Indigenous Voice to Parliament

[slangman]

Yes, let's blame the side of politics who are supporting the voice, the parties trying to start a process in the hope it can improve the outcomes for future generations of Indigenous people.

Honestly.

If the referendum fails it falls squarely on the shoulders of the Coalition, the misinformation being touted as fact and the barely disguised bigotry emanating from much of the No campaign.

This is nothing but a cynical political opportunity for them, they want to breed division and appeal to the worst of human nature.

It's what the right seek to do and it's the same playbook we see trotted out against other marginalised communities whether it be Trans people or asylum seekers.

Disappointing but no surprise that the usual suspects on here aren't going to support the voice.

Once again it's all about them when in actuality it isn't at all.

That's the whole bloody point.

That is some tripe that you’ve posted.
Typical of self aggrandising “do gooders” who when the going gets tough are usually nowhere to be seen.
If you cared about aboriginal people enough you would have been in Alice Springs when REAL assistance was needed.
But hey, let’s vote yes so we can feel good about ourselves

[David]

[slangman]

[David]

It sounds like you would vote for the voice under any circumstance.

That's not actually true. As I've said before in this thread, I'm sympathetic to the views of Lidia Thorpe and others who are voting no for similar reasons, and I could be swayed to voting no myself if I felt that most Indigenous people shared their opinion. I'm a soft "yes", and for instance probably won't be volunteering for the campaign with letterbox drops or by handing out pamphlets on voting day, as I tend to do nowadays with political causes I support. It's not a cause I can wholeheartedly get behind, because it clearly doesn't go far enough.

What I find most disappointing is those who would vote no under any circumstance on the grounds that any step forward for Indigenous people in this country that comes from a place of self-determination constitutes a threat to everyone else's interests. There are a lot of valid criticisms to be made about low-information yes voters, but I feel like in most cases their heart is in the right place.

And no, I don't think for a moment that voting no, including for conservative or self-interested reasons, makes you a racist. But frankly, a lot of stuff I'm hearing from the no camp doesn't seem to be coming from a genuine place of wanting the best for Indigenous people, and it's unfortunate that that is so.

[stui magpie]

This referendum shouldn't be about party politics. I'm voting Yes because I think it's the right thing to do but Albo has absolutely stuffed the communication.

Blaming Dutton is ridiculous. If Albo and the Yes campaign had come up with clear and consistent comms from the start and been more open and transparent, there wouldn't be the opportunity for the No campaign to raise questions and doubts. And there's many of those.

This is not something that will impact 90+% of the population, but when people start to believe that it might, then yes self interest kicks in and remember what Keating said about that?

There's also lots of other reasons why people would vote No which largely boil down to lack of trust and that comes right back to Albo's lack of clear transparent comms.

Change Management 101. First step is to craft a clear and compelling reason for change, step 2 is to create a sense of urgency.For a case study in how to do it better, just look at the Climate Change movement.

[Magpietothemax]

I am boycotting the entire referendum because either alternative, yes or no, is equally bankrupt.
Voting no leaves everything unchanged, which is disastrous for the aboriginal population who preponderantly live in what has traditionally been called 3rd world conditions.
Voting yes means agreeing to a layer of wealthy indigenous academics, entrepreneurs, etc to cement their privileges, by imposing the profit interests of corporate elite under the facade of ''indigenous rights''. The end result is the same as for a "no'' vote: continuing conditions of extreme poverty and deprivation for the vast majority of aboriginal people.
The only principled position is to reject the entire referendum.

[stui magpie]

The theory is that the participants in the Voice would be selected by local communities. That may result in the outcome you predict but isn't that better than the current situation?

[pietillidie]

^Well done. I really respect your approach of separating the stuff ups and politics from the task of trying to take steps forward. If only the rest of the electorate were that mature.

[think positive]

[stui magpie]

^Well done. I really respect your approach of separating the stuff ups and politics from the task of trying to take steps forward. If only the rest of the electorate were that mature.

cheers Ptiddy, I'm trying to walk a fine line on this, make a point without being disrespectful. Now that I'm retired and don't have the underpinning constant stress I think i am far more balanced in my posts

[think positive]

yes but i miss the swearing and abuse!
not that it was ever at me, i just miss it!!!!

[stui magpie]

^



I'm mellowed, a lot less on edge than I used to be, but unlike Skids I still like a drink so if some one pisses me off and I'm well into the 2nd bottle of red I may let loose, just for you.

[think positive]

much appreciated!!!!

[What'sinaname]

What a dumb form. Why not have two separate boxes for Yes and No.

[Bucks5]

They cannot rig it with 2 boxes. They can interpret any indistinguishable mark as a Yes vote but only a clearly written No will count.