• JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What was this vote even about? Weren’t people of aboriginal descent already able to be MPs and influence the country? If they want some sort of quota where there must be aboriginals in parliament that sounds like ‘positive’ discrimination, and it’s good it didn’t get passed.

    Edit: I am a non Australian interested in this from an outside perspective. I have since been corrected on what the vote was actually about.

    • Gorgritch_Umie_Killa@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think your comment sums up what a large portion, more than 60% of the country, felt about that referendum.

      And thats the unfortunate thing because the Voice was none of what you’ve suggested.

      At its simplest it was, ‘hey politicians! You can’t get rid of this government department because things are awkward for you on the news.’ It was a more complicated, and interesting proposal than this, but that part drove necessary constitutional change and thus required a referendum.

      But the change was declined. Most reasons i suspect have their root at: Lack of engagement with the subject matter due to unclear/tenuous benefits to their own lives. Not to mention a fair amount of ambivalence rising to dislike of the Aboriginal peoples of Australia in the broader community.

      Noel Pearson’s statement, “we are a much-unloved people.” was and is very poignant.

      This atmosphere meant anything, and i mean anything, (even contradictory statements from the same person days apart), could be thrown around as possible effects of the referendum and people would latch onto those reasons as an answer then carry on with their lives.

      Sorry, i’ve rambled a bit. There was a lot to it.

    • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s honestly a little sad that you didn’t find out the answer before the vote…

      Indigenous leaders have been asking for “proper” representation in the Australian parliament since 1933 and there have been multiple failed attempts to grant them that. Some have tried to do too much and outright failed like this one did, others took a softer approach and essentially were a waste of time - the chances didn’t actually achieve the intended goal of providing better representation.

      The voice would have made sure there is a body of people dedicated to advising parliament on matters that are important to indigenous Australians. It was only an advisory body, they wouldn’t have had any votes or anything, but whatever they said in parliament would have been an official government record and the response by politicians would also be officially recorded (even no response, would still be recorded).

      The problem, right now, is indigenous people are 3% of the population and therefore they are routinely ignored. Politicians wouldn’t have been able to ignore them anymore… the could still have chosen to do nothing at all, but if a sensible proposal was presented in parliament (such as a solution to the alarming fact that indigenous Australians have in the highest incarceration rate of any people in the entire world) and the government chose not to implement those changes they’d be raked over the coals.

      Solving those problems is good for everyone, it’s not free to put people in prison for example. It costs tax payers tens of billions of dollars… assuming you’re an Australian who pays tax, thousnads of dollars of the tax you pay each year goes towards imprisoning indigenous Australians and far too often for ridiculous charges like “failing to appear” in court for a court case they either couldn’t physically get to (e.g. you live on Mornington Island and were given a court date in Cairns) or sometimes might not have even known they were summoned to court in the first place.

      • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not Australian, just interested in this from an outside perspective. You make good points, and, to be fair, as a non Australian I hadn’t heard much about this vote at all. I may have been a bit hasty to form opinions based on what I thought the vote was about.

        • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Ah I see. A little more background then…

          The indigenous people of Australia have never formally accepted the rule of the current government — legally, the Australian government was founded on a bullshit declaration that there was no human life living on the continent - only animals lived here according to the documents and formal letters and statements made when white people settled on this land. The continent is massive and had thousands of tribes who spoke 250 individual languages. It’s estimated humans have been living here for somewhere between 60,000 and 120,000 years (there’s strong archeological evidence for “at least 60k”, and work is ongoing to verify evidence that suggests 120k years).

          The current government was forced on those people, and there horrific crimes committed (mass murder, arbitrary killings, children were systematically stolen from parents and raised by the church, in some regions the local government paid a cash bounty for anyone who brought an indigenous head to them, etc. It was bad). Things are not that bad now, but they are still far from perfect, and they need to be solved. There also needs to be some form of treaty between Australia and the indigenous nations who’s land was blatantly and obviously stolen (some of the land that white people aren’t using has been given back, but that’s not a treaty).

          Our constitution does not acknowledge the existence of indigenous people. Our national anthem claims this is a “young” country when, at 60,000+ years the indigenous people of this country are in fact the oldest still living civilisation in the world. It’s very very clear that the founders of this country did not consider indigenous people to be part of the country, and the constitution needs to be updated to reflect the modern legal state where they are an integral part of Australia.

          • tyler@lemmy.whitedragonofcroatia.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Just a quick response about the National Anthem. The official words were changed to “for we are one and free” to remove the reference to the age of the country.

            • abhibeckert@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              … that’s nice, although I’m struggling to understand how we changed that line but kept the “free” bit.

              And are we “one”? Seems pretty clear we are a nation divided especially when athletes representing our country refuse to even sing the national anthem.

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      So you obviously know nothing about what was proposed if you’re spouting nonsense about MPs and Aboriginals in parliament.

      It was an advisory board to give some representative to the people who’s entire country we stole and people we genocided.

      There was no discrimination, except from the No voters.

      • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I did start my first sentence asking what the vote was about. And then the rest of my comment was just my opinion if it meant a certain thing. If it didn’t mean that thing, all I need it a clear explanation of what it did mean.

        • nevernevermore@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Giving your opinion on something before you’ve even thought about doing some research is part of the problem here

          • StorminNorman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Welcome to the internet. Jokes aside, they did come in awfully hot on their opinion, with a massive assumption as to what was happening which was horribly wrong. Guarantee this isn’t the first time they’ve done shit like this then tried to blame everyone else for their ignorant bullshit…

      • TheHolm@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m Australian citizen and did not stole and did not kill anyone. If you did than it is your crime not mine.

        • Deceptichum@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Neither yourself or I did.

          Australia did.

          Hence why the government was not asking for Aboriginal people to have a voice in my household and instead in Australia.

          Your personal issues are irrelevant to the conversation at hand.

          • TheHolm@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            You have a point but what are you saying looks to me as same old “white man” chauvinism. “We will desire for you what you are own to others”. Sorry, I treat all people equally, regardless of their race,culture or believes. Please do not force apartheid on me or now mine country.

            • Deceptichum@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yawn.

              Good thing literally no one was forcing apartheid on you. Go make up something else to feel like a victim.

              • TheHolm@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I have no reason to feel a victim. I just do not want make aboriginals a victims again, many of them are in deep shit already.

                • 🦘min0nim🦘@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Many of the reasons they’re “in deep shit already” come back to governments making unilateral decisions for easy media and corporate donor ‘reasons’ - specifically targeting Aboriginal people (as allowed under the constitution) rather than listening to what the communities actually need or want.

                  Hence the Voice. But now we can keep doing the same old shit, targeting the same old Aboriginal communities, but 60% of the population can keep kidding themselves there’s no victims and they’re absolutely not racists at all, oh no no.

                  • TheHolm@aussie.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    No one says the was not a victims, but these guys are dead as well as one who did wrong to them. Task in hand it not give some better treatment but give all everyone same treatment. Remote communities need help - absolutely - but not because they aboriginal but because they in trouble. And do you really think that if voice passed it would help average aboriginal? Nope, it will harm them tremendously, there is reason why they mostly voted no.

            • StorminNorman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              You might treat them equally. That doesn’t mean that the rest of the nation does. We now know 60% of the nation is racist. Which is an improvement on the 77% we had back during the Tampa crisis, I guess. But yeah, we need the voice to give them a fair go, like the rest of us got. You’re an immigrant, and unless you’re white, I guarantee you’ve copped some shit. Stop being so defensive and trying to put down our indigenous population, and instead reach down and help them up to our level. They just want a level playing field, they’re not asking for the world.

              • TheHolm@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                It is something twisted logic. “Yes” vote would not help first nation, it will hurt them as now everyone who hate them would have a real reason to do so. And government probably will not miss opportunity to to make them scapegoats.
                We do not know percentage. 40% of yes voters are racist by their vote, 60% of NO voters are split between one who do not accept racism and one who do not accept racism which do not benefit them. We do not know how they split.

                • StorminNorman@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Why couldn’t you have said this earlier? Then I could have easily judged you as the narrow minded racist that you are. The “yes” vote would most definitely help our first nations people’s, or can you provide a different reason as to why the overwhelming majority of them voted “yes”? Go on, I love seeing idiots struggle… And that brings up another point related to your mindless drivel, are you saying that first nations people are racist towards themselves when they voted “yes”? They are hated because they are different, not because of a potential panel of people that helps the govt make fair and balanced decisions that affect them.

                  I genuinely despise you right now. You started off being a bit confused, now you are just spewing right wing non truths that are somehow worse than what was printed leading up to the vote. I wish you were never made a citizen here, we have enough prejudiced, close minded people here, we don’t need more… And if you don’t like this being directed at you, think of the first nations people in our country who have had to experience this for centuries. Maybe this will shake your core and give you some compassion. I’m doubtful it will due to your military grade stupidity, but I can still hope.

                  • TheHolm@aussie.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Sorry, you do not listen to my arguments. And I fail to see what of what I say make me a racist. I always argued for quality of all Australian.

            • StorminNorman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              No one individual who is still alive have done these things. But they were done in the name of our nation. We all have blood on our hands, even you who is new to this country. You decided to join our nation? Cool, but you have to accept the good with the bad. And this is part of the bad. No-one was trying to institute an apartheid, like you suggested.

              This is a very brief description, there is plenty of stuff out there to read about this issue, I suggest you find some and educate yourself on the issue, even if it is too late to do the right thing.

              • TheHolm@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Sorry as soon you start to separate people by their ancestry it is racism, apartheid it just one of the from to act on it. Unfortunately racism is too loaded, so i used milder word.
                So, why first nation is inherently different to all other nations which now live in Australia? Why they need special treatment? Been first to arrive ? And it is still not clear to me how you can compensate for suffering to people who already dead? Division is never good, it just gives people chance to hate each other.

                • StorminNorman@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  How the fuck is apartheid milder than racism? One is hate, the other is actively trying to subjugate the race. They may be linked, but you’re delusional if you think apartheid is the “milder word”.

                  And we’ve given all the information in this thread, but you either can’t or refuse to understand it. I dunno how you have lived this long on earth and don’t know that first nations people have generally got the shit end of the stick throughout history. Cos who gives a shit if the original people who were wronged are dead, this sort of trauma is encoded in their genes and carried by the following generations. It shits me immensely that you have the same voting power as me, yet you are so incredibly ignorant it’s almost to the point of stupidity.

                  • TheHolm@aussie.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    So than why repeat same mistakes now and wrong other people? Racism is wrong, regardless of intention. As long we do not stop separating people by their ancestry shit will not stop.

    • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Your ideas about what quotas and positive discrimination are almost certainly wrong and the work of people who either heard the words ans assumed they knew everything there was to know or who are seething that they can no longer discriminate.

      The reality is that for any given position, there is a range of applicants of different races and genders, any of whom is qualified for the role.

      The belief that organisations are forced to say “Well this person has every degree offered by Harvard and is a leader in our field. Unfortunately the quota says we need a black person so let’s hire this high school drop out who turned up to the interview drunk” is pure bullshit.

      Also, the absense of these systems doesn’t create a meritocracy, it creates discrimination. We know this from seeing it over and over again before these systems were implemented. Straight white men of a social class hire other straight white men from the same social class and then claim that they just always seem to be the most qualified candidate.

      If they genuinely are, it shouldn’t be difficult to prove it should it?