Referendum 2023

[Winston Churchill]

It's a great take:
[Lets work a Wests Tigers analogy, Which consultants do you want?
Yes - "people who will tell it how it is".

No - "Justin Pascoe is the Best General manager ever" (Consultant then proceeds to collect their 6 figure sum.)]

You could also say:
Yes - "We need to make changes in our club to become successful again."

No - "Lee Hagipantelis and the Wests Tigers board is doing a wonderful job. The onfield results are in no way our fault" (Invoice for consultant sent in mail).

People want to complicate this. It is very simple, Do you want the Aboriginal people having authentic and truthful representatives in Canberra?
Canberra is a bubble, it is a world of it's own. All the Aboriginal people have asked for is "a voice", to say to whatever government how it really is in the Aboriginal communities.

^it's that simple.

We know you've outed yourself as a troll but its getting too easy now fella. Lift your game back up to where it was 20 pages ago before we all thought you weren't trolling.

Its not just a poor but incredibly naive or maybe its just a straight up dumb take.

 

[Mistymuzzle]

People want to complicate this. It is very simple, Do you want the Aboriginal people having authentic and truthful representatives in Canberra?
Canberra is a bubble, it is a world of it's own. All the Aboriginal people have asked for is "a voice", to say to whatever government how it really is in the Aboriginal communities.

^it's that simple.

You have made the No case perfectly. You have said the quiet part out loud.

Aboriginal people already have democratically elected representatives in Canberra, the exact same ones as non indigenous people have, which is exactly how a democracy works.

What the Voice says is that indigenous australians get additional representatives in Canberra, which is the opposite of how democracy works.

Very simple.

 

[Mistymuzzle]

No one is saying anything other than 'dividing' Australia which is complete bullshit. Watch if anyone remembers anything two weeks after the vote. Uneducated folk haha, hiding the undertone you hypocritical lot.

Mate you obvious cant or dont read. Literally 100 pages of reasons for No including:

1. Establishing Constitution privileges within the Constitution based on the immutable characteristic of race.
2. Uneven additional representation within Parliament and within the executive for one small section of the population based on the immutable characteristic of race.
3. Impracticality of The Voice being consulted on every legislation as it passes parliament and the executive, grinding the already slow gears of parliament.
4. Access to High Court for the Voice if they are not consulted or inadequately consulted.

Many others throughout these pages.....but yeah you are right....just racists.

 

[Mistymuzzle]

That's all the voice is about. We have had Aboriginal voices in Parliament before, just whenever they say something the government does not like. They get thrown out.

That's all it is, but hey News media has to bash it worse then they do the Tigers!

Remind me when we previously had indigenous voice enshrined in the Constitution?

You clearly dont understand what this referendum is for.

 

[Mistymuzzle]

Also the GST was never ever meant to replace stamp duty. Stamp duty is a state tax, not federal.

GST was 100% supposed to replace stamp duty. That is why the Federal government reimburses the States out of the GST money.

 

[Mistymuzzle]

Here is what Paul Keating has said:
"We committed the murders. We took the children from their mothers."

This happened to the Aboriginal people. This happened to them because they were Aboriginal. This happened as a part of a policy called "white Australia".

So what did Paul Keating do for them in the 5 years he was prime Minister or the 13 years he was in cabinet on the Government executive?

 

[TillLindemann]

This happened to the Aboriginal people. This happened to them because they were Aboriginal. This happened as a part of a policy called "white Australia".

I don't know why, but people get this wrong all the time these days. The 'White Australia' policy had absolutely nothing, zero, nil to do with Aboriginals. It was an immigration policy (properly called the Immigration Restriction Act, 1901) passed after federation, which preferenced the entry of first British then later wider European entrants, based on a language test.

 

[Tim Sheens]

Re Paul Keating quote..
"[on taxation] If you don't understand it, don't vote for it; if you do understand it, you'd never vote for it!"

Yep and the GST has been so SO bad hasn't it?

Lets work a Wests Tigers analogy, Which consultants do you want?
Yes - "people who will tell it how it is".

No - "Justin Pascoe is the Best General manager ever" (Consultant then proceeds to collect their 6 figure sum.)

That's all the voice is about. We have had Aboriginal voices in Parliament before, just whenever they say something the government does not like. They get thrown out.

That's all it is, but hey News media has to bash it worse then they do the Tigers!

It isn't just the majority of the media pushing the BS, sadly, the more balanced media players also report on those pushed agendas, which perpetuates the crap such as that false quote.

These pages are full of the same, which is no surprise when a quick perusal of those continually posting similarly shows.

Shame on each of you, particularly the ones knowingly pretending otherwise, and compassion for the few, if any, that may have been fooled by them.

There are also some honest contributors here that are intending to vote no, and each type knows which they truly are.

 

[tiger_scott]

I am surprised that neither the NRL or AFL got Midnight Oil in as their pre-game entertainment. They could have worn "Yes" suits, similar to their "Sorry" ones they wore at the Olympics. Seems like an opportunity missed by the codes, who are both pro-yes and the Oils....

 

[tiger_scott]

I am also pleasantly surprised and more than a little amazed that this thread is still "live" at 100 pages. Well done for keeping things relatively calm in here!

 

[TV Ted Ellery]

I don't know why, but people get this wrong all the time these days. The 'White Australia' policy had absolutely nothing, zero, nil to do with Aboriginals. It was an immigration policy (properly called the Immigration Restriction Act, 1901) passed after federation, which preferenced the entry of first British then later wider European entrants, based on a language test.

Strictly speaking that's true, though you make the White Australia Policy sound benign.

While Aboriginals were not directly impacted by the White Australia policy, the desire to preserve Australia's white European heritage underpinned other forms of discrimination and marginalisation of Aboriginals, such as denial of voting rights, restrictions on interracial marriage and removal of half raced children.

 

[TillLindemann]

Strictly speaking that's true, though you make the White Australia Policy sound benign.

While Aboriginals were not directly impacted by the White Australia policy, the desire to preserve Australia's white European heritage underpinned other forms of discrimination and marginalisation of Aboriginals, such as denial of voting rights, restrictions on interracial marriage and removal of half raced children.

The Immigration Restriction Act is a complex topic - in many senses it was progressive for its time, in the sense of being a reaction to bosses exploiting foreign labour in ways not dissimilar to slavery (e.g the Kanakas), which is why it was so widely embraced by the labour movement. So it was in a sense an attempt to do the exact opposite of slavery in the Americas. Of course, others supported it along purely racial / cultural lines.

But these days we have a comic book understanding of our history in which whitey is bad for bringing in and exploiting Kanakas (via blackbirding), and whitey is simultaneously bad for keeping out Kanakas (via Immigration Restriction Act).

 

[Mistymuzzle]

Strictly speaking that's true, though you make the White Australia Policy sound benign.

While Aboriginals were not directly impacted by the White Australia policy, the desire to preserve Australia's white European heritage underpinned other forms of discrimination and marginalisation of Aboriginals, such as denial of voting rights, restrictions on interracial marriage and removal of half raced children.

Like pretty much every other nation on the planet at the time. By 2023 standards its disgraceful, but standards, thoughts and culture were different then. Such a dangerous and disingenuous thing to do to make judgement on past events based on current standards, thinking and culture.

Its not as if a suddenly racist goverment got in and people were evil back then,

 

[Odessa]

The Paul Keating quote may very well have been taken out of context but still very good advice none the less. If you don't understand it, don't vote for it; if you do understand it, you'd never vote for it!"

The detail has not been forthcoming so why would you vote for it and even if you have some idealistic thoughts about what it might be, why would you risk it if you cannot be sure what might be coming, especially if it is to be enshrined in the constitution and cannot be undone.

Why would you risk it?

Yes the GST is a tax collected by the Feds and is distributed to the States and many would argue that it is distributed inequitably among the states, especially by the states that receive a smaller per capita share than their constituents contribute.

You are correct in saying that the GST is not the VOICE but just like some could argue about the inequities that the GST creates the same could be said about the VOICE in that it provides additional access to Government for a very small minority of the population that is not available to the majority of citizens.

Let's face it, Albo is an idiot, instead of following good advice and legislating to trial a VOICE so that everyone could see how this may possibly work, without out making all these other bloated Agencies and Bodies that currently exist more responsible for the billions of dollars that they currently waste, this was doomed to failure and all he has done is make a nation more divided than it has ever been.

Paul Keating may very well have said: "We committed the murders. We took the children from their mothers."

Well he may have but I didn't and neither did anyone that I know, I mean how long are we going to be made to feel guilty about something you or I did not do?

Sure we can look back in time and agree that many things that occurred were wrong and do our best to make sure that these things don't happen again, but at the end of the day we have to move on.

Do we still hold the current generations of Japanese or German people responsible for what happened in the World Wars when none of the current generation were alive when various atrocities happened.

My Polish Grand Parents on my Mother's side were killed by Ukrainian Nationalists in 1943 along with tens of thousands of other Poles in what is now regarded as an act of genocide.

My parents were forced to work in German labour camps in World War II, but do I blame or hold the current generation of German and Ukrainian citizens responsible for what happened?

As far as Noel Pearson is concerned, he is a very angry radical who has only just recently put on a conciliatory front for the media. Will be interesting to see how he and his academic mates react after the referendum when the result is handed down regardless of which way the vote goes.

This is so well said thank you

Also the Japanese wow have you seen the way they treat The Aboriginals of Japan and yes there is Aboriginals in Japan

And if you go back far enough in everyone's ancestry you will find somewhere that you have been a victim

 

[Odessa]

Like pretty much every other nation on the planet at the time. By 2023 standards its disgraceful, but standards, thoughts and culture were different then. Such a dangerous and disingenuous thing to do to make judgement on past events based on current standards, thinking and culture.

Its not as if a suddenly racist goverment got in and people were evil back then,

In 200 years time people will look back on us the same as backwards terrible People.

It's easy to criticise people looking backwards but if you where not there why do you feel guilty and why do people feel like Victims. ?

Being a victim of something is an easy out a ready-made excuse

 

[Tucker]

And if you go back far enough in everyone's ancestry you will find somewhere that you have been a victim

Half my tree are Aboriginal, the other half can be traced back as convicts.
Both groups were persecuted in different ways…those histories have not held me back in any way. They have not provided barriers I couldn’t get past.
It’s possible I have a healthy dislike for Poms more than most…not a hatred mind you, but a dislike for sure lol.

The truth is, you can sit on your arse whining about the bad hand you got dealt or you can use it as motivation to succeed. There are plenty of Aboriginal people in this country who have chosen the second path - including some of these activists who cry victimhood.

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Again. As if they care about Aboriginals. And what if they really did. What about your family? How they doing?

 

[AmericanHistoryX]

Are you Aboriginal? Whether you are not. Its not getting easier. I feel they are using Aboriginals for their own gain. How sad.

 

[Tucker]

Again. As if they care about Aboriginals. And what if they really did. What about your family? How they doing?

Mixed bag, some are running businesses, some are running families and some are running drugs.
Same as most families I’m sure.

 

[Tucker]

Are you Aboriginal? Whether you are not. Its not getting easier. I feel they are using Aboriginals for their own gain. How sad.

Yeah. It doesn’t define me in any way though.
100% they are….and a lot of them know it despite what those crackpot polls are saying.