The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
as to why...
you can go down your miserable road all you want...
but there's many o people on the left of politics commenting why ...how... labor have gone from 75%+ majority to probably failing miserably...
it's no secret... fuck even the abc have gone there... but nah... can't talk about it here....
because stupe is doing the devil's work... or some bullshit...
carry on...
it's a big wide mediascape out there...
bigger than ever
get some fucking perspective people!
Long time reader, 1st time poster.
It’s been an entertaining read so far. I look forward to my morning catchup of the past day and night posts. There's certainly some passionate thick-skinned people contributing. Thick skinned (not thick skulled as some might read) as there’s a little too much heat at times which spills towards hate speak yet the perpetrators still come back for more. It’s fascinating.
In saying that - I'm venturing into the discussion. Firstly, a little about me. Late 50's, white suburban boy, corporate accountant, logical thinker (stick figures are as artistic as I can get),
call a spade a spade, married to a Kiwi, have gone to the dark side & ride an SUP. I can hear the laughter now, but leave her alone, she’s a good woman - a keeper.
In all honesty I'm probably a No voter. It’s not because I don’t acknowledge the hardships or recognize the harm to generations of FNP that past actions have resulted in, it’s not that I don’t want change, it’s not about fear, it’s because over time I've become risk averse! Simple as that. I doubt there’s anyone on this forum that doesn’t want to see good outcomes.
Being around for a while you get to see how humans operate, react to things etc, so with the Voice proposal I look at it from the perspective of "what are the humans going to do with it".
The emotional arguments of the Yes vote and the various arguments of the No voters are all just noise to me and don’t play a part. It's how much I determine that normal human behavior will complicate the process & the consequences of dysfunction that sway me to vote No. It really is a vote of no confidence more than anything.
People have differing views, different needs, different agendas, different priorities etc, bring in all those human characteristics into the Voice operating structure IMO will likely result in
dysfunction or at best very slow progress. Given the Voice is Australia wide how do you prioritize need? How do you agree on a course of action? You can’t please everyone. I’d throw in Lydia’s
treaty impact as well - I expect her to join in but push for treaty which just adds to the priority decision complexity. Very hard to move forward without unity. I’ll have a huge amount of
respect for those taking on the task of making it work. The amount of shit their going to cop from all sides will be enormous.
Given the complexity of the Voice task, do I have confidence in it being successful - not really. There's been that many Govt initiatives that had great intentions but were largely ineffective,
over budget, rorting etc (NDIS springs to mind) all hampered in some way by human involvement. Based on the way this one been rolled out so far, it’s very hard to have any confidence that it will work.
I can hear the "it’s not working now, let’s change it" call. Yep, I agree. What will an unsuccessful Voice leave us with? Given it'll be enshrined in the Constitution, I'd imagine it will just keep trying
different approaches hoping that something works which is great, however… it suggests an open cheque book with unlimited cheque's and that’s not the type of change I want to see. I’d like to
see some sort of limitations in place - which is probably the role of parliament but that comes down to that damn confidence thing again and I really don’t want to have to vote for Pauline.
Being risk averse I tend to steer away from this type of unknown, unlimited scenario. I prefer calculated risk. Some will call me a pessimist, I'd reply - pessimist or realist?
A question that I haven’t seen asked yet - What happens when the Voice successfully achieves harmony? Will it wind itself down? Why will it be needed? Asking on behalf of my grandkids.
What would make me vote Yes (in a heartbeat actually) is if the Voice proposal included winding back existing ineffective measures and replacing them with Voice driven initiatives. It’s Ok to try
something and fail, just fail quickly. No point holding onto those existing failures. That’s the Accountant coming out in me.
My preferred solution would be to get really passionate people from both Yes & No camps, give them the power to investigate why the existing measures are not fixing things at ground level.
When I say passionate people, I mean those that will call out a "piss weak excuse", people that will apply the funding from the ground up not the other way around. Basically, serious accountability for the existing methods. The key being - give them the power! Sounds a bit like the Voice doesn’t it - unfortunately the Voice doesn’t have the power.
Has Albo given us any indication of what his plans are if the Voice fails? Can’t say I've heard anything about that. It would be nice to have an option. It may help the Yes vote.
Although voting No, I'll be happy if Yes gets up and they can achieve what they set out to, If they get up and fail well then it won’t come as a surprise. It's not the first initiative that didn’t work.
Time always gives up who’s more right & who’s less right.
That's my 1 votes worth. Thanks for your time.
"...call a spade a spade, married to a Kiwi, have gone to the dark side & ride an SUP. I can hear the laughter now, but leave her alone, she’s a good woman - a keeper..."
you talking about the kiwi or the SUP?
"...What would make me vote Yes (in a heartbeat actually) is if the Voice proposal included winding back existing ineffective measures and replacing them with Voice driven initiatives. It’s Ok to try
something and fail, just fail quickly. No point holding onto those existing failures. That’s the Accountant coming out in me..."
totally!
if labor even hinted at this, it would have 90%+ support overnight!
50 odd ngo's operating in wilcannia, serving a population of not even a 1000 people
not a word of such things from labor
vacuum is filled...
such a wasted opportunity
https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NC2311C032S00. Jacinta Price is also appearing at the NPC sometime soon .
So i heard on the grapevine a couple of the most knowledgeable contributors have been silenced??
Did i miss something??? What happened?
Bud1 and Wilhelms contributions were colourful and honest.
Held some people to account too that otherwise wouldn't have been.
One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgD...
southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgD...
Hi SR,
This reminds me somewhat of the Whitlam Dismissal.
Any anti ALP diehard who would not have had a clue what Section 53 of the Constitution referred to, overnight became a constitutional expert.
A Salty Dog wrote:southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgD...Hi SR,
This reminds me somewhat of the Whitlam Dismissal.
Any anti ALP diehard who would not have had a clue what Section 53 of the Constitution referred to, overnight became a constitutional expert.
Gday Saltydog. Yeah the current media works to create division in any way possible.
I could see this coming a mile out when the referendum was announced, as i'm sure you did too based on what you said re. Whitlam.
It doesn't even matter these days what the topic is, the objective is to divide the audience and create unrest amongst the readers/watchers, most of whom now have the ability to comment(unfortunately you don't need a licence for that) which only amplifies the division.
I'm truly saddened reading the comments in this forum for No, and i've gotta say, most of my family and friends are also No.
It's staggering the unwillingness to be open to a population in our country that have had it hard for so long, and and have been asking for a fair go for so long, to finally have reached that summit of the mountain for that opportunity, only to not just be pushed back down the mountain, but blown off the top of it with an oi oi oi flag jammed up their backsides.
This country holds a lot of dark energy and until that's fixed, we're gonna be stuck with shit media like this and the resultant plebs that inhabit forums and comments like lowinfo and his bottom dwelling ilk.
It's alot easier sometimes just to turn the screens off isn't it. Not much wrong with the world then.
Cheers.
A Salty Dog wrote:Sorry mate, I need more detail before I vote no.
I loved that comment Salty.
basesix wrote:A Salty Dog wrote:Sorry mate, I need more detail before I vote no.
I loved that comment Salty.
Haha. Missed this one!
Yep +1 to that Basesix and SD.
southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgD...
Incoming Labor govt should have as one of its first tasks banned foreign ownership of media organisations, broke up print and digital media, put strict anti monopoly duopoly controls in place and instigate a Royal Commission into Murdoch.
Too late now.
Think Albo thought if he was nice they may come around. Yeah right Murdoch and Costello....
Had momentum with Rudd and Turnbull plus a huge number of Australians who had signed the petition for a RC.
Anyway think Labor are screwed now, no good being Shit Lite...
Thought that article nailed it.
southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgD...
Super surprised my malware protection didn't give me a warning just clicking that link, this would have to be the most dodgy looking media website ive ever seen, looks like an old Angelfire website, article was just as bad.
southernraw wrote:A Salty Dog wrote:southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgD...Hi SR,
This reminds me somewhat of the Whitlam Dismissal.
Any anti ALP diehard who would not have had a clue what Section 53 of the Constitution referred to, overnight became a constitutional expert.
Gday Saltydog. Yeah the current media works to create division in any way possible.
I could see this coming a mile out when the referendum was announced, as i'm sure you did too based on what you said re. Whitlam.
It doesn't even matter these days what the topic is, the objective is to divide the audience and create unrest amongst the readers/watchers, most of whom now have the ability to comment(unfortunately you don't need a licence for that) which only amplifies the division.
I'm truly saddened reading the comments in this forum for No, and i've gotta say, most of my family and friends are also No.
It's staggering the unwillingness to be open to a population in our country that have had it hard for so long, and and have been asking for a fair go for so long, to finally have reached that summit of the mountain for that opportunity, only to not just be pushed back down the mountain, but blown off the top of it with an oi oi oi flag jammed up their backsides.
This country holds a lot of dark energy and until that's fixed, we're gonna be stuck with shit media like this and the resultant plebs that inhabit forums and comments like lowinfo and his bottom dwelling ilk.
It's alot easier sometimes just to turn the screens off isn't it. Not much wrong with the world then.
Cheers.
Hi SR
The LNP have managed to make it political and much of the public appear to have fallen for it, if opinion polls are to be believed.
As I've stated previously the No campaign is populated with CC Deniers, Trumpists, anti vaxxers etc. Their motive is to disrupt the conversation and divide the community. Abbott in Opposition did everything he could to frustrate the government and destroy any attempt at progress. Ultimately we all suffer. And his attempt at government was a complete disaster.
I have corresponded with an American guy for over 15 years (it started on a guitar forum!). About six years ago he moved to New Zealand and says he will stay. He visits relatives in the US occasionally, but has said he will never return to live there as it has become such a divided society. It's clear the divisions coincide with the rise of Trump.
Sadly I see Australia heading the same way.
I hope it can be turned around.
I think I need a good dose of saltwater to clear the head!!
Cheers
indo-dreaming wrote:southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgD...Super surprised my malware protection didn't give me a warning just clicking that link, this would have to be the most dodgy looking media website ive ever seen, looks like an old Angelfire website, article was just as bad.
that's funny I-D, burleigh made me laugh on the other thread too (not to diminish Salty's points). When you rein in your inner sky-karen and emulate burleigh's sardonic wit, your posts are very engaging. These threads might return to front-bar banter after all..
Smart decision by AFL
https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl-commission-reportedly-rules-out-voice-...
basesix wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?
fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgDkisa6IcZ4700-DUBfCVWu-e_7vIvRvj7J34zcvO82F5hwlAAfoSuper surprised my malware protection didn't give me a warning just clicking that link, this would have to be the most dodgy looking media website ive ever seen, looks like an old Angelfire website, article was just as bad.
that's funny I-D, burleigh made me laugh on the other thread too (not to diminish Salty's points). When you rein in your inner sky-karen and emulate burleigh's sardonic wit, your posts are very engaging. These threads might return to front-bar banter after all..
Nope..the guys a snake.
Default mode is to go for the lowest slimiest form of "point scoring" there is.
While others get banned, this sleazy aussie bogan remains. Its beyond a joke but i think we all know why.
Disgusting.
southernraw wrote:So i heard on the grapevine a couple of the most knowledgeable contributors have been silenced??
Did i miss something??? What happened?
Bud1 and Wilhelms contributions were colourful and honest.
Held some people to account too that otherwise wouldn't have been.
Radio silence?? What happened???
Anyone know?
southernraw wrote:southernraw wrote:So i heard on the grapevine a couple of the most knowledgeable contributors have been silenced??
Did i miss something??? What happened?
Bud1 and Wilhelms contributions were colourful and honest.
Held some people to account too that otherwise wouldn't have been.Radio silence?? What happened???
Anyone know?
The silence could be because no one gives
a fuck that they’ve been sin binned, again.
Both pretty fkn annoying, one turns every thread to shit with his deranged ranting and the other turns every thread to shit posting endless memes.
southernraw wrote:What happened???
Hey southern. Queenies and Nurseys may get something out of it. Personally, I found this one of Rik Mayall's more boorish roles:
That was very good basesix. Thanks for the laugh.
southernraw wrote:A Salty Dog wrote:southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgD...Hi SR,
This reminds me somewhat of the Whitlam Dismissal.
Any anti ALP diehard who would not have had a clue what Section 53 of the Constitution referred to, overnight became a constitutional expert.
Gday Saltydog. Yeah the current media works to create division in any way possible.
I could see this coming a mile out when the referendum was announced, as i'm sure you did too based on what you said re. Whitlam.
It doesn't even matter these days what the topic is, the objective is to divide the audience and create unrest amongst the readers/watchers, most of whom now have the ability to comment(unfortunately you don't need a licence for that) which only amplifies the division.
I'm truly saddened reading the comments in this forum for No, and i've gotta say, most of my family and friends are also No.
It's staggering the unwillingness to be open to a population in our country that have had it hard for so long, and and have been asking for a fair go for so long, to finally have reached that summit of the mountain for that opportunity, only to not just be pushed back down the mountain, but blown off the top of it with an oi oi oi flag jammed up their backsides.
This country holds a lot of dark energy and until that's fixed, we're gonna be stuck with shit media like this and the resultant plebs that inhabit forums and comments like lowinfo and his bottom dwelling ilk.
It's alot easier sometimes just to turn the screens off isn't it. Not much wrong with the world then.
Cheers.
Amen... and Aeveryone
Reference for 2nd Reffo...
Cut down all Oz forests to print a Voice Mach III preamble!
Strange how [L] argues Albo's proposal is confusing...
Dutto's Reffo dumbfounds himself + [L] party + Aboriginal Minister + NP + Aboriginals.
Rip Rip Woodchip Reffo III Proposal...
[L] Owned msm had just one job...to report if No camp were on side with Voice III.
Let's just see how well the [L] Attack Dogs dodged the #1 Reffo Brain Snap of 2023
tbb searched hard...[L] licking media won't dare question Dutto's Bully entourage!
If any Media dare Question the [NO] Bullies they get a wishy washy dodgy cowardly response
NP David Littleproud : Gives crew 2 Batshit crazy Answers
1. Hold Dutto's Reffo With next Election
Oops! Try the 2nd answer!
2. If [Yes] fails + If Coalition wins the next Election...we'll run a [L]ucky Dip!
(As long as we can Vote No & then Yes but still mean No! Ok!)
https://www.farmonline.com.au/story/8334399/nationals-back-duttons-promi...
Jacinta Price's Eyebrows : "Yeah I said we've had conversations...to have recognition."
Never intended to answer the [L] reffo question...
If Price supports her Boss's Brain Snap then she's the poorest promoter of [No] + [L] Victory Reffo!
Meaning she just failed her first test as [L] Aboriginal Minister to free her people by Her own [Reffo]
Price must lead her [L] reffo from the front...failed #1 Pub Test. Boss told her shit & she knows less!
[see] : Big White [L] Bully with boot on the throat of lil powerless token [L] Black woman...(So Sad!)
Poor Aboriginal Woman of the [L] Stolen Voice Generation... can't even speak for herself. (A crime!)
2025 Oz elects [L] Aboriginal Leader that can't share Taboo talk of Big Bully White Voice Reffo...
Vote [NO] For #1 [L] Racists for an even more confusing expensive Reffo with zero detail!
Q: Where's the Detail on [L] Reffo?
[NO] Not Enough - Liddle : " [100x ?,?,?,?]...Dodged every single opportunity to sell [L] Reffo! (ZERO!)
Please stop asking me a Voice question ... I'm just another Voiceless powerless [L] Aboriginal chick.
But a Big Yes! To more of the same Boot on Throat / Can't Breathe Legislation
Big No! To Aboriginal Voice in Constitution.
https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/radionational-breakfast/oppositio...
[NO] Partner Lidia Thorpe : Opposes Albo's Reffo but has conveniently lost her Voice on Dutto's Reffo.
[L] Media reuse to ask The Mad Lady : " Will you equally oppose Dutto's [L]ucky Dip Reffo! Huh?
Neither have the guts to reveal...as it will split the [L] News Directive [NO] Vote
[NO] Mobster Mundine : "My bombastic Hate Campaign boosted Dutto~Where's my [L] Senate Ticket!"
Recap : Mundine bled 16% of [L] votes on his last outing...but [L] effortlessly reward haters!
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/nyunggai-warren-mundine-emerges-...
Media & [NO] camp are gutless cowards & have got no Questions for Zero [L]ucky Dip Voice Reffo .
They're full of shit & care least for Aboriginal People by fucking them around further with a Fake Reffo.
Like who the fuck is so evil to exploit First Nation for a [L]ucky Dip Power Trip...'Dutto!'
Other Nations demand any alternative Reffo be squared off at same time!
If [L] are too gutless & still that heartless & stupid...then fuck off & let the caring Oz folk get on with it!
Qldurrz : We apologize for Voldemort's dizzy spell...he's just powerin' up his Voodoo chalm!
No Camp Lucky Dip Reffo
Nats > Get 2 Dips
[L] Ministers > We Cut off our Tongues!
Cash > Wot the Boss said...Nothin'
Price > Sorry! Lost my Voice!
Liddle > Sorry! Lost my Voice!
Lidia > F.U. Voice stole my Voice
Mundine > Where's my Senate Seat
Oz Media! > Lost our collective [L] Executive Voice!
PS: If any can get a straight answer from [NO] on 100x more confusing [L]ucky Dip Reffo...please share!
[If ya Don't Know] About Dutto's Lucky Dip ...
By being true to dogmatic mantra [NO] are now mandated to Vote [Yes] to avoid Dutto's [L]ucky Dip!
Otherwise...no one would ever believe a word they said! True!
@suprusty one area you didn't cover is transparency
Currently a lot of money is spent, lots of advice given but no information about it.
So what advice is given and what advice is acted on and who decides where the money goes to and how was the out come?
Good luck on finding that out we do know things are not working due to the gap report the why and how is not known.
The Voice would be a game changer in all of this and may well be a un intended consequence of shining a light where darkness now exists.
The Voice will publish its's advice, that will certainly put pressure on government and those that issue the advice to get it right unlike now.
The No vote supports no action and continued indifference.
suprusty wrote:Long time reader, 1st time poster.
It’s been an entertaining read so far. I look forward to my morning catchup of the past day and night posts. There's certainly some passionate thick-skinned people contributing. Thick skinned (not thick skulled as some might read) as there’s a little too much heat at times which spills towards hate speak yet the perpetrators still come back for more. It’s fascinating.
In saying that - I'm venturing into the discussion. Firstly, a little about me. Late 50's, white suburban boy, corporate accountant, logical thinker (stick figures are as artistic as I can get),
call a spade a spade, married to a Kiwi, have gone to the dark side & ride an SUP. I can hear the laughter now, but leave her alone, she’s a good woman - a keeper.In all honesty I'm probably a No voter. It’s not because I don’t acknowledge the hardships or recognize the harm to generations of FNP that past actions have resulted in, it’s not that I don’t want change, it’s not about fear, it’s because over time I've become risk averse! Simple as that. I doubt there’s anyone on this forum that doesn’t want to see good outcomes.
Being around for a while you get to see how humans operate, react to things etc, so with the Voice proposal I look at it from the perspective of "what are the humans going to do with it".
The emotional arguments of the Yes vote and the various arguments of the No voters are all just noise to me and don’t play a part. It's how much I determine that normal human behavior will complicate the process & the consequences of dysfunction that sway me to vote No. It really is a vote of no confidence more than anything.People have differing views, different needs, different agendas, different priorities etc, bring in all those human characteristics into the Voice operating structure IMO will likely result in
dysfunction or at best very slow progress. Given the Voice is Australia wide how do you prioritize need? How do you agree on a course of action? You can’t please everyone. I’d throw in Lydia’s
treaty impact as well - I expect her to join in but push for treaty which just adds to the priority decision complexity. Very hard to move forward without unity. I’ll have a huge amount of
respect for those taking on the task of making it work. The amount of shit their going to cop from all sides will be enormous.Given the complexity of the Voice task, do I have confidence in it being successful - not really. There's been that many Govt initiatives that had great intentions but were largely ineffective,
over budget, rorting etc (NDIS springs to mind) all hampered in some way by human involvement. Based on the way this one been rolled out so far, it’s very hard to have any confidence that it will work.I can hear the "it’s not working now, let’s change it" call. Yep, I agree. What will an unsuccessful Voice leave us with? Given it'll be enshrined in the Constitution, I'd imagine it will just keep trying
different approaches hoping that something works which is great, however… it suggests an open cheque book with unlimited cheque's and that’s not the type of change I want to see. I’d like to
see some sort of limitations in place - which is probably the role of parliament but that comes down to that damn confidence thing again and I really don’t want to have to vote for Pauline.Being risk averse I tend to steer away from this type of unknown, unlimited scenario. I prefer calculated risk. Some will call me a pessimist, I'd reply - pessimist or realist?
A question that I haven’t seen asked yet - What happens when the Voice successfully achieves harmony? Will it wind itself down? Why will it be needed? Asking on behalf of my grandkids.
What would make me vote Yes (in a heartbeat actually) is if the Voice proposal included winding back existing ineffective measures and replacing them with Voice driven initiatives. It’s Ok to try
something and fail, just fail quickly. No point holding onto those existing failures. That’s the Accountant coming out in me.My preferred solution would be to get really passionate people from both Yes & No camps, give them the power to investigate why the existing measures are not fixing things at ground level.
When I say passionate people, I mean those that will call out a "piss weak excuse", people that will apply the funding from the ground up not the other way around. Basically, serious accountability for the existing methods. The key being - give them the power! Sounds a bit like the Voice doesn’t it - unfortunately the Voice doesn’t have the power.Has Albo given us any indication of what his plans are if the Voice fails? Can’t say I've heard anything about that. It would be nice to have an option. It may help the Yes vote.
Although voting No, I'll be happy if Yes gets up and they can achieve what they set out to, If they get up and fail well then it won’t come as a surprise. It's not the first initiative that didn’t work.
Time always gives up who’s more right & who’s less right.
That's my 1 votes worth. Thanks for your time.
well said , my train of thoughts are along that line
Is the SUP rider planted into the forum by the LNP? Not much in a positive light was said apart from casting his 1 votes worth more than once.
southernraw wrote:basesix wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?
fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgDkisa6IcZ4700-DUBfCVWu-e_7vIvRvj7J34zcvO82F5hwlAAfoSuper surprised my malware protection didn't give me a warning just clicking that link, this would have to be the most dodgy looking media website ive ever seen, looks like an old Angelfire website, article was just as bad.
that's funny I-D, burleigh made me laugh on the other thread too (not to diminish Salty's points). When you rein in your inner sky-karen and emulate burleigh's sardonic wit, your posts are very engaging. These threads might return to front-bar banter after all..
Nope..the guys a snake.
Default mode is to go for the lowest slimiest form of "point scoring" there is.
While others get banned, this sleazy aussie bogan remains. Its beyond a joke but i think we all know why.
Disgusting.
Mate i dont know if your troll friends got banned or not that's between them and Swellnet, but it would be of zero surprise if they did, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out why they might.
Nobody here EVER gets banned for their views or even the number of post they post, they get banned for how they treat other posters and rarely for one or two post but generally for longer patterns of behaviour, of which both your mates have a long history of just trolling and stirring up others just trying to blow things up.
I mean seriously the mods here are super tolerant, but these people even seem to troll the mods themselves, and then you wonder why they might get banned???
God its not rocket science, have your say stick to the topic, reply with a bit of banter here or there, maybe it might get heated at times and a little abuse might get thrown, we are all human most get it, but if your here just to follow people around trolling them trying to blow up things then at some stage you have to expect mods to go, okay enough is enough.
BTW. if you were a decent mate and you didn't want them banned, you would actually be telling them to pull their heads in before they get banned, and also telling them to cut it out because you dont want this thread/topic shut down, which their behaviour also increases the risk of happening as its a topic that could easily go off the rails.
Ha ha i dont know if ive even been called a bogan before :D
Reform wrote:Is the SUP rider planted into the forum by the LNP? Not much in a positive light was said apart from casting his 1 votes worth more than once.
How do you even know he is a LNP voter?, he could very well be a Labor voter or vote for a minor party.
Reading his post i think he would fall into a pretty typical mid age moderate centrists typical view point.
For perspective here is the recent poll stats on how people are looking at voting, age wise most people here seem to be in the 35 to 65 age bracket (many seem to be over 50) so really he is a much more accurate representation of the typical view for this age demographic than other posters here that while highly represented here are otherwise actually in a minority in the wider Australian community.
Of course thats if stats can be believed, they aren't always right, but all polling companies have shown similar patterns over the last few months.
flollo wrote:Smart decision by AFL
https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl-commission-reportedly-rules-out-voice-...
Yes, but NRL took 400k of yes vote advertising.
indo-dreaming wrote:southernraw wrote:basesix wrote:indo-dreaming wrote:southernraw wrote:One from the grave.... i hear voices....
https://theaimn.com/the-great-australian-gaslighting/?
fbclid=IwAR0sW2GgDkisa6IcZ4700-DUBfCVWu-e_7vIvRvj7J34zcvO82F5hwlAAfoSuper surprised my malware protection didn't give me a warning just clicking that link, this would have to be the most dodgy looking media website ive ever seen, looks like an old Angelfire website, article was just as bad.
that's funny I-D, burleigh made me laugh on the other thread too (not to diminish Salty's points). When you rein in your inner sky-karen and emulate burleigh's sardonic wit, your posts are very engaging. These threads might return to front-bar banter after all..
Nope..the guys a snake.
Default mode is to go for the lowest slimiest form of "point scoring" there is.
While others get banned, this sleazy aussie bogan remains. Its beyond a joke but i think we all know why.
Disgusting.Mate i dont know if your troll friends got banned or not that's between them and Swellnet, but it would be of zero surprise if they did, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out why they might.
Nobody here EVER gets banned for their views or even the number of post they post, they get banned for how they treat other posters and rarely for one or two post but generally for longer patterns of behaviour, of which both your mates have a long history of just trolling and stirring up others just trying to blow things up.
I mean seriously the mods here are super tolerant, but these people even seem to troll the mods themselves, and then you wonder why they might get banned???
God its not rocket science, have your say stick to the topic, reply with a bit of banter here or there, maybe it might get heated at times and a little abuse might get thrown, we are all human most get it, but if your here just to follow people around trolling them trying to blow up things then at some stage you have to expect mods to go, okay enough is enough.
BTW. if you were a decent mate and you didn't want them banned, you would actually be telling them to pull their heads in before they get banned, and also telling them to cut it out because you dont want this thread/topic shut down, which their behaviour also increases the risk of happening as its a topic that could easily go off the rails.
Ha ha i dont know if ive even been called a bogan before :D
This is the most laughable shit i've ever read.
You stay safe behind your keyboard cowboy.
Interesting... my previous explanations dodged by Indo... plain logic fails him at last. Doesn't take a genius to see why Yes is so much smarter than no.
I focus wrote:@suprusty one area you didn't cover is transparency
Currently a lot of money is spent, lots of advice given but no information about it.
So what advice is given and what advice is acted on and who decides where the money goes to and how was the out come?
Good luck on finding that out we do know things are not working due to the gap report the why and how is not known.
The Voice would be a game changer in all of this and may well be a un intended consequence of shining a light where darkness now exists.
The Voice will publish its's advice, that will certainly put pressure on government and those that issue the advice to get it right unlike now.
The No vote supports no action and continued indifference.
Hi I Focus
Thanks for your conversational reply. I think we are on similar pages re transparency or accountability as I put it.
Reason for my post is a couple of pages back a contributor wanted to know why someone votes no. That got me asking myself How am I going to vote? Starting with being honest with myself I answered the question What concerns do I have? resulting in my post. I knew it wouldn't be to everyone's taste as I concluded that I'm probably a no voter. There's always at least 3 sides to every story so am I a staunch no voter, definitely not, I posted to see what other sides would be brought up in a conversational style. Your reply resonates with me. If the Voice publishes its advice that suits me but I would prefer publishing outcomes as well. If Albo's alternative to the Voice is just doing the same than that would sway me to a yes as I believe something has to change.
Believe it or not, what's having a bigger impact on me is Lydia, not her crazy actions, but her stand up and fight attitude. When you see in the media FNP with not much, saying their voting No because they don't want to make it worse meaning they are just going accept the current then the inner Lydia comes out - stand up and fight. Maybe that's what I need to do. Fight for them.
I look forward to the Yes party knocking on my door for a conversation. Not so much the No party - my sisters partner is a flag waving LNP supporter - heard those arguments long ago & yes some of those resonate with me.
Cheers
harrycoopr wrote:Interesting... my previous explanations dodged by Indo... plain logic fails him at last. Doesn't take a genius to see why Yes is so much smarter than no.
What post are you referring too? (give me the post date and time)
Ive never seen any post that brings any half decent argument for a yes case.
And thats what the yes camp need to bring, they need to convince Australians why this is needed and why the constitution needs to be changed.
Telling people they are voting no because they are racist or this or that, doesn't sway anyone.
BTW. I watched the Yes campaign your the voice advert yesterday, i highly doubt that would sway anyone either there was nothing at all in the advert that gave information or a reason to vote yes, it was more just an ad playing on emotions.
harrycoopr wrote:Interesting... my previous explanations dodged by Indo... plain logic fails him at last. Doesn't take a genius to see why Yes is so much smarter than no.
Harry, your posts don’t equal logic. Much like this one.
Long time reader, very occasional poster, appreciative of the many on here who provide little nuanced jewels amongst the dirt and gravel. I'm voting yes for many reasons already posted on here and because of my own background, experience, knowledge, study, worklife and friendships. I just wrote, then deleted a long response but didn't want to just be another voice ;) in the crowd. Anyway, thanks to those who post and inform in good faith and hopefully so called Australia (another wink ;)) turns the ship and starts the long road to becoming what it can be. PS quads are still good but I've slipped back to a twin plus trailer combo as the go to :)
Good posts @owgoodarequads and @suprusty. Regardless of yes or no, good on yas for sharimg thoughtful comments for others to reflect on.
Referendum aside, i think the crux of indigenous Australians hopes is unity.
And civility and openess to different perspectives is a great step towards that.
Cheers
Btw surfed a quad this morning for the first time in a month and felt rejuvenated!
udo wrote:
What an absolute boofhead.
Divisive and diversiom tactics 101
Voice Combo Poll Charts
[YES] Age 18-34 = 65% > 35-54 = 42% > 55+ = 24%
[YES] Party Time ~ Greens 72% > ALP 61% > LNP 26% > *Other 18%
*Other (Anomaly) Ind (Teals) are running on [YES] > Seems odd that *Other are least supportive?
https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/ng-interactive/2023/sep/04/ind...
Oz crossed to the Darkside during 2nd week of July...
Seasonal Up to [NO] Gooders ...April Qld > May SA > June WA > July NSW > Aug Tas > Sept Vic
However! Polls don't include Dutto's Clusterfuck Lucky Dip!
If media constantly label Albo's Voice confusing then we'll expect Dutto's Lucky Dip Poll to Plummet.
Just joking...[L] media wouldn't dare lop dead wood from their Executive branch. (Not hear a word of it!)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2023_Australian_In...
2025 Election Poll
1st Sept:
Albo scored his very first Negative Satisfaction rank (Peak +39 > (Now) -1% )
Dutto scored his least shitty Satisfaction rank (Low point -28 > (Now) -5% )
That's a whopping 61% turnaround in the Leader's satisfaction rankings.
Should Albo keep humpin' Aukus Missiles or wish to 'Alter' (Bastardize) Old School Oz...Bye! Bye!
Of interest being the Primary Vote seems to ever pinch closer towards Ballot Day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_Australian_fe...
burleigh wrote:harrycoopr wrote:Interesting... my previous explanations dodged by Indo... plain logic fails him at last. Doesn't take a genius to see why Yes is so much smarter than no.
Harry, your posts don’t equal logic. Much like this one.
Ah the burley... clouding the waters. You know what, ppl like u and Indont remind me of what's sad about whitey... it's a mentality of denying... I think it's a carrythru from colonial times... deny blackfellas their land, their cultures, their rights... and now their Voice. There seems to be something in the hearts of ppl like this that takes perverse pleasure in denying others. And in this case denying something that is rightfully theirs!!
Ask yrself this burly, what difference does it make to me... what do I care... how does it really affect me? Look into why no is so important to u. Then go back to my original post.
harrycoopr wrote:burleigh wrote:harrycoopr wrote:Interesting... my previous explanations dodged by Indo... plain logic fails him at last. Doesn't take a genius to see why Yes is so much smarter than no.
Harry, your posts don’t equal logic. Much like this one.
Ah the burley... clouding the waters. You know what, ppl like u and Indont remind me of what's sad about whitey... it's a mentality of denying... I think it's a carrythru from colonial times... deny blackfellas their land, their cultures, their rights... and now their Voice. There seems to be something in the hearts of ppl like this that takes perverse pleasure in denying others. And in this case denying something that is rightfully theirs!!
Ask yrself this burly, what difference does it make to me... what do I care... how does it really affect me? Look into why no is so important to u. Then go back to my original post.
Refer to my previous comment about logic.
southernraw wrote:udo wrote:What an absolute boofhead.
Divisive and diversiom tactics 101
You're too kind.
Rennick is a dead set, complete and utter idiot.
Read Wiki.
And for some reason, the idiots are all attracted to the LNP
harrycoopr wrote:burleigh wrote:harrycoopr wrote:Interesting... my previous explanations dodged by Indo... plain logic fails him at last. Doesn't take a genius to see why Yes is so much smarter than no.
Harry, your posts don’t equal logic. Much like this one.
Ah the burley... clouding the waters. You know what, ppl like u and Indont remind me of what's sad about whitey... it's a mentality of denying... I think it's a carrythru from colonial times... deny blackfellas their land, their cultures, their rights... and now their Voice. There seems to be something in the hearts of ppl like this that takes perverse pleasure in denying others. And in this case denying something that is rightfully theirs!!
Ask yrself this burly, what difference does it make to me... what do I care... how does it really affect me? Look into why no is so important to u. Then go back to my original post.
Nailed it perfectly Harry.
sigh.. nothing like pre-existing politics/ideology threatened to send people scurrying off to their internet machines. Perhaps one of the few benefits to come of all this brouhaha is people taking an active interest, motivation aside, and looking things up - from what Aboriginal Australians prefer to be called, to genetic evidence of migration, to Aussie archaeological discoveries. A second benefit might be people starting to become more skeptical of their source material. If the vote is No, at least, perhaps, there will be some better informed people.. long bow, but that's all we have.
southernraw wrote:harrycoopr wrote:burleigh wrote:harrycoopr wrote:Interesting... my previous explanations dodged by Indo... plain logic fails him at last. Doesn't take a genius to see why Yes is so much smarter than no.
Harry, your posts don’t equal logic. Much like this one.
Ah the burley... clouding the waters. You know what, ppl like u and Indont remind me of what's sad about whitey... it's a mentality of denying... I think it's a carrythru from colonial times... deny blackfellas their land, their cultures, their rights... and now their Voice. There seems to be something in the hearts of ppl like this that takes perverse pleasure in denying others. And in this case denying something that is rightfully theirs!!
Ask yrself this burly, what difference does it make to me... what do I care... how does it really affect me? Look into why no is so important to u. Then go back to my original post.Nailed it perfectly Harry.
Thanks SR... Burleys just resorting to nonsense now... no actual rebuttals of any substance or intelligence. They also remind me of Trumpians... ppl who have a chip on their shoulder, who feel they lack power... so they damn well use any little amount they can find and then feel better about themselves.
Ppl like burley and indo should read White Nation by Ghassan Hage... this would clear up everything about why they are the way they are... these books have been written for them!! Sad they don't utilise them.
One of the oldest storwees in existence ;)
https://m.
&pp=ygU7ZHJlYW10aW1lIGFuZCB0aGUgc2V2ZW4gc2lzdGVycyAtIHRoZSB3b3JsZCdzIG9sZGVzdCBzdG9yeSA%3D harrycoopr wrote:southernraw wrote:harrycoopr wrote:burleigh wrote:harrycoopr wrote:Interesting... my previous explanations dodged by Indo... plain logic fails him at last. Doesn't take a genius to see why Yes is so much smarter than no.
Harry, your posts don’t equal logic. Much like this one.
Ah the burley... clouding the waters. You know what, ppl like u and Indont remind me of what's sad about whitey... it's a mentality of denying... I think it's a carrythru from colonial times... deny blackfellas their land, their cultures, their rights... and now their Voice. There seems to be something in the hearts of ppl like this that takes perverse pleasure in denying others. And in this case denying something that is rightfully theirs!!
Ask yrself this burly, what difference does it make to me... what do I care... how does it really affect me? Look into why no is so important to u. Then go back to my original post.Nailed it perfectly Harry.
Thanks SR... Burleys just resorting to nonsense now... no actual rebuttals of any substance or intelligence. They also remind me of Trumpians... ppl who have a chip on their shoulder, who feel they lack power... so they damn well use any little amount they can find and then feel better about themselves.
Ppl like burley and indo should read White Nation by Ghassan Hage... this would clear up everything about why they are the way they are... these books have been written for them!! Sad they don't utilise them.
Please refer to my previous comments about logic.
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