Today, we know the result of this referendum that has hung over us for what seems an eternity.
According to the polls and the media (notably News Corp), the “NO” campaign has won. Both sides exhausted their arguments with words that either spoke the truth, half-truths, or full-on lies – or repeated the exact same words for months.
It was a simple referendum that, if won, would have seen First Nations people take their rightful place in our society, recorded in our constitution. A proposition not at all unreasonable.
Secondly was a proposal to give a voice to these people who once needed no such thing. A voice recommending things to the Australian Parliament that might improve their lives, their health, their education and their longevity. Doing whatever they requested their way instead of the white man’s. However, the Parliament, if desired, could refuse any such request.
It was to be a voice that might make them as equal to us than they are now. But asking for that from conservatives with a superiority complex and a “born-to-rule” attitude was a bridge too far.
The proposal’s details were relatively simple and easy to understand until the warriors of relentless negativity with no motive other than to destroy an idea entered the fray.
Understanding why the conservative parties would want to waste this opportunity for the Indigenous people of this nation to advance themselves takes a bit of insight. First, one must look at the character of those who championed a conservative ‘No’ vote. From John Howard Tony Abbott to Peter Dutton, the forces of conservatism grew to oppose this referendum in the knowledge that their opposition would destroy it. Only parties without conscience, empathy and empty hearts would do such a thing.
The National Party, led by David Littleproud without much introspection or conscience, showed their true colours by opposing it before the questions were even known. He looked cowardly in the face of such uninformed thinking.
Peter Dutton, the negatively inclined Leader of the Opposition, opposed the referendum because it is what conservatives do. Afraid of change unless it profits. Is he a racist? I don’t know, but a glance at his history might illuminate.
There was never anything in it politically for him. It has yet to show him as an informed leader with a touch of sageness. On the contrary, this hostile victory has portrayed him as just one of those awful right-wing leaders from the darkened world of Trump.
His decision to oppose won’t win the teal seats back from the independent members of Parliament, far from it. He will only enhance his reputation as another in the Abbott mould – another spoiler. Being constantly pessimistic in a changing world will not convince the undecided, young, or disengaged voters who want change. It is not a strategy for winning the next election.
Joining the YES campaign could have changed his public image, had he taken a bi-partisan approach.
Aboriginal leaders Warren Mundine and Jacinta Yangapi Nampijinpa Price supported a NO vote because they wanted more than a voice. However, Mundine was so difficult to understand at times that I needed help comprehending his confusion. They wanted political power to go with a treaty designed by them.
They have both experienced success in life and may not want others to have the privileges that go with it.
Contradicting that, however, is that the LNP want Indigenous people to know their place in society. Equality is a word they would dare not use.
Two weeks ago, it became apparent that Dutton and Albanese were beginning to position themselves for a post-referendum period when both parties would require different words to explain a NO victory.
Why did the YES vote lose so miserably after 15 years of negotiation, endless meetings, goodwill, and good ideas? Let’s start with a known fact: Referendums have always been historically difficult to win, especially without consensus.
The Voice could have succeeded with Peter Dutton’s and his party’s support, but if politics is about ideas, he is totally against them. Like myself, those on the YES side will see it as an opportunity missed.
We will feel cheated that the voices of Dutton, Price and Mundine convinced most of the population that 1.4% of our people should be subjected to no improvement in their living standards while we want more. I feel ashamed that we cannot admit to the Aboriginal’s unique standing among us.
Of course, with truthfulness, we will feel aggrieved and, in part, blame the News Corp’s “no news” saturation and their dedication to conservative values. Some of us will feel guilty for not doing more. Others will wonder about the tools of propaganda and its success at conning the people. Scare campaigns still work as efficiently as not saying how you would approach the problem.
Those on the right will display their self-righteousness, telling the Prime Minister and our First Nations people it was the NO who were right all along and that the Prime Minister should get another job because he lacks judgment.
Now, having recorded a telling victory, Price will, in her high-handed way, demand that negotiations begin immediately for a treaty. She is probably not interested in any truth-telling. They will tell Albanese and his Government that the money would have been better spent on matches rather than wasting it on a proposal without any information about how it would work.
The Government will be less inclined to talk about a Treaty now than if the YES vote had won. That’s human nature. This means that we can forget the past few months’ events and the goodwill of our Aboriginal peoples. The status quo will remain in place for some time now, and Dutton, Mundine and Price should take the blame. Our First Nations peoples will justifiably feel angry and vent their spleen. Albanese may talk about alternatives, but there are none on the table.
However, history shows no Government has ever lost an election after losing a referendum. (“If you don’t know, vote no”) was a message calculated to turn off lazy minds who might be bothered to find out, and, in the course of it being too hard, that’s what they did?
For his part, Peter Dutton is still acting as a leader left over from ten years of less-than-mediocre governance. A group of right-wing wankers that showed a liking for corruption and wrongdoing. Opposition, for opposition’s sake, is a useless compass when seeking the highest office.
He is fast becoming Australia’s Donald Trump. Full of the same kind of bullshit. His exaggerated style speaks from the lowest podium about things of monumental importance. He offers nothing other than his self-importance, which may be necessary to him, but in terms of the nation, it is nothing more than weaponised mendacity.
The failure of the YES VOTE will flatten the many fine people, not just First Nations people, who thought they might add a bit of history to the already 65,000 years of existence. They have taught us a patience that ever lingers, talking to the light of day and the spirits of the blackest nights.
Last but not least, l believe Peter Dutton has circumvented any chance of us becoming a republic soon.
[textblock style=”4″]
My thought for the day
A leader with any character would slap down members of his shadow cabinet who roam the road of racism with all the force of a heavy roller. Dutton, however, is joined at the hip.
[/textblock]
[textblock style=”7″]
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
[/textblock]
