A resounding vote for division
By Loz Lawrey
Well, Australia voted NO.
I saw it coming but I’m still gutted.
Really? Is this really our best?
What possible reason could any well-intended citizen have for voting against a simple constitutional adjustment aimed at improving the lives of so many First Nations people?
Are so many of my countrymen really wearing their racism so blatantly on their sleeves?
Addressing the disadvantage in our Indigenous community that has for over two centuries (and to this day) remained entrenched – that’s all the Voice was about.
So why did so many Australians vote against it?
I am reminded of Britain’s Brexit referendum, where many of the voters seemed clueless as to the actual meaning of the question they were being asked and the implications of their answer upon their own lives and those of others.
A folk rumour has it that “Brexit” was the most-Googled word on the day following the referendum, which begs the question: why didn’t they google the damn word BEFORE voting?
Dutton’s campaign of lies, disinformation and obfuscation succeeded, most sadly.
We have, overnight, become a meaner, more miserable country.
Let us never forget that the Coalition, the National party and the No Campaign all followed the fascist playbook, emulating the Trump power-seeking strategy which is, at its heart, based upon the “divide and conquer” campaign that brought Hitler to power.
What I find truly frightening in these post-truth times is the disruptive power of trolls and “commentators” on social and mainstream media who hijack all rational discussion with tools from the saboteur’s toolbox such as “othering” – giving people an enemy to blame for their troubles… giving them “others” (think Jews, Palestinians, Aborigines etc…) to hate.
Such hypocrisy! For months now I’ve been hearing misleading nonsense dribbling from the scowling mouth of opposition leader Peter Dutton.
Never before have I found myself yelling so often at both radio and TV as the most disgusting lies and ambiguities (all appealing to the fear, greed and insecurities of voters) were peddled by both Dutton and his co-conspirators in their concerted efforts to sabotage something beautiful that had the true potential to brighten Australia’s heart.
I must also credit others, such as Nationals leader David Littleproud, No Campaigners Warren Mundine, Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and Senator Lydia Thorpe (ably assisted by others of their contrarian ilk) with making hefty contributions to the amplification of the fears and doubts injected into the voice “debate” by racists and right-wing conservatives.
And what will be the wondrous legacy of these narcissistic naysayers?
A BIG FAT NOTHING.
For people of empathy who possess critical thinking skills, supporting the Indigenous Voice to Parliament was a no-brainer, surely?
If you voted NO, I do not want to hear your mendacious justifications.
Seriously, who are you to vote against the upliftment of others, particularly when you would know (had you informed yourself) that a YES vote comes at no cost to you personally?
It was a simple and direct request: will you let us be heard?
Will you allow us a Voice that will be listened to?
May we, Indigenous Australians, simply be allowed input into decisions that affect us?
Why is this asking too much?
If you voted NO, you are either a racist, seriously misinformed or perhaps just confused and disengaged.
If the latter is the case, should you even be allowed to participate in our nation’s democratic process?
Democracy is a wonderful concept, but it does require informed participation.
Personally, the lesson I take away from the sad, miserable and disturbing result of this Voice Referendum is that Australia’s education system is letting us down.
Are young people leaving school properly equipped to fully participate in the democratic process?
Are they being taught real civics – the rights and obligations of citizens in society?
Do they know their rights in the workplace?
Do they graduate with some understanding of our financial system and their tax obligations etc?
Does our system properly equip us to become informed, empowered, participating and contributing citizens?
Does our education system teach students about living in a social democracy, where the needs of all must be considered?
In the context of the Voice “debate” one must also ask: does our educational system fully inform all students of the real history of Australia and truly reflect the actual verified facts underpinning Aboriginal disadvantage: the attempted genocide, the frontier wars, the apartheid state, the bloody Terra Nullius?
Surely real reconciliation demands that these things be fully taught and understood by all Australians?
If the broader Australian community truly understood the issues that confront our First Nations brothers and sisters, the result of the referendum would have been a resounding YES, I believe.
The NO vote won the day by exploiting ignorance, an ignorance that our very system seems to entrench.
Righteousness requires a YES.
Basic humanity requires a YES.
Colonialists seeking redemption for the crimes of their ancestors require a YES.
Social justice requires a YES.
Decency requires a YES.
Sadly, our country has a long way to go on the road to YES.
The hidebound regressives of the right have kicked us back to the start, but let’s take the first step towards a fairer future.
Let’s reclaim the Fair Australia that Dutton works so hard to destroy.
I’ll make one more point: which political leader has truly engaged with First Australians, attended the Garma festival year after year, enjoyed and tried to understand their culture?
Which political leader made his concern for Aboriginal empowerment and upliftment a priority once elected, by announcing his government’s support for the Uluru Statement From The Heart?
Which political leader actually cares about First Nations Australians and makes a real effort to understand their needs?
Which political leader actually walks with first Australians?
Which political leader is capable of heartfelt (not claimed in a monotone) empathy for others?
If you consider the facts, I think you’ll know the answer.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
17 comments
Login here Register here-
Andrew Smith -
Teiresias -
Shane Mortimer -
Kerri -
K -
Mj -
Stephen S -
New England Cocky -
Wayne Turner -
Stephengb -
Mingku -
Wayne Turner -
Ill fares the land -
New Bruce -
Stephengb -
Stephengb -
Teiresias
Return to home pageConcur, especially Brexit comparison, same actors and dynamics via Koch linked think tanks (e.g. IPA/CIS locally) to disrupt democracy and allow fossil fuels etc. to avoid EU regulatory constraints on environment, money laundering, employee & consumer rights etc. for the <0.1%, and Russia.
If so, outcomes to emerge will be regret, support for ‘No’ sentiments will subside vs. demands for ‘Yes’ (via alternatives), especially as many oldies pass away, RW &/or social media campaigns will continue to justify ‘No’, the Libs will become QLD LNP and lose even more support, then with Murdoch led RW media, think tanks and LNP et al. will continue trying to stymie any progress; risk is more extreme views and wilful parliamentary chaos aka US GOP & Congress, or UK Tory Parliament (guaranteeing a Labour return).
Loz Lawrey,
beautifully written. Inspiring.
We need a Royal Commission on this farcical nonsense. No one checked the Referendum Booklet for misinformation.
We also need a Royal Commission of the weaponisation of the Higgins-Lehrmann farcical sham. Riddled with corruption.
And another highly monied combination, the pairing of highly paid sports participants and greedy, obsessive betting agencies. Any questions?
NO – First People narrowly escaped being rendered “subjects” of the British Crown owned “Australia” construct.
First People are the Allodial Titleholders of their lands. See attached Lilienthal & Ahmad, (2019). Commonwealth Law Bulletin published paper. Colonial Land Title in Australia – A meta-legal critical inquiry.
The Crown craves the beneficial entitlement like a heroin addict.
Allodium cannot be given or taken away. It is the right of all First People who have bloodline connection to their homelands.
The NO result has a silver lining,
The reason this stuff isn’t taught in schools is because every time teachers attempt to inform and enlighten the rabid right wing start screaming “lefty communists grooming our children”. FFS don’t blame the education system! Blame all the interfering political hacks that want to look inside everyone else’s underpants and take children away from parents who don’t attend enough story times at their local library or have the wrong colour skin.
Shane Mortimer, thank you!
As for the rest of the comments, can we please stop demanding Royal Commissions on everything? It’s a bit of a misnomer, especially on an article regarding the importance of the referendum, and the missed opportunity due to Spud’s and Co mis/disinformation campaign!
Maybe try bombarding your local MP (especially if they are LNP) with feedback and complaints on their official websites…. Ask them to please explain, or just place a takeaway fish and chips order, just for @#%&$ and giggles.
A squeaky wheel and all that…
What an insightful piece. Everyone who voted no is a racist, bigot or a moron easily influenced by the dumbest politicians on the planet. I mean what else could it have been? The foresight to pigeon hole a great swathe of people and push them into the waiting arms of the very people you hate is to be commended. Let’s not self reflect nor consider alternative reasons for a failed proposal to change the constitution, that self reflection isn’t needed here. The answer is glaringly obvious; anyone who didn’t vote yes hates indigenous people. They were probably burning crucifixes on their lawns and frolicking around with pillow cases over their heads as well. I applaud this journalism, it really highlights what we need highlighted. Albanese is a sincere and trustworthy person who cried about giving a voice to our indigenous people and also stated he fully supports Zionist Israel to blow the Palestinians into bits, as well as to starve them to death, it’s self defence after all. These things aren’t incongruous and really shows the type of stuff our little Albo is made of. Once again Bravo!
You are merely writing out, one more time, exactly why the referendum went down. If you want to lecture 17 million voters, “you’re a racist”, unless you vote Yes to a “Voice”, then don’t give them a vote in the first place.
Will Albanese learn from the experience? Not likely, he is a dill, and he will continue to think like, and govern for, the inner-city enclaves that voted Yes. Which is why I don’t want him to touch the “republic” issue, he would only screw it up, and give King Charles a fresh mandate.
If you want to see unpleasantly stubborn groupthink in action, don’t look at 17 million voters in six states. Have a look at the comfortably wealthy landlords on the Labor front bench, preaching their open borders and “net zero” at the homeless.
An eloquently put case for Australia the Racist Republic of 18th Century Colonial Thinking.
.
@ Shane Mortimer: Uhm ….. I think you may be a little late in your erroneous celebration of ”First People narrowly escaped being rendered “subjects” of the British Crown owned “Australia” construct.” The English declared all Aborigines subjects of the English Crown about 200 years ago and confirmed that declaration on several later occasions.
.
There is too much history in this matter to discuss here, however the history of Australian colonial settlement/invasion includes the six (6) sovereign states that pre-date the declaration of the Australian Constitution in 1901. Identifying ”alloidal claims to land title” as giving precedence to land title established by warfare is an interesting approach.
Relying upon a meta-analysis rather than original data is less convincing.
I voted YES, because it was nothing to fear,and the majority of First Nations People asked for this. Due to the Uluru Statement From The Heart.
It is the very least we could do for our First Nations People – To be Recognised in The Constitution,along with The Voice.A non-binding advisory Group Enshrined In The Constitution.
It is what was asked for in full,not “cherry picking” like most politicians have done. Aka Albanese and Labor actually listened totally to a majority of First Nations People.
It was nothing more. With The exact details of how The Voice would work,decided by Parliament. Like Parliament does for every policy EVER.
Plus,if YES got up,I would of keep my house too (Yes I am rightfully mocking no voter’s.).
The majority of the public in this country are ignorant,self centred,and gullible. They fell for all the LIES,and lack proper critical thinking skills to tell lies from truth.
The racists,who I believe are a minority of course voted NO.
It is the most of the other NO voters that were easily conned, because they have no idea on how to think logically.
For those that voted NO because it didn’t go far enough – Is as logical,as voting against a Republic they wanted because they didn’t like the model on offer. How is their new Republican model going?
The majority rule,but it doesn’t mean they are right. FACTS are FACTS,same with LIES, regardless of what the majority (don’t) think.
Australia the ignorant,shameful,and gullible country.
Wow, talk about group think, talk about facist ideas of restricting voting rights especially to exclude opinions that differ from theose who believe the ‘no’ voters are those that are wrong !
Did any of the ‘yes’ voters, even consider that establishing an institution for the exclusive benefit of a single group of citizens, just might be a little bit anti demicratic ?
And Yes many Australians are indeed the most racist bunch I have ever met, and I have been called all the names under the sun because I dared to say it on social media.
Every citizen has the right to vote and their opinion, just because you dont like their opinion dies not give you the right to hyperbole.
Get over it !
Cease & desist using “Uluru” in association with the “Statement from the heart” fraud. The owners of Uluru do not want their name associated with the Statement. It is a contrivance by a privileged opportunistic few, Langton, Pearson, Davis & co. It was not a deliberative process. They spoke with 13 groups out of 259+ language areas. 250 First People were paid to sign a blank canvas who had no idea of what was going to be written on it in Melbourne. The statement will not stand up in court!
How democratic are all those hundreds of powerful lobby groups already with access to Federal Parliament? Not at all.
They don’t need to be in the Constitution, because they are so powerful,they are not going away ever. I take it you are now lobbying for them to go too?
If not,you are an inconsistent hypocrite.
If those Lobby Groups can stay having a powerful voice, having one for the First Nation People should be ok.
Entitled to opinion? Mostly said by ignorant people. How about having an informed opinion instead.
FACTS are still FACTS, regardless of what the majority think. Same with LIES.
As I have said. The majority are ignorant,and this is what this country truly is.
The genius of the Potato Head campaign is that it did two things really well. Firstly, it tapped into the tacit racism that exists at the core of so many Australians. Secondly, it enabled them to believe that in voting no they weren’t actually being racist – and in some cases, doubtless thought voting yes would have amplified racism. I doubt Potato Head has the smarts to grasp the nuances, but he understood the Trumpian tactic of spreading lies and fear to tap into the psyche of those who approved of the views of Hanson (remember her maiden speech emphasising, or shrieking about how much First Nations get – for nothing) and tacitly endorsed or promoted by Howard. We know that Hanson was a godsend for Howard – she could express all of our deep-seated racist fears and, in essence, do Howard’s “work” for him. Many decades ago, a nephew of Sigmund Freud realised that many of our choices were a battle between “thinking & rational brain” and feeling and irrational brain”. So, a man has a different pair of socks for each day of the week – rational brain’s in charge. But, for irrational brain, it could be “persuaded” to want 50 pairs of socks (a silly example I know) and thinking brain would then rationalise that “want” as a “need”. Bingo – the birth of marketing as we know it and its that which the Trumps and Potato Head’s exploit. Just spout any old crap that often can’t withstand even the most cursory investigation (Potato Head didn’t make a single claim that couldn’t be shown to be a lie or at best misrepresentation) but which activate “irrational brain” and” rational brain” then decides that the Voice is a pretext for a UN takeover of Australia; that First Nation’s people will take our farms and houses, that because Credlin did an FOI to get her hands on a public document the Voice was much more insidious than First Nations people were letting on and there was so much detail not being revealed or explained (despite that Potato Head was given a 400-page report on the Voice some years ago he didn’t understand the detail!!)… on and on the rationalisations go. Those rationalisations allow us to believe we didn’t vote note because we’re racist but because we’re right to be suspicious.
Last Saturday, Australia came a distant l last in the humanity and decency stakes.
Why ?
Too much noise.
What should have been a Community stroll around the park and sausage sizzle was turned into an ultra marathon with hurdles and high jumps, with a dose of mafs meets gladiator thrown in, and We the Voter fell at the first.
Any statements of racism and ignorance were swiftly dealt a “I’m not stupid, cop this”, and the msm whipped all of the crap being spread into a shit sandwich that was too hard to ignore.
All this on top of an already stl;anted toward stagnation referendum system, and we failed.
Not only our First Australian family, but ourselves.
This one from Mr Kristfferson says it all.
New Bruce
As a matter of fact I understand that there are lobby groups and I am so glad that you agree that the proposed institution would be a “lobby group”, however (and I do not expect agreement) there is a world of difference between a Constitionally imposed lobby group and a commercially lobby group that can be closed down at the whim of any Party in government, so I certainly do not buy that story.
Bruce I can assure that as a life long (I am 76) egalitarian (note I do not say socialist) I thought about my vote long and hard and tried to find as much information as I could ( I have stage 4 cancer and have been very ill) however I could not agree to a Constitutionally enshrined instition that allowed one specific group of people absolute access to our Parlianent and Government to the exclusion of all other groups.
Further If I had my way ( via my none existant garenteed institute ) to make representations to my Parliamment and Governing Executive to remove access of all commercial lobby groups.
As an Englishman with dual citizenship I absolutely accept that Britain created a means to forceably wipe out the indiginous population. What a terrible time in history that era was, I an sure you are aware the ill treatmebt of aboriginaks was continued well after Australia had begun extracting British influance even before 1901, so I do not accept the brutality handed to Aboriginals by your so called “dinky die Aussies”, and ues even to the stolen generation handed to mere children extracated from Britsin during the WWII “see” A Fortunate Life by Albert Facey.
End of rant
Wayne Turner,
Thanks for the abuse.
You certainly feel strong about your opinion. Well done!
It is difficult to understand what the NO people believe or understand. They will try to employ legal matters as Shane Mortimer does and when we go to alloidal title-holders we find that such matters are disputed and there is a “meta-legal critical inquiry, dated 2019.”
As New England Cocky points out, land matters go back a long way historically. Peter Sutton, author of “Farmers or Hunter-Gatherers? The Dark Emu” debate, tells us he has been involved in Aboriginal land matters for decades and he says of early Aboriginal farmers that “They left a far better Australian environment than we have now, given that so many native species are now extinct, so many feral introduced species are creating havoc, and huge regions have been domesticated under mono-culture and thereby degraded in ecological richness.” (p. 200)
There are people here who wish to criticise Albanese, who is a “dill” says Stephen S, and he ridicules Labor. He says: Have a look at the comfortably wealthy landlords on the Labor front bench, preaching their open borders and ‘net zero’ at the homeless.”
And we could look at wealthy Dutton, who has a 275 page Voice document (aided by Chris Kenny). What is he going to do with it? And What is it we are finding out about Dutton and the misuse of migrants?
We also have lobby groups who tinker with politicians. And people who come from overseas and spend money supporting selected people to speak at length with misinformation.
Easy peasy. Even lies and untruths claimed to be the truth.
But if it is about Aboriginal people, who cares?
I know people who do.