culture!
That was great @Westofthelake.
He just left out Nathan Cleary for Yes.
Dam still upset over Broncos. ;)
I'm off to vote 'yes' tomorrow.
Brilliant share @westy.
Thanks for that.
southernraw wrote:Brilliant share @westy.
Thanks for that.
Still waiting for you to call out the other rule breakers Southern.
I also voted today. A big NO to division of our country and a big FUCK YOU to the Australian Government for how they treated us during Covid and the daily lies they spread. The trust will never ever be regained in my lifetime.
As i said previously on this thread, if this vote has come up before Covid i would not have questioned it and voted yes. Not now and not ever again.
burleigh wrote:southernraw wrote:Brilliant share @westy.
Thanks for that.Still waiting for you to call out the other rule breakers Southern.
I also voted today. A big NO to division of our country and a big FUCK YOU to the Australian Government for how they treated us during Covid and the daily lies they spread. The trust will never ever be regained in my lifetime.
As i said previously on this thread, if this vote has come up before Covid i would not have questioned it and voted yes. Not now and not ever again.
Like I’ve said before. I can understand your justified reasoning. It’s clear. Indo not so much.
southernraw wrote:Brilliant share @westy.
Thanks for that.
X2
@westofthelake "...to get stupid people scared and upset."
Ring a bell fishfood & #boycottindo??
The No camp will eventually hang their heads in shame.
I feel this will be a moment like children overboard and the second Iraq war when we wonder what the fuck just happened.
soggydog wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:GuySmiley wrote:“ BTW. I see the weird media explanations and theories have already started before the results even dropped oh well i guess its just going to be part of the parcel”
You do realise that the author of the excellent article posted above by @ifocus worked for Howard? No, off course you wouldn’t nor would you remotely understand the gravity of her rightful criticism @info dipshitter
A bad opinion is a bad opinion no matter who it comes from, just because she was part of the Howard government means shit, or do you suddenly agree with or give weight to the views from previous Labor people like Gary Johns, Mark Latham, Warren Mundine?????
People are all free to have different views and people are also free to change views.
Like ive said before you have written off Jacinta for years claiming she will be nothing, even if this is her peak, she has proven you wrong, im sure she would say kiss my arse Guy.
Written off Jacinta for years? nobody new who she was in regards to politics before the announcement of the referendum, then she’s catapulted in her first term to the front bench. I’ll concede she is very articulate. But again you clutch at straws, Adios Snivelly
She has been part of discussion here since at least Jan 2019, back then Guy and Facto were dissing her, ive been bringing her into the conversation ever since and she's been dissed ever since.
Even at that stage id already been following her on social media for sometime (as mentioned on the links previous page)
She already had somewhat of a profile back then featuring in media articles on issues like Australia day and raising awareness to the issues of indgenous violence towards women in remote communities
Her mother Bessie was part of discussions here going back to the Adam Goodes saga in 2013.
AndyM wrote:I feel this will be a moment like children overboard and the second Iraq war when we wonder what the fuck just happened.
Bigger than children overboard lies Andy, I’m thinking more like the Whitlam dismissal with Dutton, Price and Mundine treated like Kerr everywhere they go. If NO gets up those grifters will have nowhere to hide.
burleigh wrote:southernraw wrote:Brilliant share @westy.
Thanks for that.Still waiting for you to call out the other rule breakers Southern.
I also voted today. A big NO to division of our country and a big FUCK YOU to the Australian Government for how they treated us during Covid and the daily lies they spread. The trust will never ever be regained in my lifetime.
As i said previously on this thread, if this vote has come up before Covid i would not have questioned it and voted yes. Not now and not ever again.
Huh? You want me to do what?
Got nothing to do with me.
Haha
- burley goin all passionate anti government rant tantrum about what ‘they’ did during covid etc…
(I actually agree with the sentiment)
… buuuuuuut goes all inbred raging hebitch hulk style on an online forum and demands someone call out ‘rule breakers’ ?
Yah maaan …
Abide by the mandate ;)
https://m.
&pp=ygUMbW9uc3RlciBtYXNo JF. My nephew still can't walk properly and only attends 1 day of school after the jab.
I lost my job and alot of my life changed because i didn't get the jab.
meanwhile....
The indigenous mob created the Uluru statement and within that statement was the request for Australian people to decide if they would like to jump on board with the mob, in seeking a better future.
I can clearly see the difference. It baffles me that others on this thread can't.
I can't imagine the fear people who think this way must live with, let alone the paranoia.
It can only be casual racism disguised with 'i blame the government'.
True.
- and sorry to hear bout your nephew, and your job stuff etc…
southernraw wrote:JF. My nephew still can't walk properly and only attends 1 day of school after the jab.
I lost my job and alot of my life changed because i didn't get the jab.
meanwhile....
The indigenous mob created the Uluru statement and within that statement was the request for Australian people to decide if they would like to jump on board with the mob, in seeking a better future.
I can clearly see the difference. It baffles me that others on this thread can't.
I can't imagine the fear people who think this way must live with, let alone the paranoia.
It can only be casual racism disguised with 'i blame the government'.
Thanks sr for sharing for a real and actual life story. And I agree with your sentiments, The Govts and the vested industry have a lot to answer for! For imposing these mandates on the everyday individuals. Well done for averting the jab! Well done, I hope your nephew will get better as each new sun rises each and every day as it should in time. I send my best wishes to him!
Much appreciated JF and Reform. Thankyou.
It's definitely been a battle but he's getting plenty of love and yes, one day at a time.
Uni assignment i did a few years ago. This is my take on things. I'm sure this will ruffle many feathers. I hope so.
Love Blue Diamond x
The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
Introduction – Compensatory Justice
Disparities between the standards of living of humans on this planet have long been a part of our history on this planet. From the wealthy nations of the West to the developing and undeveloped nations on this globe, the diversity in the quality of life when viewed from a moral standpoint are without a doubt grossly unfair.
In this paper I will look at why historic injustices do require some form of reparation. I take a strong stance that we are more obliged to solve current injustices than to provide reparation for every act of injustice in the past. In doing this I will first investigate the historic injustice of the Aboriginal people of Australia and I will look at the argument that they are entitled to some form of reparation and why.
I will incoroporate some interesting views from Jeremy Waldron, Robert Nozick and others which will help me slowly build to my conclusion that reparation should be in the form of Non Indigenous Australians surrendering some of our priveleges as a form of reparation.
Historic Injustices to Indigenous Australians:
Australia the continent was well inhabited for many years long before white settlement. It is commonly known that in 1788 Australia was colonised as a country under the rule of the British Empire, with total contempt for the fact that it was already inhabited by a native indigenous race of people.
The way the original inhabitants have been treated, including forced assimilation, execution, stolen families and not even allowed to be recognised as citizens for a large part of white Australia’s history are also well known facts. (Poole, 1999,pp114-142)
There exists now a situation where there is a large divide between Aboriginal and non Aboriginal Australian’s that can be traced back to the moment Australia was invaded by English settlers and the brutal and unfair treatment that has followed.
So at this point now, in 2013 what is the just and fair way to make amends for past actions?
I would argue that a moderate to large amount of reparation is overdue for this nation of people, the Aboriginal people. But there are many challenges to this view point especially that of how much reparation, and what sort of compensation.
Past injustices or present suffering?
One of the questions raised in an issue like this is whether it is better to provide compensation or reparation for past deeds, which have already been done in a previous generation and cannot be changed, or whether it is better to now provide assistance to those who are suffering in their current situations and consider that as a form of moral duty.
To understand this we need to delve a little deeper into this issue and hear some differing viewpoints.
Firstly we need to understand what the best way to provide reparation. How do we judge what is the best way of giving back and how much? Jeremy Waldron states “The historic record has a fragility that consists, …in the sheer contingency of what happened in the past” (Waldron,1992,p5 )
This is saying that we can’t trace every single injustice back to the original act therefore reparation for every act would be almost impossible because it would ultimately be guess work.
In this statement he has an objection from Robert Nozick who believes it is in fact possible to address this problem by “changing the present so that it resembles how the past would have looked had the injustice not taken place” (McKenzie, 2013)
This would be a way to ultimately provide maximum reparation, but is it the correct approach? I believe this is a fairly radical approach, although it does have some merits in the fact it would be working in a positive way for indigenous people, I don’t think it is entirely the right way to deal with these issues but it is on the right track.
Waldron argues that it is based on too many unknowns. “The status of counterfactual reasoning about the exercising of human reasoning of human freedom is unclear”(Waldron 1993,p10)
Which leaves the question somewhat open about the sort of reparation that is required, but provides one clear answer to the key question. Both agree that yes, reparation to some extent is required. But how much and in what form?
Another philosopher who leans more towards Waldron’s views is Kymlicka. He is somewhat more straightforward in his assessment that property rights in particular for Aboriginals would create “massive unfairness” and also he maintains the argument “Aboriginal rights must be grounded in concerns about equality and contemporary disadvantage. (McKenzie, 2013) I agree with both these views but I don’t think they provide any active solutions.
The Solution?
So if its not handing back all of Australia’s land to the original inhabitants that is the most appropriate way to deal with past injustices, then what is?
I look at the current country I grew up in, as a white Australian. I ask myself why I never had Aboriginal friends growing up, no understanding of Aboriginal culture and why my basic understanding of Indigenous Australians is mostly 200 years old. I look at our flag, a symbol of a nation that stole a country from its original inhabitants, with no recognition of the Indigenous people at all on it. I see that Australia considered Indigenous people as less than people until only 40 years ago and I see the way that Indigenous Australians live a completely separate life to the way of life I know as an Australian. I see that the only indigenous politician I am aware of is a former Olympian and it is because of this fact of her sporting status that I know this. I see no collective power or representation of Indigenous Australians and I see non Indigenous Australians,( a culture built on a history of stealing a land and mistreating its people) still taking, taking as much out of this land as they can, with little to no regard of sharing or giving to the original inhabitants. I see a government that says lots of words about ‘closing the gap’ and bringing the living standards of non- indigenous and indigenous Australians closer together, but apart from nice words, there is no conviction, no follow through, just assimilation , and all that still remains are injustices.
As stated by Sparrow, “Continuity gives rise to responsibility on part of present generations of Australians for our history”.(McKenzie,2013). Although deeds happened in the past beyond our control, what we do now to either ignore, or rectify these issues will reflect on us in history. So if we choose to do nothing, we are contributing to the history of the mistreatment of non- indigenous Australians. And this is simply unacceptable in my opinion.
Conclusion
So what is fair? I believe that the way forward is a surrendering of some of our privileges as non- indigenous Australians. The simple fact is it was morally wrong without a doubt what has happened in the past. And it is also morally wrong without a doubt to ignore these facts and not offer some form of reparation in the present. But how much?
I think that going back to Robert Nozick’s argument is a start. I think Nozick is wrong to make the present resemble the past in every aspect. But I do think that it would be reasonable to restore some aspects of the way things should be. The things that happened in the past were out of our control and we can’t go back to changing the way things were. But we could change the way things are.
For some examples. Why not give at least 50% of political power to indigenous people? It surely would be a fair thing to do considering this is their country. Media control. 50 percent. Industry. Realestate. The list goes on. Why do we not acknowledge the indigenous people on our flag, or better still use their flag? Why is Australia still a part of the Commonwealth when it serves little purpose to any of us and serves as a constant reminder to Indigenous Australians that they are still controlled by the original invaders. These to me are fairly simple reparations that would have minimal impact on Australia as a whole. Perhaps, it would alter the way we live but I think it is our responsibility, morally to forfeit some of our privileges for the greater good. Basically a little bit goes a long way.
In closing, it is a fact that a huge injustice occurred to the Indigenous population and suffering continues to this day. There is no easy solution to such a burden of pain. I believe the only solutions are for the non- Indigenous population to take responsibility and sacrifice our own way of life to bring about an overall equality. Sacrifice is not an easy word. But it all comes down to right and wrong. We are in a position to give, in this current generation. What are we so scared to lose, that was never ours in the first place??
Bibliography
McKenzie,C.”Prof” (2013), Lecture, Historic Injustices and Indigenous Rights, Macquarie University
Poole, R. (1999). Nation and Identity.Routledge, London, pp.114-142
Waldron,J. (1992). ‘Superseding Historic Injustice’. Ethics, 103 (1), 4-28
References
Poole, R. (1999). Nation and Identity.Routledge, London, pp.114-142
Waldron,J. (1992). ‘Superseding Historic Injustice’. Ethics, 103 (1), 4-28