The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices
“ Reality is we have no idea “
- catchphrase of the no hopers ;)
https://m.
burleigh wrote:southernraw wrote:Is Burleighs friend, the Bundjalung man, and the guy at #lowinfos wedding the same person?
Warren?I’ll put the same question to you. If a new poll was released and only 30% of FNP were in favour for the voice, would you still vote yes?
Ha! A question. Make me laugh!
Like i said previously Burleigh, it's a slippery slope for you, that there's no coming back from.
And you still owe me a house!!. ;-)
goofyfoot wrote:“ One was only 300 people the other 800, you only had to tick a box to say you are Indigenous, at best even if they were indigenous most were probably just white city folk with some indigenous ancestor down their family tree.”
As opposed to what Indo?
Being a full blood dressed in possum skins living in a bark hut in the middle of the Simpson desert hunting kangaroo and goanna for dinner?
Opposed to actual aboriginal people who the voice is suppose to be designed for, that aint white city folk no matter how they identify.
southernraw wrote:burleigh wrote:southernraw wrote:Is Burleighs friend, the Bundjalung man, and the guy at #lowinfos wedding the same person?
Warren?I’ll put the same question to you. If a new poll was released and only 30% of FNP were in favour for the voice, would you still vote yes?
Ha! A question. Make me laugh!
Like i said previously Burleigh, it's a slippery slope for you, that there's no coming back from.
And you still owe me a house!!. ;-)
Answer it
indo-dreaming wrote:goofyfoot wrote:“ One was only 300 people the other 800, you only had to tick a box to say you are Indigenous, at best even if they were indigenous most were probably just white city folk with some indigenous ancestor down their family tree.”
As opposed to what Indo?
Being a full blood dressed in possum skins living in a bark hut in the middle of the Simpson desert hunting kangaroo and goanna for dinner?Opposed to actual aboriginal people who the voice is suppose to be designed for, that aint white city folk no matter how they identify.
Probably Price's rellies... she's been truckin a few about
burleigh wrote:southernraw wrote:burleigh wrote:southernraw wrote:Is Burleighs friend, the Bundjalung man, and the guy at #lowinfos wedding the same person?
Warren?I’ll put the same question to you. If a new poll was released and only 30% of FNP were in favour for the voice, would you still vote yes?
Ha! A question. Make me laugh!
Like i said previously Burleigh, it's a slippery slope for you, that there's no coming back from.
And you still owe me a house!!. ;-)Answer it
One of the last people on this planet i'd answer to is you champ.
@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
Hiccups wrote:Supafreak wrote:It beggars belief why anyone would want to be on the same side as any of these turbo-gronks. #straya
Oh I bet indo burley costco etc will print this for their loungeroom walls
What a bunch of slimy corrupt ugly mean&nasty inhumane excuses of homo sapiens... a truly disgusting collection. And they've all proven their complete stupidity and incompetence in one way or another! How embarrassing
I look forward to reading what ronni salt has uncovered . https://x.com/ronnisalt/status/1703679184277795013?s=46&t=5RczxwAfzXe7hK...
Supafreak wrote:Can you spot the difference ?
. Why do they call it “ Labors “ risky voice ?
Bcos as we all know the GreatSpud weaponised the issue as partisan politics cos it's his only hope against Albo... who btw is handling the rights insanity with calm and aplomb!
Supafreak wrote:I look forward to reading what ronni salt has uncovered . https://x.com/ronnisalt/status/1703679184277795013?s=46&t=5RczxwAfzXe7hK...
Love it... greatest hypocrites on earth
Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
harrycoopr wrote:Hiccups wrote:Supafreak wrote:It beggars belief why anyone would want to be on the same side as any of these turbo-gronks. #straya
Oh I bet indo burley costco etc will print this for their loungeroom walls
What a bunch of slimy corrupt ugly mean&nasty inhumane excuses of homo sapiens... a truly disgusting collection. And they've all proven their complete stupidity and incompetence in one way or another! How embarrassing
Hey Winnie, wait until you see the big businesses backing the yes campaign. If you don’t like slimy corrupt ugly men, you’re in for a shock
burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Im going with the people I personally trust in this campaign, that’s my choice . You also have a choice Burleigh and your voting no . Do you believe you can change my thinking on this ? I don’t believe I can change yours and I’m not attempting to either . Gotta stand for something I believe , or fall for anything . Can you show me your poll that only 30% of FNP support the voice ? Now that Ive answered your question can you answer mine ? You don’t trust the labor government, if they opposed the voice and wanted everyone to vote no would you then vote yes ?
Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Im going with the people I personally trust in this campaign, that’s my choice . You also have a choice Burleigh and your voting no . Do you believe you can change my thinking on this ? I don’t believe I can change yours and I’m not attempting to either . Gotta stand for something I believe , or fall for anything . Can you show me your poll that only 30% of FNP support the voice ? Now that Ive answered your question can you answer mine ? You don’t trust the labor government, if they opposed the voice and wanted everyone to vote no would you then vote yes ?
No I can’t, it was a hypothetical. However when yes23 campaign of 80% is based off an online vote of 300 then 800 FNP with no actual proof needed it gets you thinking. Then when you realise it was done over 6 months ago it seems extremely suss.
burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Not to mention online polls, not phone polls.
Online polls are very problematic.
For instance you could provide a link to a poll on Swellnet asking how many people surf and get 1,000 respondents and 99% say they surf, that doesn't mean 99% of Australians surf.
So how people come to know of an online poll is important
Also just ticking a box to claim your indigenous is problematic, those that arent indigenous but want to push votes one way or the other be it No or Yes can do so.
Random phone polls are much more accurate and then having a number of companies doing it is better still.
Even better having a number of polls over time is even better .
For instance while polls can be wrong, its likely the overall polls on the voice are correct as have been done by a number of companies doing it over months and they are all showing similar numbers and the same clear trend.
Add into that, because of a possible negative perception of voting No, some who say Yes might really vote No, while it doesn't work the other way around.
This is generally why polls can be wrong like Brexit or Trump, because people might not want to admit they are voting the way that is not deemed in a positive light, most you expect would say they dont know yet, so undecided votes are more likely to go to No's rather than Yes, also those truely undecided are generally more cautious and more likely to play it safe and vote no. (and if waiting for more info, it aint coming )
All that said the yes campaign has 20 million worth of just TV ads for the next month, i saw the same ad about 5 times last night and it was a very manipulative type of ad, and they have million more for other things like signs etc, the No camp only have about 10 million all up and dont even have a budget for signs etc (the ones you put at the front of your house).
Who knows how many brain dead people can be swayed, there is a lot of stupid people out there thats for sure, so i wont feel okay until i see iNo's in reach state or overall on the TV after the vote.
burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Im going with the people I personally trust in this campaign, that’s my choice . You also have a choice Burleigh and your voting no . Do you believe you can change my thinking on this ? I don’t believe I can change yours and I’m not attempting to either . Gotta stand for something I believe , or fall for anything . Can you show me your poll that only 30% of FNP support the voice ? Now that Ive answered your question can you answer mine ? You don’t trust the labor government, if they opposed the voice and wanted everyone to vote no would you then vote yes ?
No I can’t, it was a hypothetical. However when yes23 campaign of 80% is based off an online vote of 300 then 800 FNP with no actual proof needed it gets you thinking. Then when you realise it was done over 6 months ago it seems extremely suss.
Where did you get your information on how yes23 came up with 80% ?
Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Im going with the people I personally trust in this campaign, that’s my choice . You also have a choice Burleigh and your voting no . Do you believe you can change my thinking on this ? I don’t believe I can change yours and I’m not attempting to either . Gotta stand for something I believe , or fall for anything . Can you show me your poll that only 30% of FNP support the voice ? Now that Ive answered your question can you answer mine ? You don’t trust the labor government, if they opposed the voice and wanted everyone to vote no would you then vote yes ?
No I can’t, it was a hypothetical. However when yes23 campaign of 80% is based off an online vote of 300 then 800 FNP with no actual proof needed it gets you thinking. Then when you realise it was done over 6 months ago it seems extremely suss.
Where did you get your information on how yes23 came up with 80% ?
Am I wrong?
burleigh wrote:harrycoopr wrote:Hiccups wrote:Supafreak wrote:It beggars belief why anyone would want to be on the same side as any of these turbo-gronks. #straya
Oh I bet indo burley costco etc will print this for their loungeroom walls
What a bunch of slimy corrupt ugly mean&nasty inhumane excuses of homo sapiens... a truly disgusting collection. And they've all proven their complete stupidity and incompetence in one way or another! How embarrassingHey Winnie, wait until you see the big businesses backing the yes campaign. If you don’t like slimy corrupt ugly men, you’re in for a shock
They're only backing it so they don't look as gross as your bunch of shitturds
indo-dreaming wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Not to mention online polls, not phone polls.
Online polls are very problematic.
For instance you could provide a link to a poll on Swellnet asking how many people surf and get 1,000 respondents and 99% say they surf, that doesn't mean 99% of Australians surf.
So how people come to know of an online poll is important
Also just ticking a box to claim your indigenous is problematic, those that arent indigenous but want to push votes one way or the other be it No or Yes can do so.
Random phone polls are much more accurate and then having a number of companies doing it is better still.
Even better having a number of polls over time is even better .
For instance while polls can be wrong, its likely the overall polls on the voice are correct as have been done by a number of companies doing it over months and they are all showing similar numbers and the same clear trend.
Add into that, because of a possible negative perception of voting No, some who say Yes might really vote No, while it doesn't work the other way around.
This is generally why polls can be wrong like Brexit or Trump, because people might not want to admit they are voting the way that is not deemed in a positive light, most you expect would say they dont know yet, so undecided votes are more likely to go to No's rather than Yes, also those undecided are generally more cautious and more likely to play it safe and vote no.
All that said the yes campaign has 20 million worth of just TV ads for the next month, i saw the same ad about 5 times last night and it was a very manipulative type of ad, and they have million more for other things like signs etc, the No camp only have about 10 million and dont even have a budget for signs etc (the ones you put at the front of your house).
Who knows how many brain dead people can be swayed, there is a lot of stupid people out there thats for sure, so i wont be ensured all is good until see it on TV after the vote.
Hahaha...classic. Your last p/graph sums u up perfectly indo! It's ASSURED btw...stoopid.
harrycoopr wrote:burleigh wrote:harrycoopr wrote:Hiccups wrote:Supafreak wrote:It beggars belief why anyone would want to be on the same side as any of these turbo-gronks. #straya
Oh I bet indo burley costco etc will print this for their loungeroom walls
What a bunch of slimy corrupt ugly mean&nasty inhumane excuses of homo sapiens... a truly disgusting collection. And they've all proven their complete stupidity and incompetence in one way or another! How embarrassingHey Winnie, wait until you see the big businesses backing the yes campaign. If you don’t like slimy corrupt ugly men, you’re in for a shock
They're only backing it so they don't look as gross as your bunch of shitturds
Oh winnie. You keep this funny shit up mate. I love it
I prefer, shitcunts!!!, myself.
burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Im going with the people I personally trust in this campaign, that’s my choice . You also have a choice Burleigh and your voting no . Do you believe you can change my thinking on this ? I don’t believe I can change yours and I’m not attempting to either . Gotta stand for something I believe , or fall for anything . Can you show me your poll that only 30% of FNP support the voice ? Now that Ive answered your question can you answer mine ? You don’t trust the labor government, if they opposed the voice and wanted everyone to vote no would you then vote yes ?
No I can’t, it was a hypothetical. However when yes23 campaign of 80% is based off an online vote of 300 then 800 FNP with no actual proof needed it gets you thinking. Then when you realise it was done over 6 months ago it seems extremely suss.
Where did you get your information on how yes23 came up with 80% ?
Am I wrong?
Burliegh, you just got it off Indo! You straight away believe it because of bias. Now Indo may be correct but you didn’t care to check.
seeds wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Im going with the people I personally trust in this campaign, that’s my choice . You also have a choice Burleigh and your voting no . Do you believe you can change my thinking on this ? I don’t believe I can change yours and I’m not attempting to either . Gotta stand for something I believe , or fall for anything . Can you show me your poll that only 30% of FNP support the voice ? Now that Ive answered your question can you answer mine ? You don’t trust the labor government, if they opposed the voice and wanted everyone to vote no would you then vote yes ?
No I can’t, it was a hypothetical. However when yes23 campaign of 80% is based off an online vote of 300 then 800 FNP with no actual proof needed it gets you thinking. Then when you realise it was done over 6 months ago it seems extremely suss.
Where did you get your information on how yes23 came up with 80% ?
Am I wrong?
Burliegh, you just got it off Indo! You straight away believe it because of bias. Now Indo may be correct but you didn’t care to check.
I did check actually, and indo IS correct
Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Im going with the people I personally trust in this campaign, that’s my choice . You also have a choice Burleigh and your voting no . Do you believe you can change my thinking on this ? I don’t believe I can change yours and I’m not attempting to either . Gotta stand for something I believe , or fall for anything . Can you show me your poll that only 30% of FNP support the voice ? Now that Ive answered your question can you answer mine ? You don’t trust the labor government, if they opposed the voice and wanted everyone to vote no would you then vote yes ?
No I can’t, it was a hypothetical. However when yes23 campaign of 80% is based off an online vote of 300 then 800 FNP with no actual proof needed it gets you thinking. Then when you realise it was done over 6 months ago it seems extremely suss.
Where did you get your information on how yes23 came up with 80% ?
Here is the info on the 300 online poll from mid Jan.
burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:@burleigh , just saw your question, If you can show me a poll that only 30% FNP support the yes to voice then I would seriously vote no . Why ? Because it’s not about me burleigh , I’m not requesting a voice to parliament, FNP are .
So you’re basing your vote off the yes23 campaign of 80% of FNP supporting the Voice?
Do you think the 80% from yes23 is misleading or possibly not correct as it was done on Feb with a very small minority of FNP?
Im going with the people I personally trust in this campaign, that’s my choice . You also have a choice Burleigh and your voting no . Do you believe you can change my thinking on this ? I don’t believe I can change yours and I’m not attempting to either . Gotta stand for something I believe , or fall for anything . Can you show me your poll that only 30% of FNP support the voice ? Now that Ive answered your question can you answer mine ? You don’t trust the labor government, if they opposed the voice and wanted everyone to vote no would you then vote yes ?
No I can’t, it was a hypothetical. However when yes23 campaign of 80% is based off an online vote of 300 then 800 FNP with no actual proof needed it gets you thinking. Then when you realise it was done over 6 months ago it seems extremely suss.
Where did you get your information on how yes23 came up with 80% ?
Am I wrong?
There’s been more than one poll plus when you look at how many FNP have been involved in putting the voice together which is thousands not just 2 so called elites then I think you will find the majority do support it . I must agree with indo though , polls don’t always indicate the outcome. Look at some of the past elections. What I found interesting about the rallies on the weekend were the huge difference in numbers. Australians dont generally get out in large numbers unless it’s something they really believe in like the Vietnam war protests. I posted the video from Melbourne and pictures from Sydney, massive difference . Spud is playing games with this and thats why he has JP & wazza front and center , he doesn’t want to be seen as leading if it goes pear shaped which by the looks of those rallies is very possible . Gotta wonder why there isn’t big turnouts for no vote rallies. Or is it that people on the no vote side don’t really care enough and can’t be bothered.
burleigh wrote:harrycoopr wrote:burleigh wrote:harrycoopr wrote:Hiccups wrote:Supafreak wrote:It beggars belief why anyone would want to be on the same side as any of these turbo-gronks. #straya
Oh I bet indo burley costco etc will print this for their loungeroom walls
What a bunch of slimy corrupt ugly mean&nasty inhumane excuses of homo sapiens... a truly disgusting collection. And they've all proven their complete stupidity and incompetence in one way or another! How embarrassingHey Winnie, wait until you see the big businesses backing the yes campaign. If you don’t like slimy corrupt ugly men, you’re in for a shock
They're only backing it so they don't look as gross as your bunch of shitturds
Oh winnie. You keep this funny shit up mate. I love it
Glad to be of service burley.. tell me how much u love your bunch of RoboFuks. Tell how much Pauline turns u on...lol.
Melbourne no rally https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz...
Supafreak wrote:Big turn out for those that don’t know. https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz... meanwhile at one of the yes rallies
Big difference
Supafreak wrote:Supafreak wrote:Big turn out for those that don’t know. https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz... meanwhile at one of the yes rallies
Big difference
All white people. This is no different during Covid getting vaccinated “to protect Nan” playing on peoples emotions and being good people.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CxU4ue9SW5b/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==[/ I would love it burleigh if the yes no vote was purely up to FNP , unfortunately it’s not .
Supafreak][quote=burleigh wrote:https://www.instagram.com/reel/CxU4ue9SW5b/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==[/ I would love it burleigh if the yes no vote was purely up to FNP
Yep. Me too Supa. Me too
burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:Supafreak wrote:Big turn out for those that don’t know. https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz... meanwhile at one of the yes rallies
Big difference
All white people. This is no different during Covid getting vaccinated “to protect Nan” playing on peoples emotions and being good people.
Why do you say it’s all white people ? Do you believe no fnp are there ? Who do you believe organisers the rallies and speaks at them ? Please don’t say the labor party .
Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:Supafreak wrote:Big turn out for those that don’t know. https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz... meanwhile at one of the yes rallies
Big difference
All white people. This is no different during Covid getting vaccinated “to protect Nan” playing on peoples emotions and being good people.
Why do you say it’s all white people ? Do you believe no fnp are there ? Who do you believe organisers the rallies and speaks at them ? Please don’t say the labor party .
No idea and I don’t really care. It’s just cringy as fuck
burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:Supafreak wrote:Big turn out for those that don’t know. https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz... meanwhile at one of the yes rallies
Big difference
All white people. This is no different during Covid getting vaccinated “to protect Nan” playing on peoples emotions and being good people.
Why do you say it’s all white people ? Do you believe no fnp are there ? Who do you believe organisers the rallies and speaks at them ? Please don’t say the labor party .
No idea and I don’t really care. It’s just cringy as fuck
Exactly Burleigh and that’s why you’re voting no because you don’t really care and don’t wanna know . It’s your choice.
burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:Supafreak wrote:Big turn out for those that don’t know. https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz... meanwhile at one of the yes rallies
Big difference
All white people. This is no different during Covid getting vaccinated “to protect Nan” playing on peoples emotions and being good people.
Why do you say it’s all white people ? Do you believe no fnp are there ? Who do you believe organisers the rallies and speaks at them ? Please don’t say the labor party .
No idea and I don’t really care. It’s just cringy as fuck
As cringy as your secret lust for Michaela huh Roboburley...
Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:Supafreak wrote:Big turn out for those that don’t know. https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz... meanwhile at one of the yes rallies
Big difference
All white people. This is no different during Covid getting vaccinated “to protect Nan” playing on peoples emotions and being good people.
Why do you say it’s all white people ? Do you believe no fnp are there ? Who do you believe organisers the rallies and speaks at them ? Please don’t say the labor party .
No idea and I don’t really care. It’s just cringy as fuck
Exactly Burleigh and that’s why you’re voting no because you don’t really care and don’t wanna know . It’s your choice.
No, I’m voting no because my good friend who is a FNP is voting no along with majority of his FNP family and friends.
But I guess you only care about the FNP that vote yes
‘ No, I’m voting no because my good friend who is a FNP is voting no along with majority of his FNP family and friends. ‘
Sounds kinda the same principle / reason as to why ppl got vaccinated ;)
Different context and all but….ummmm, yewwww ppl of the world unite !
Jelly Flater wrote:‘ No, I’m voting no because my good friend who is a FNP is voting no along with majority of his FNP family and friends. ‘
Sounds kinda the same principle / reason as to why ppl got vaccinated ;)
Different context and all but….ummmm, yewwww ppl of the world unite !
You’re confused with the Yes Campaign. Exactly the same method as they used to get vaccinated to protect granny. And what a crock of shit that turned out to be.
So all you No voters agree with Thorpe's assertions that Sovereignty has not been ceded therefore nothing less than Sovereign recognition and reparations can be accepted. Seems yr Mundine's starting to trip up all over the place with his treaties!! Yes is Reconciliation in action... No is either against Aboriginal people's claims or in favour of their Sovereign claims... can't sit on the fence boys unless you like the feeling
burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:Supafreak wrote:Big turn out for those that don’t know. https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz... meanwhile at one of the yes rallies
Big difference
All white people. This is no different during Covid getting vaccinated “to protect Nan” playing on peoples emotions and being good people.
Why do you say it’s all white people ? Do you believe no fnp are there ? Who do you believe organisers the rallies and speaks at them ? Please don’t say the labor party .
No idea and I don’t really care. It’s just cringy as fuck
Exactly Burleigh and that’s why you’re voting no because you don’t really care and don’t wanna know . It’s your choice.
No, I’m voting no because my good friend who is a FNP is voting no along with majority of his FNP family and friends.
But I guess you only care about the FNP that vote yes
I’m going with what the majority of FNP is asking for Burleigh, that’s my choice .
. 
Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:burleigh wrote:Supafreak wrote:Supafreak wrote:Big turn out for those that don’t know. https://x.com/cookersozstyle/status/1703317001551401091?s=46&t=5RczxwAfz... meanwhile at one of the yes rallies
Big difference
All white people. This is no different during Covid getting vaccinated “to protect Nan” playing on peoples emotions and being good people.
Why do you say it’s all white people ? Do you believe no fnp are there ? Who do you believe organisers the rallies and speaks at them ? Please don’t say the labor party .
No idea and I don’t really care. It’s just cringy as fuck
Exactly Burleigh and that’s why you’re voting no because you don’t really care and don’t wanna know . It’s your choice.
No, I’m voting no because my good friend who is a FNP is voting no along with majority of his FNP family and friends.
But I guess you only care about the FNP that vote yes
I’m going with what the majority of FNP is asking for Burleigh, that’s my choice .
You actually have no idea what they want. None. I don’t either, but what I do know is that 80% is bullshit.
Supafreak wrote:
Beautifully scripted interview, She says that so clearly and concisely, a lovely example of a great human and guess what?....She's indigenous! You have to come over and join with us 'detractors'. Its not too late to clear your conscience and jump that wall into a promising world where there is hope, passion, goodwill, compassion and aspirations for peace.
Reform wrote:Supafreak wrote:Beautifully scripted interview, She says that so clearly and concisely, a lovely example of a great human and guess what?....She's indigenous! You have to come over and join with us 'detractors'. Its not too late to clear your conscience and jump that wall into a promising world where there is hope, passion, goodwill, compassion and aspirations for peace.
Scripted alright. How many hours did they spend rehearsing this piece of dribble?
“ You’re confused with the Yes Campaign. “
- um… no…
This bit … “ I’m voting no because my good friend who is a FNP is voting no along with majority of his FNP family and friends. “
This is you admitting the reason you are doing it is simply because a friend is doing it… along with the majority of their friends and family.
- connoisseur of confusion ;)
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