77
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by unionagainstdhmo@aussie.zone to c/australia@aussie.zone

With the Voice to Parliament Referendum date announced to be October 14 2023, this thread will run in the lead up to the date for general discussions/queries regarding the Voice to Parliament.

The Proposed Constitutional Amendment

Chapter IX Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples

129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice

In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:

there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice; the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.

Past Discussions

Here are some previous posts in this community regarding the referendum:

Common Misinformation

  • "The Uluru Statement from the Heart is 26 Pages not 1" - not true

Government Information

Amendments to this post

If you would like to see some other articles or posts linked here please let me know and I'll try to add it as soon as possible.

  1. Added the proposed constitutional amendment (31/08/2023)
  2. Added Common Misinformation section (01/07/2023)

Discussion / Rules

Please follow the rules in the sidebar and for aussie.zone in general. Anything deemed to be misinformation or with malicious intent will be removed at moderators' discretion. This is a safe space to discuss your opinion on the voice or ask general questions.

Please continue posting news articles as separate posts but consider adding a link to this post to encourage discussion.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Zozano@aussie.zone 21 points 1 year ago

I'm trying to understand the No voters.

They're saying because the details haven't been ironed out, the Voice could be given much more power than is proposed.

But in their worst case scenario, what do they think is going to happen?

[-] Baku@aussie.zone 12 points 1 year ago

At this point I've just come to the conclusion the no people are most likely racists in hiding. The whole special rights/excessive powers/etc is just a cover story imo

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 0 points 1 year ago

Ah yes, the many many indigenous people campaigning for no are racist against themselves. You hit the nail on the head.

[-] INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago

That's now what they said. Have you hit yourself on the head?

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 0 points 1 year ago

He said that the no voters are racist……have you taken a fall yourself?

[-] INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago

the conclusion that the "no" people are most likely racists in hiding

the conclusion that indigenous people campaigning for "no" are racist against themselves

Different hits to different heads? I don't know what to tell you.

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I can’t tell if you’re just taking the piss or actually think that he didn’t say that everyone voting no is a racist….? Or are you suggesting that 100% of indigenous people are voting yes?

[-] INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago

Maybe I have hit myself on the head because I sure don't remember offering any opinions.

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago

Read the conversation that you interjected your opinion in.

[-] Nonameuser678@aussie.zone 12 points 1 year ago

The worst case scenario for them is that marginalised groups might start getting a greater say over the policies and laws that affect them. If Indigenous Australians are awarded more power in a system that is designed to keep them powerless then who knows what other groups in a similar situation of powerlessness might start getting uppity about.

The conservative no campaign don't want to change the status quo because they don't have a problem with it. Shit's working fine in their view. The yes campaign and progressive no campaign agree that the status quo is not good enough but disagree about how it needs to be changed.

If you read the conservative no campaign's brochure one of the concerns that they have about the voice is that it opens the door to activism. I personally think that is the foundation of their position and everything else is just incoherent fluff to wrap it up in.

[-] Zozano@aussie.zone 6 points 1 year ago

opens the doors to activism

Cool, where do I sign up?

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone -3 points 1 year ago

The worst case scenario for them is that marginalised groups might start getting a greater say over the policies and laws that affect them.

Ah yes, that explains the marginalised group of indigenous Australians that are against this and voting no. They're afraid that they'll get a greater say over policies.

You guys are acting ridiculous, trying to paint every single person that is voting no as a scared racist. As with most other types of activists, you're doing more harm than good with your rhetoric.

[-] Emu_Warrior@aussie.zone 4 points 1 year ago

You'd probably be one of those white guys in American saying the "negros" don't want equal rights or to be able to marry white women for the same reasons lol.

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone -2 points 1 year ago
[-] Commiejones@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago

I mean Mundie isn't the greatest person to link to.

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago
[-] Commiejones@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

Lets just say he has some problematic ideas. He has been involved in professions prone to causing extensive brain damage. I'm not going to say his entire opinion is wrong but he uses buzz words and phrases that are common is far-right and conspiracy theory circles.

There are more qualified people who have good credibility like Lidia Thorpe who's arguments are well formed and don't inadvertently reference less reputable ideas.

[-] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The point being made was that he’s indigenous and voting no, which apparently makes him a white racist according to some other posters in here that I’m replying to.

I dislike Mundine, I think he’s an idiot and a cancer to those young people that he takes under his wing, but he’s indigenous and voting no, not a racist white.

Also if there has been one thing Mundine has always been consistent about, it’s his views on systemic racism against his people and being vocal about it.

[-] Commiejones@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago
[-] Taleya@aussie.zone 9 points 1 year ago

Those insert slur here will get uppity!

That's their worst case scenario. No longer playing with a stacked deck.

[-] Ilandar@aussie.zone 8 points 1 year ago

What's that saying? Equity feels like oppression to the privileged?

[-] morry040@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

Probably the worst case for No voters is that the Voice becomes a platform to push for reparations, whereby Australians are expected to pay a tax for events that occurred before they were born or arrived in the country.

[-] Zozano@aussie.zone 5 points 1 year ago

People being angry about paying reparations are silly. They act like money is being taken out of their pockets.

The amount of tax we pay doesn't change, and the tax will be going towards improving peoples lives.

If we're going to get salty about how our tax money is spent, maybe we should be looking at the billions of dollars given to billionaire companies.

[-] Commiejones@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

Its not that the details haven't been ironed out its that none of the details will be protected by the constitution.

The wording of the referendum makes the voice a political football.

[-] Zozano@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago

Okay, then what happens when the football is dropped? What's the worst that could happen in the eyes of both parties?

This is one of the no sides more compelling arguments.

Its a consideration for all office holders, but more so if you're the Liberal/National party that see's a reasonable chance of holding power someday.

Historically this side of politics interests have disagreed more often with indigenous nations interests.

To disagree and ignore the Voice councils recommendations could leech political capital, and a resulting media storm could use up all the 'air in the room', so to speak. Undermining that executives ability to carry out their agenda.

In short it can be an easy political wedge for opposition partys, or other interested persons to hit the government of the day with.

[-] Commiejones@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

The right is always the one who wins political Football.

The voice will become an impotent political appointment to stuff a friend into as a favor like the appeals court or ABC Board. Nothing will change materially for indigenous peoples but settlers will get to pretend they aren't racists because they voted yes.

this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
77 points (98.7% liked)

Australia

3579 readers
129 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS