The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
that's right supa
I thought I could be dragged over to yes, to vote enthusiasticly, with a clear conscience...
but it just hasn't happened
I've just been repulsed by the yes campaign
however, I will not vote no
I cannot begrudge aboriginal people this opportunity
and I urge people to ignore the....
"if you don't know, vote NO'
or whatever their bullshit slogan is...
and if you don't know... or if you just think there's just too much bullshit flying... just go informal vote to show your distrust of the system, and what a fuck up of a referendum it has been...
I said 18 months ago, or thereabouts...
it's clear what labor's strategy is, with them so obviously not wanting to be dragged into detail...
and that, if they really think they can keep that schtik up for 18 months, good luck to them...
(not believing they would actually try to maintain this position all the way)
but they have kept it up, and then some...
people want something they can believe in, tangible change...
this ain't it for me
I think I’ve told this story before , can’t remember if it was on SN . I met a french girl in Bali who was part of a ngo . They had gone to west sumartra after the tsunami to help with the rebuilding of villages . She said at the time she wasn’t sure if they were doing the right thing. In the past there had been natural disasters over the centuries and people had rebuilt and got on with life. The ngo rebuilt a village where there had been two
seperate villagers . After it was finished it remained empty as both villagers refused to live together as they had been fighting with each other for decades . The problem was the ngo just went ahead , they didn’t actually ask what the people wanted. Throwing money at problems and not consulting people on what they need causes bigger problems .
https://m.
and, my questions were not directed at you supa, just the hypocrisy of yes camp going this trump line
its so fucking tedious, whenever the left is losing anything, it's always trump trump trump...
instead of asking why voters don't like the stench of what it is they are selling
it's the whole reason trump became a thing in the first place... an aloof ruling class, showing absolute disdain for their traditional voters...
trump should have never been more than a blip... but now he is firmly entrenched in decades of our politics... surely 'the left's' biggest own goal failure ever...
just wanted to point that out, because not having a go at you, I totally respect your eternal reasonableness
sypkan wrote:I said 18 months ago, or thereabouts...
it's clear what labor's strategy is, with them so obviously not wanting to be dragged into detail...
and that, if they really think they can keep that schtik up for 18 months, good luck to them...
(not believing they would actually try to maintain this position all the way)
but they have kept it up, and then some...
people want something they can believe in, tangible change...
this ain't it for me
What details are missing that you would like to see ? Isn’t it up to parliament to decide the finer details if and when the yes voice gets up ? Albo has said he favours the voice design but it’s up to parliament to decide those details which can’t happen until after australia votes .
I understand everything perfectly well thanks winnie
it seems there's a lot you don't understand...
a hell of a lot
I want nuts and bolts supafreak
a potential model at a minimum
tangible change
all I see is another layer of bureaucracy
more bureauracy that only empowers those that are already in positions of power
those that got us to here...
sypkan wrote:I want nuts and bolts supafreak
a potential model at a minimum
tangible change
all I see is another layer of bureaucracy
more bureauracy that only empowers those that are already in positions of power
those that got us to here...
I can see people elected by communities to represent them rather than government appointed representatives, will be far far better . The cheek of wazza saying he would like to be on the voice committee if yes vote gets up was hilarious, I mean does he seriously believe any mob will vote for him to represent them ?
supa, yes I kept up to date with all the propaganda and disinformation disgracefully spewing out of both sides of the debate, including on The Voice's own website, before I went overseas again a couple months ago.
I was originally passionately yes until I saw the debate play out and just how disgraceful and despicable the socialist left/yes side is (in not just The Voice but every issue over the past 18mths or so). I don't buy either side now.
I know the spirit of the great Australian society and nation that I grew up in and came to love. That spirit is not reflected in The Voice and is more generally no longer reflected in either the ALP or the LNP.
Supafreak wrote:@gsco , have you read the design of the voice ?
Well you can try to but what details there is on its design is actually only a recommendation, the government actually gets the final say, I only learnt this recently from an recent interview with Noel Pearson.
So yeah even media articles like from ABC on design really aren't correct.
But even if you look at the recommendations you can see how poorly its put together.
Instead of focussing on the areas with the most need where the gap needs to be closed like Alice springs or remote areas and working back from there, seats are spread out more evenly Australia wide and in reality it will be the city indigenous folk who hold the most seats and hence the power.
Suggested is:
24 seats, three to Torres strait islands with a pop of 4.5K (very good deal for them)
5 seats only for remote areas.
2 seats in ACT because they have such a big indigenous population with so many problems right...yeah nah.
Rest spread out over states and cities.
Its set up to be a great political vehicle for city type activist, to get a treaty or push other things they want, but not real good for those that actually need the gap closed.
And of course as we know there is a lot of important details and boundaries missing even in the suggested design, some of the biggest around how its decided who gets seats and details and possible issues around seats, one of the most important areas lacks a lot of important detail even in just suggested design.
And worst still its unlikely to be a democratic process, that decides seats which equals high risk of corruption.
My post earlier today on other page cut and pasted from elsewhere also highlights other issues.
And then there is the Uluru statement from the heart, which this is really about , start reading the docs past the 1st page and things like minutes from meetings, i think very few people would still vote yes after doing so
And also go listen to what those involved have said when they had nothing to lose, not now when they are trying to down play things.
https://m.
&pp=ygUbVWx1cnUgZnJvbSB0aGUgaGVhcnQgYnJpZ2dz fitzroy-21 wrote:I've been purposely staying out of this thread as it is just another case of us and them, yes and no division. I know many T.O's up here that are well and truly in the No camp.
What so many on here just don't understand is that FNP are no different to the rest of us. The needs and views are all different nation wide. Those that live in the city, the bush, the desert, the coast, the islands, the North South East and West. Everyone is different. It's not a clear cut Yes or No.
Good to see you post though, when you do it often seems to be based on real life experience, which to me is a good thing (condition of reef comes to mind as other topic)
Q: "Dear Mr Green Ant, can campaign signage use Purple that is similar to the AEC's branding?"
A : "Dear Mr / Ms / LGBTQIA+ / Chinese [L]...The AEC would strongly urge anyone planning electoral communication activities at the next (Federal Election) to not use the colour purple or any other branding elements that could be perceived to imitate the AEC in any way!"
https://www.aec.gov.au/FAQs/files/21-1579-factsheet-purple-signage-02.pdf
*Example 1
VOTE AEC Purple (Oz Mix colour Ribbon Map)
https://content.api.news/v3/images/bin/3d9584921150cb8ea9ebddd67c5a0833
VOTE YES Purple (Oz Mix colour Ribbon Map)
https://content.api.news/v3/images/bin/08ecf7d2bafd5340448f37436091e895
*Example 2
AEC Purple / Blue [Info Signs].
https://thenewdaily.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/1649675041-AEC-sig...
YES 23 Purple / Blue [Vote Signs]
https://i.headtopics.com/images/2023/8/22/sbsnews/yes-and-no-voice-campa...
*Example 3
(Sacred) Tjukurpa Flag Colours were gifted to Oz Govt to be used as a Symbol of Unity!
Australian Govt should uphold the Pride of the Flag.
[NO] Camp must stop this hateful trashing of Oz / Aboriginal Flags to divide Australians.
If [NO] Jacinta Hates Tjukurpa so much then please stop exploiting these colours to incite Violence!
Our Flags are proudly flown together united as one!
[NO] Camp Destroys & shits on our Flags and opposes any unity!
Instead uses our Flags to Weaponize the Referendum to incite hate.
Stop trashing & exploiting Oz / Aboriginal Flags to incite hate campaigns during Voice Referendum
When does one [L] Stand proud to defend our flag & order this Divisive [NO] Camp from trashing it...
If Chinese tore up our Flag every 3 days the whole nation would declare War
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=232330683126255&set=pb.100090479...
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=231869923172331&set=pb.100090479...
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=225037227188934&set=pb.100090479...
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=184450554580935&set=pb.100090479...
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=185910484434942&set=pb.100090479...
indo-dreaming wrote:Supafreak wrote:@gsco , have you read the design of the voice ?
Well you can try to but what details there is on its design is actually only a recommendation, the government actually gets the final say, I only learnt this recently from an recent interview with Noel Pearson.
So yeah even media articles like from ABC on design really aren't correct.
But even if you look at the recommendations you can see how poorly its put together.
Instead of focussing on the areas with the most need where the gap needs to be closed like Alice springs or remote areas and working back from there, seats are spread out more evenly Australia wide and in reality it will be the city indigenous folk who hold the most seats and hence the power.
Suggested is:
24 seats, three to Torres strait islands with a pop of 4.5K (very good deal for them)
5 seats only for remote areas.
2 seats in ACT because they have such a big indigenous population with so many problems right...yeah nah.
Rest spread out over states and cities.
Its set up to be a great political vehicle for city type activist, to get a treaty or push other things they want, but not real good for those that actually need the gap closed.
And of course as we know there is a lot of important details and boundaries missing even in the suggested design, some of the biggest around how its decided who gets seats and details and possible issues around seats, one of the most important areas lacks a lot of important detail even in just suggested design.
And worst still its unlikely to be a democratic process, that decides seats which equals high risk of corruption.
My post earlier today on other page cut and pasted from elsewhere also highlights other issues.
And then there is the Uluru statement from the heart, which this is really about , start reading the docs past the 1st page and things like minutes from meetings, i think very few people would still vote yes after doing so
And also go listen to what those involved have said when they had nothing to lose, not now when they are trying to down play things.
Indo are you saying there are only 4.5 thousand TSIs ? Maybe on the islands but there’s more than that on the BIG island, pretty sure GS or Adam12 pointed this out before plus you left out 35 local and regional voices and what makes you think there may be corruption in the election process ? Don’t trust them ? But you do trust government appointed representatives to do their jobs honestly ? Hmmmmmmmm
It is worth casting your mind forward to where The Voice would take us. Here is a reasonably likely, but not certain, prediction based on observations of how the world works.
If The Voice is successful, after initial enthusiasm and a hectic few years of establishment, planning, direction finding, consultation and striving to implement new, and not so new, ideas the reality of the complexity and intractability of the task at hand will weigh heavily on the committee. Whilst successes will be achieved, these will tend to be hard to sustain and tend to be where a favourable set of circumstances and people were in place. Seeds of good ideas and programs will fall on fertile ground but many will wither.
Successes will often be hard replicate from region to region, place to place and tribe to tribe. Overpromising in the campaign will have created impatience and a tendency towards dissappointment with results achieved by the committee within FNP.
After 5 years or so, those in the committee most focussed on the most aluristic but hardest challenges of solving health, housing, employment, social problems, poverty etc. will be struggling to stay motivated, optimistic and to see a clear path to better outcomes. They will be so busy trying to make good things happen they will have little time or inclination for "political" games within the group and in lobbying for influence. This could make them a weaker faction in inevitable power plays.
Another "activist" group within The Voice committee will have a much narrower focus with clearer, more tangible and achievable goals with potentially quite dramatic payoffs in terms of long term power and wealth gains for themselves and their supporters and some FNP groups and regions. Their focus will be on the big wins / big levers of treaty, forms of reparations, resource control and land rights expressed as desires by many in the record of consultation recorded from participants in the Uluru Statement process.
This ability to focus may well give them the drive and and clarity of purpose to come to dominate the committee and its agenda. That is just how groups tend to work. Energised leaders with clear purpose tend to dominate in groups, committees, parties and tribes. Pursuit of power, resources and wealth (in its various forms) have overwhelmingly been drivers of human societal dymanics throughout human history. This may be somewhat less the case for many FNP but recent history has shown that enough such leaders exist among FNP to be potential catalysts.
With intelligent use The Voice in the constitution is no small thing. It could be a powerful lever. The lever will probably be used to its full potential by the "activists".
Such a scenario painted above is not certain but is more likely than not. In which case the vote is not for the small target as presented by the Yes campaign - a small change of wording or just an "advisory group". It is probably for a permenant very activist group with considerable power pursuing goals set out in the full 20 plus page Uluru Statement supporting info. Major change to the Nation will occur. How and where is uncertain.
Vote on the likely reality not just warm fuzzy TV ads and Albo's carefully scripted reassurring one liners.
Just how do some people get appointed to these positions ? ………..The contract was awarded while Bess Price was the Housing Minister for the former Country Liberals Party government.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-16/tangentyere-council-welcomes-audi...
Ms Price now works for Zodiac.
frog wrote:It is worth casting your mind forward to where The Voice would take us. Here is a reasonably likely, but not certain, prediction based on observations of how the world works.
If The Voice is successful, after initial enthusiasm and a hectic few years of establishment, planning, direction finding, consultation and striving to implement new, and not so new, ideas the reality of the complexity and intractability of the task at hand will weigh heavily on the committee. Whilst successes will be achieved, these will tend to be hard to sustain and tend to be where a favourable set of circumstances and people were in place. Seeds of good ideas and programs will fall on fertile ground but many will wither.
Successes will often be hard replicate from region to region, place to place and tribe to tribe. Overpromising in the campaign will have created impatience and a tendency towards dissappointment with results achieved by the committee within FNP.
After 5 years or so, those in the committee most focussed on the most aluristic but hardest challenges of solving health, housing, employment, social problems, poverty etc. will be struggling to stay motivated, optimistic and to see a clear path to better outcomes. They will be so busy trying to make good things happen they will have little time or inclination for "political" games within the group and in lobbying for influence. This could make them a weaker faction in inevitable power plays.
Another "activist" group within The Voice committee will have a much narrower focus with clearer, more tangible and achievable goals with potentially quite dramatic payoffs in terms of long term power and wealth gains for themselves and their supporters and some FNP groups and regions. Their focus will be on the big wins / big levers of treaty, forms of reparations, resource control and land rights expressed as desires by many in the record of consultation recorded from participants in the Uluru Statement process.
This ability to focus may well give them the drive and and clarity of purpose to come to dominate the committee and its agenda. That is just how groups tend to work. Energised leaders with clear purpose tend to dominate in groups, committees, parties and tribes. Pursuit of power, resources and wealth (in its various forms) have overwhelmingly been drivers of human societal dymanics throughout human history. This may be somewhat less the case for many FNP but recent history has shown that enough such leaders exist among FNP to be potential catalysts.
With intelligent use The Voice in the constitution is no small thing. It could be a powerful lever. The lever will probably be used to its full potential by the "activists".
Such a scenario painted above is not certain but is more likely than not. In which case the vote is not for the small target as presented by the Yes campaign - a small change of wording or just an "advisory group". It is probably for a permenant very activist group with considerable power pursuing goals set out in the full 20 plus page Uluru Statement supporting info. Major change to the Nation will occur. How and where is uncertain.
Vote on the likely reality not just warm fuzzy TV ads and Albo's carefully scripted reassurring one liners.
Like i said... don't trust the blackfellas... whitey fear right there.
Hey Jelly,
Here's one for you
The central theme in virtually all my political comments on a host of topics and many on the religion thread is an aversion to spin. I attempt to comment on issues as they are in reality not how the dominant narrative of the media, political players and religious leaders portray them. The Voice has had more than a little spin and a simplistic carefully controlled dominant narrative that obscures rather than informs.
These guys are absolutely caning it!
Haven't heard that song for years. Love that track.
Always have, always will.
If we're gonna nail our colours to the mast, I'm a yes. Got my reasons too.
Been enjoying your posts Syp. Onya for dropping by Fitz.
Edit: Fark two from two! Forgot how good these guys were.
Supafreak wrote:Just how do some people get appointed to these positions ? ………..The contract was awarded while Bess Price was the Housing Minister for the former Country Liberals Party government.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-16/tangentyere-council-welcomes-audi...
Ms Price now works for Zodiac.
What do you expect...she was with the CLP
I reckon this track is beautiful.
?si=wVmLuCz0ZdrgmROo Cheers Zen, Yes! Another worldly experience of a tune from Coloured Stone - Pure genius..so talented.
Beautiful indeed!
That was unreal. Thanks Zen.
sypkan wrote:that's right supa
I thought I could be dragged over to yes, to vote enthusiasticly, with a clear conscience...
but it just hasn't happened
I've just been repulsed by the yes campaign
however, I will not vote no
I cannot begrudge aboriginal people this opportunity
and I urge people to ignore the....
"if you don't know, vote NO'
or whatever their bullshit slogan is...
and if you don't know... or if you just think there's just too much bullshit flying... just go informal vote to show your distrust of the system, and what a fuck up of a referendum it has been...
Hi Sypkan,
But yes, agree with you, it’s been poorly offered and presented to the Australian people from Labour. Quite hastily presented and the setting of a date as soon as possibly convenient was adopted and articulated because it was said “There are many other important things to get on with governing that cannot be neglected”. Kind of makes one get the message that this referendum is of some minor significance when in fact it is not. It is of a monumental significance for the Indigenous people of this land, the FNP.
Because people don’t get it, the time given isn't long enough for most to grasp the concept or the idea of it. (No help from Dutto there!). Albanese should have been a bit wiser and known of the trickery that the LNP are capable of and provided more time for the voting of this, perhaps around Autumn next year would have been a better time.
But you know maybe Labour (and the Libs) Yep both major parties just simply don’t want to get the yes vote to succeed. Never have, never will. Hero’s like Noel Pearson, Linda Burney and Marcia Langton come to mind as being the pawns in all of this and are being used for a cause that’s possibly going to fail.
The following are my thoughts and not something I have researched – purely speculation:
There is still a lot of CSG - Coal Seam Gas to be got, iron ore, Lithium, uranium, and other energy metals. Aboriginal consent is required for this extraction on Aboriginal land which the Government can take at any time now anyway as it is said in the constitution, ‘What lies 3 feet below the soil surface belongs to the Commonwealth.’
Perhaps with the Voice in place, that may make it challenging for the Govt. to easily set forth to pillage, rape and ruin the land for mining extraction, like they do!! Aboriginal land.
Someone may know more about this matter than I do and as mentioned I am just speculating on this.
It makes me put effort into this and to act on this, get it won for the FNP. It’s just utterly too sad that these amazing people are subjected to rejection and reproach in so many ways in our world of living and divide.
BTW – Tomorrow country wide in all the major cities and large regional towns is the ‘rally for the voice’ Be there or be square!.. Sunday 17 Sept.
Thanks and
Cheers
https://m.
&pp=ygUca2luZyBzdGluZ3JheSBsaWtlIGEgdmVyc2lvbg%3D%3D CLP Bess Price NT Housing Minister (Handbook One Rule : Don't rort yourself a job 4 life in Portfolio)
Bess kicked out The Local Housing Mob Association...
2014-2015 Bankrolled Private Zodiac $6m to fellow CLP Steve Brown (Accountant wife) Mellissa Young
2016 Bess funnels another $1.87m to Zodiac for (17 Town Camps) Sucks the Local Mob's Kitty dry!
Town Camp Reps + Local Council want inquiry about Bess's Rort > Were told to shut up!
2016 Election > NT #1 Corrupt Pollie Bess is ousted with 31% swing against!
Jan 2017 : Bess Price lands a job with Mob funded $7.87m CLP Quango Zodiac.
https://digitalntl.nt.gov.au/10070/799444/0/6
As for Bess's girl Jacinta landing a plum CLP Senate Seat ...
Lets just say a known Psycho Bully that hates the Senator was moved into the Senator's Office
She had to resign with PTSD that opened the door for Jacinta...(Wow! Another stroke of Good Luck!)
Well not for CLP as Jacinta instantly lost 5% of CLP Vote first 2022 outing! (vs) Oz Nats picked up Vote%)
The Price Mob struggle to win any Sympathy Vote with the Local Mob!
Just as well the Price girls fortunately land in the right place at the exact right time ever time after time.
Just this week...Jacinta's $5m Westpac Lectern has her [NO] Badge with her name on it! (Must be sheer dumb luck!)
Ever get the feeling you've all been had...(Cough!)
Thanx Zen. For Nguura. Work is the spot where i try new music and tonite (it’s 1037 here) i will listen to this. I found an album or extended play that has 11 tracks that i can busy myself with. So lookin forward to it! I just got outta The Brine and had listened to this just before entering. Niiice.
Reform wrote:Hero’s like Noel Pearson, Linda Burney and Marcia Langton come to mind as being the pawns in all of this and are being used for a cause that’s possibly going to fail.
The following are my thoughts and not something I have researched – purely speculation:
There is still a lot of CSG - Coal Seam Gas to be got, iron ore, Lithium, uranium, and other energy metals. Aboriginal consent is required for this extraction on Aboriginal land which the Government can take at any time now anyway as it is said in the constitution, ‘What lies 3 feet below the soil surface belongs to the Commonwealth.’
Perhaps with the Voice in place, that may make it challenging for the Govt. to easily set forth to pillage, rape and ruin the land for mining extraction, like they do!! Aboriginal land.
Someone may know more about this matter than I do and as mentioned I am just speculating on this.
Hero's?
All three are toxic and a complete gift to the No camp and im sure helped more decide to vote No, than yes, Noel and Marcia with their name calling and hate and Marcia is such a bitter nasty piece of work that as recently as last week she couldn't help but let one slip, pretty much nailing the coffin shut for the Yes camp. (unless they can buy votes back with their big ad campaign this month)
Linda has done similar with things like calling the No camp Trump like and putting complete lies out there like the voice cant advise on things like Australia day that even figures on the Yes camp said is BS, of course they can.
Linda is such a liability in parliament she now answers any question read from written text because of her past Fk ups, in most cases what she reads has nothing to do with the question asked, she is a like a female Biden
Jacinta price has challenged her to a debate more than once but Linda rejects it because Jacinta would totally destroy her.
As for your conspiracy theory on the mining industry, yes you clearly you haven't researched it, seeing much of the mining industry has come out supporting the voice including BHP, Rio Tinto, New crest mining, Woodside energy.
I know some have donated decent money like BHP two million to the Yes campaign
Yeah sure its like petty cash to them but for perspective the No campaign are said to only have 10 million all up, the yes campaign about 100 million with 20 million this month alone just on TV advertising.
Do a basic google search and you will find numerous articles on the topic of mining supporting and funding the yes side, i dont think ive seen any mining companies supporting the No case, some have come out and said they are neutral.
Of course much of this support was early when polls were strong for the Yes case, i guess if it got up they wanted to be able to say we supported you guys and not be targeted by the Voice.
BTW. Mining is one of the biggest providers of indigenous jobs and expect the biggest in remote communities where the gap is biggest, and well paying jobs too, and mining provides communities with royalties and payments for land leases and even just road access, of course as is often the case not everyone sees the money and big wigs in communties often get very rich as was the case with receently deceased Yunupingu.
@ Supa will try to reply latter to you.
frog wrote:It is worth casting your mind forward to where The Voice would take us. Here is a reasonably likely, but not certain, prediction based on observations of how the world works.
If The Voice is successful, after initial enthusiasm and a hectic few years of establishment, planning, direction finding, consultation and striving to implement new, and not so new, ideas the reality of the complexity and intractability of the task at hand will weigh heavily on the committee. Whilst successes will be achieved, these will tend to be hard to sustain and tend to be where a favourable set of circumstances and people were in place. Seeds of good ideas and programs will fall on fertile ground but many will wither.
Successes will often be hard replicate from region to region, place to place and tribe to tribe. Overpromising in the campaign will have created impatience and a tendency towards dissappointment with results achieved by the committee within FNP.
After 5 years or so, those in the committee most focussed on the most aluristic but hardest challenges of solving health, housing, employment, social problems, poverty etc. will be struggling to stay motivated, optimistic and to see a clear path to better outcomes. They will be so busy trying to make good things happen they will have little time or inclination for "political" games within the group and in lobbying for influence. This could make them a weaker faction in inevitable power plays.
Another "activist" group within The Voice committee will have a much narrower focus with clearer, more tangible and achievable goals with potentially quite dramatic payoffs in terms of long term power and wealth gains for themselves and their supporters and some FNP groups and regions. Their focus will be on the big wins / big levers of treaty, forms of reparations, resource control and land rights expressed as desires by many in the record of consultation recorded from participants in the Uluru Statement process.
This ability to focus may well give them the drive and and clarity of purpose to come to dominate the committee and its agenda. That is just how groups tend to work. Energised leaders with clear purpose tend to dominate in groups, committees, parties and tribes. Pursuit of power, resources and wealth (in its various forms) have overwhelmingly been drivers of human societal dymanics throughout human history. This may be somewhat less the case for many FNP but recent history has shown that enough such leaders exist among FNP to be potential catalysts.
With intelligent use The Voice in the constitution is no small thing. It could be a powerful lever. The lever will probably be used to its full potential by the "activists".
Such a scenario painted above is not certain but is more likely than not. In which case the vote is not for the small target as presented by the Yes campaign - a small change of wording or just an "advisory group". It is probably for a permenant very activist group with considerable power pursuing goals set out in the full 20 plus page Uluru Statement supporting info. Major change to the Nation will occur. How and where is uncertain.
Vote on the likely reality not just warm fuzzy TV ads and Albo's carefully scripted reassurring one liners.
One of the better post in this whole thread, this is exactly the most likely outcome.
indo-dreaming wrote:frog wrote:It is worth casting your mind forward to where The Voice would take us. Here is a reasonably likely, but not certain, prediction based on observations of how the world works.
If The Voice is successful, after initial enthusiasm and a hectic few years of establishment, planning, direction finding, consultation and striving to implement new, and not so new, ideas the reality of the complexity and intractability of the task at hand will weigh heavily on the committee. Whilst successes will be achieved, these will tend to be hard to sustain and tend to be where a favourable set of circumstances and people were in place. Seeds of good ideas and programs will fall on fertile ground but many will wither.
Successes will often be hard replicate from region to region, place to place and tribe to tribe. Overpromising in the campaign will have created impatience and a tendency towards dissappointment with results achieved by the committee within FNP.
After 5 years or so, those in the committee most focussed on the most aluristic but hardest challenges of solving health, housing, employment, social problems, poverty etc. will be struggling to stay motivated, optimistic and to see a clear path to better outcomes. They will be so busy trying to make good things happen they will have little time or inclination for "political" games within the group and in lobbying for influence. This could make them a weaker faction in inevitable power plays.
Another "activist" group within The Voice committee will have a much narrower focus with clearer, more tangible and achievable goals with potentially quite dramatic payoffs in terms of long term power and wealth gains for themselves and their supporters and some FNP groups and regions. Their focus will be on the big wins / big levers of treaty, forms of reparations, resource control and land rights expressed as desires by many in the record of consultation recorded from participants in the Uluru Statement process.
This ability to focus may well give them the drive and and clarity of purpose to come to dominate the committee and its agenda. That is just how groups tend to work. Energised leaders with clear purpose tend to dominate in groups, committees, parties and tribes. Pursuit of power, resources and wealth (in its various forms) have overwhelmingly been drivers of human societal dymanics throughout human history. This may be somewhat less the case for many FNP but recent history has shown that enough such leaders exist among FNP to be potential catalysts.
With intelligent use The Voice in the constitution is no small thing. It could be a powerful lever. The lever will probably be used to its full potential by the "activists".
Such a scenario painted above is not certain but is more likely than not. In which case the vote is not for the small target as presented by the Yes campaign - a small change of wording or just an "advisory group". It is probably for a permenant very activist group with considerable power pursuing goals set out in the full 20 plus page Uluru Statement supporting info. Major change to the Nation will occur. How and where is uncertain.
Vote on the likely reality not just warm fuzzy TV ads and Albo's carefully scripted reassurring one liners.
One of the better post in this whole thread, this is exactly the most likely outcome.
Like I said... conservative whitey fear...
Hi ID,
It’s a lovely spring morning! Will you be attending the walk for the Voice’? It’s happening around the country. Seems that the walk will attract thousands and thousands, I’m sure you’d be welcomed by all and sundry.
As mentioned I was speculating and could have held back on that. But this, please refrain mate and have respect for the indigenous representatives. Do you have any idea how much courage these people have? These are giants in the current debate for the YES vote to Parliament. Just contemplate how courageous these amazing individuals are! Can you match their courage? Off to attend the walk now, cheers
[quote=harrycoopr
Like I said... conservative whitey fear...
How is it conservative whitey fear when so many blackfellas fear it too?
One of my many good FN friends who is T.O. in West Arnhem Land doesn't want it either. I spend a lot of time with him and his family at his home talking and listening to his amazing stories. He and all his family are spread out on their large area of ancestral land that they happily live on. Him and many others up there fear yet another layer of bureaucratic BS governing them. They just want to live in peace. They already have the NLC trying to interfere and run their land, which is the very agency that is supposed to represent them. Yes, that's right, the NLC is already supposed to be their "voice". Instead, the NLC are an incredibly corrupt agency that continually try and step in and control what they do on their land. Every time there is a quarrel between him and his brothers, the NLC want to step in and take control of their land.
They can see through all the Gov BS. Ol' Albo flies up, tells them he is going to fix all their problems for them, get some lovely photos and media entourage for all the masses to see in the cities, and then fly off in a cloud of dust. They just laugh, wave goodbye and hope to never see them again.
I may not be able to articulate into writing what goes on up in these remote areas, but I know and listen what these people are saying firsthand. This is just one tiny example of many. I want what's best for our FN brothers and sisters. But, as I said earlier, what happens up here can be completely different to other parts of the country. The needs of FNP all around the country differ.
So go ahead harrycoopr, you go tell everyone here how you know best and everyone that doesn't agree with you is a fucken idiot or racist redneck. Your view of one size fit's all is complete ignorance.
[NO] spends 4x more on Facebook Ads than [YES] + [?]
#1 Boss Hog of the Junk Heap ~ Jacinta
100-200 Divisive [DIVISION] Banners
100 - Larger than Life (Smiley Jacinta Self Promotions!)
20 - PM Shots ~ Blurred / Dulled / Tilted / Doctored / Grossly animated
1 Dozen Desecrated Australian & Aboriginal Flags lay in waste at her feet.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/sep/01/coalition-no-camp...
Jacinta's Fav' Brain Dead Hate Campaign Hobbies...
Self Promotion / Bludging + rorting Leadership Roles
Dividing Australians by denigrating our Flag/s
Parliamentarian dumps shit on her devout Commonwealth Leader
Jacinta hates everything about The Commonwealth of Australia & First Nation
Jacinta loves only herself.
[factcheck] Jacinta is #1 Big Spender of spreading hate over Australia.
Shareholders smell new blood...Ogress now wears Voldemort's balls!
Q: Wot did Jacinta say about [L] Reffo...
A: Dutto now gives the exact same answer!
Again...Sheer dumb luck or....Magnate Madness!
fitzroy-21 wrote:[quote=harrycoopr
Like I said... conservative whitey fear...
How is it conservative whitey fear when so many blackfellas fear it too?
One of my many good FN friends who is T.O. in West Arnhem Land doesn't want it either. I spend a lot of time with him and his family at his home talking and listening to his amazing stories. He and all his family are spread out on their large area of ancestral land that they happily live on. Him and many others up there fear yet another layer of bureaucratic BS governing them. They just want to live in peace. They already have the NLC trying to interfere and run their land, which is the very agency that is supposed to represent them. Yes, that's right, the NLC is already supposed to be their "voice". Instead, the NLC are an incredibly corrupt agency that continually try and step in and control what they do on their land. Every time there is a quarrel between him and his brothers, the NLC want to step in and take control of their land.
They can see through all the Gov BS. Ol' Albo flies up, tells them he is going to fix all their problems for them, get some lovely photos and media entourage for all the masses to see in the cities, and then fly off in a cloud of dust. They just laugh, wave goodbye and hope to never see them again.
I may not be able to articulate into writing what goes on up in these remote areas, but I know and listen what these people are saying firsthand. This is just one tiny example of many. I want what's best for our FN brothers and sisters. But, as I said earlier, what happens up here can be completely different to other parts of the country. The needs of FNP all around the country differ.
So go ahead harrycoopr, you go tell everyone here how you know best and everyone that doesn't agree with you is a fucken idiot or racist redneck. Your view of one size fit's all is complete ignorance.
@fitzroy , first thanks for your input by sharing your personal experience . If you have a look at the design and the details it clearly states that not all FNP are the same and have different needs and wants. This is why Langton has specifically stated that there needs to be representation from different areas and not just put everyone under the one umbrella . 24 representatives nationally who also have 35 local regional voice representatives to speak on behalf of their areas . Having representatives that are elected by the community and not by the government is a huge plus and they are held accountable to any corruption by icac . I understand not all FNP agree with the voice but the majority do and that’s what counts . If the no vote gets up it says alot about Australia’s changing culture. If you are really comfortable with voting no , go for it , same goes for feeling comfortable about voting yes .
Hey Supa, I'm not one bit comfortable with voting No or Yes. So many people don't actually know what they will be voting for and for me it is feeling rushed.
None of you conservative paranoid fearful whiteys get it... you know who u are.
The Voice if FOR Aboriginal people BY Aboriginal people. Once again it appears whiteys know best... whitey will dictate... whitey go NO... no u blackfellas we'll decide (ala that grub Howard)... NO faith NO hope NO detail NO trust... can't trust dem blackfellas!!
@indo and Supa is that list of membership for the Voice fact or idea? This article would suggest it is just someones idea
“iii. the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.”
“But clause (iii) clearly empowers future governments to fiddle with the Voice's composition, powers and procedures. So a hostile future government could, say, reduce the membership of the Voice to one person, and park that person in a windowless room in Canberra without an internet connection, or take every recommendation from the Voice and file it straight into the recycling.”
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-03/voice-referendum-vote-on-92-words...
I reckon most of what is being said, from both sides, is pure speculation in an effort to sway the vote one way or the other, and it is easy to just jump on board with the argument that aligns with one’s belief, regardless of any truth to that argument.
In a nutshell, the composition of the Voice, it’s allocated funding etc haven’t even been decided yet and when it comes to deciding, it will be up to the parliament to vote and decide how it is done.
https://m.
&pp=ygUTdGFrZSBhIGNoYW5jZSBvbiBtZQ%3D%3D fitzroy-21 wrote:[quote=harrycoopr
Like I said... conservative whitey fear...
How is it conservative whitey fear when so many blackfellas fear it too?
One of my many good FN friends who is T.O. in West Arnhem Land doesn't want it either. I spend a lot of time with him and his family at his home talking and listening to his amazing stories. He and all his family are spread out on their large area of ancestral land that they happily live on. Him and many others up there fear yet another layer of bureaucratic BS governing them. They just want to live in peace. They already have the NLC trying to interfere and run their land, which is the very agency that is supposed to represent them. Yes, that's right, the NLC is already supposed to be their "voice". Instead, the NLC are an incredibly corrupt agency that continually try and step in and control what they do on their land. Every time there is a quarrel between him and his brothers, the NLC want to step in and take control of their land.
They can see through all the Gov BS. Ol' Albo flies up, tells them he is going to fix all their problems for them, get some lovely photos and media entourage for all the masses to see in the cities, and then fly off in a cloud of dust. They just laugh, wave goodbye and hope to never see them again.
I may not be able to articulate into writing what goes on up in these remote areas, but I know and listen what these people are saying firsthand. This is just one tiny example of many. I want what's best for our FN brothers and sisters. But, as I said earlier, what happens up here can be completely different to other parts of the country. The needs of FNP all around the country differ.
So go ahead harrycoopr, you go tell everyone here how you know best and everyone that doesn't agree with you is a fucken idiot or racist redneck. Your view of one size fit's all is complete ignorance.
So tell me one size fits all... how do the needs differ? Housing? Youth suicide? Substance abuse? Disempowerment thru bureaucracy? Cultural recognition? The blackfellas who oppose it like Price Mundine and Thorpe are just worried they'll lose their pretty pay packets once they become irrelevant and superfluous... follow the money
Fliplid wrote:@indo and Supa is that list of membership for the Voice fact or idea? This article would suggest it is just someones idea
“iii. the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.”
“But clause (iii) clearly empowers future governments to fiddle with the Voice's composition, powers and procedures. So a hostile future government could, say, reduce the membership of the Voice to one person, and park that person in a windowless room in Canberra without an internet connection, or take every recommendation from the Voice and file it straight into the recycling.”
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-03/voice-referendum-vote-on-92-words...
I reckon most of what is being said, from both sides, is pure speculation in an effort to sway the vote one way or the other, and it is easy to just jump on board with the argument that aligns with one’s belief, regardless of any truth to that argument.
In a nutshell, the composition of the Voice, it’s allocated funding etc haven’t even been decided yet and when it comes to deciding, it will be up to the parliament to vote and decide how it is done.
@fliplid , it’s definitely not fact . If it gets the yes vote there’s a process that follows, the final say is decided by parliament on what the design will be , albo is supporting this report but this doesn’t mean this will be how it’s done word for word . FNP will ( can ) also contribute more to the design but at the end of the day it’s parliament that decides who what and where . https://apo.org.au/node/316024 I’m pretty sure adam12 or GS or both explained the process in simple terms.
;)
https://m.
@supa, yes, that’s the way I read it however to believe the no supporters the decision will be taken out of parliaments hands. Like I said, most of what is being said is pure speculation.
It is a shame that everyone doesn’t try and take an honest look at what has been proposed and work from that instead of blindly believing what is being said in the media, I mean we’re all adults who can think for ourselves aren’t we?
By the way, hope you’re all good with the health condition
Fliplid wrote:@supa, yes, that’s the way I read it however to believe the no supporters the decision will be taken out of parliaments hands. Like I said, most of what is being said is pure speculation.
It is a shame that everyone doesn’t try and take an honest look at what has been proposed and work from that instead of blindly believing what is being said in the media, I mean we’re all adults who can think for ourselves aren’t we?
By the way, hope you’re all good with the health condition
Thanks fliplid , I just hope that the article I posted by pascoe doesn’t come true in that australia becomes permanently divided and is heading down the same path at the good old US of A . For the life of me I can’t understand why Albo didn’t back a RC into media in this country. I would love to have been a fly on the wall when he had a meeting with the murdoch team early in his appointment as PM
Great to see this level of debate....
andy-mac wrote:Great to see this level of debate....
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CxRshoph-eW/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
Is that you @lowinfo??
Haha ;)
https://m.
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