Society/Culture Notional Take Back Australia Day

[demondavey]

I don't need a history lesson, I'm well aware.

Again, you're trying to conflate 80 years ago to now, that just ain't.

That's some allegation, because I ask you to be clear in your language you immediately think I'm trying to justify racism.

You argued you didn’t think the majority were. I disagree. The majority have and still are. Look at the vote no situation a few years back. Wow.

 

[FIGJAM]

60% of Australians voted no in the referndum in 2023.

AFAIC the vast majority of those people are racist.

Since when was The Voice a referendum on whether or not someone was racist?

Based on some polls, Australia was as high as 80+% on a 'forced to call basis' at the time of Albo's election win.

Opinion polling for the 2023 Australian Indigenous Voice referendum - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Are you suggesting that 40% of Australians became "racist" in a 17 month period?

 

[ferball]

Vote No did you?

 

[Kram]

And Dutton got flogged at a federal election.

And One Nation are a pissant fringe party.

 

[Carringbush2010]

You argued you didn’t think the majority were. I disagree. The majority have and still are. Look at the vote no situation a few years back. Wow.

Maybe look up the words context and nuance, it's not zero or 100.

Agree to disagree, I'm gonna move on.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Vote No did you?

Well I voted yes, that doesn't mean every single person who voted no is a racist.

It's not zero or 100, there's lots of varying reasons why one would vote no, not just 'I hate first nations people'

 

[ferball]

Well I voted yes, that doesn't mean every single person who voted no is a racist.

It's not zero or 100, there's lots of varying reasons why one would vote no, not just 'I hate first nations people'

I can think of one other reason that's legit and the people I know who thought that way voted yes anyway because they acknowledged the outcomes for their people would be better and that was more important than their personal political opinions.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I can think of one other reason that's legit and the people I know who thought that way voted yes anyway because they acknowledged the outcomes for their people would be better and that was more important than their personal political opinions.

Most people vote not on political opinions but rather what works best for them and their community, freinds, family etc., the referendum no different, the difference is that in the referendum there was a lot of misinformation which swayed votes, not because those voters are racist.

I voted yes because I knew (or believed) there'd be no harm to anyone if there was an indigenous voice to parliament, just a better outcome for those that are in need / deserve.

Others voted no because they were misled into believing it would be detrimental to their self interest, not because they're racist.

Obviously there'd be a LOT that voted no because they are racist, but I don't think for one second that's a reflection of the majority of the electorate.

 

[demondavey]

Maybe look up the words context and nuance, it's not zero or 100.

Agree to disagree, I'm gonna move on.

Maybe move on to understanding that it doesn’t have to be 100 to be a majority.

You’re not right because you feel nuance or context is required. It’s purely a numbers game.

Best to agree that I am right because you haven’t argued very well, you’ve constantly missed the point, and you’ve tried to put words in my mouth.

 

[demondavey]

And Dutton got flogged at a federal election.

And One Nation are a pissant fringe party.

Missed
The
Point

Try again

 

[demondavey]

Well I voted yes, that doesn't mean every single person who voted no is a racist.

It's not zero or 100, there's lots of varying reasons why one would vote no, not just 'I hate first nations people'

I spoke to a lot of people about this, lots, the message I got was that it was ‘virtue signalling’ it was ‘tokenistic’ it was ‘unnecessary to give a voice’ and in some cases it was ‘discriminatory to other people’

So basically just a way to make more excuses for the vote to no.

I genuinely don’t think people are willing to give our indigenous a parliamentary voice because they see their causes as pithy and irrelevant.

 

[Kram]

Missed
The
Point

Try again

Yeah I got your simple wallaby level point.

 

[ferball]

Most people vote not on political opinions but rather what works best for them and their community, freinds, family etc., the referendum no different, the difference is that in the referendum there was a lot of misinformation which swayed votes, not because those voters are racist.

I voted yes because I knew (or believed) there'd be no harm to anyone if there was an indigenous voice to parliament, just a better outcome for those that are in need / deserve.

Others voted no because they were misled into believing it would be detrimental to their self interest, not because they're racist.

Obviously there'd be a LOT that voted no because they are racist, but I don't think for one second that's a reflection of the majority of the electorate.

No one was misled.

People chose to believe what they chose to believe cos it reinforced what wanted to feel and enabled them to be racist in a socially acceptable way.

It would have taken anyone five minutes to find out exactly what the referendum enabled if they really cared about "what works best for them and their community, friends, family etc". The only people who could object to it on legit grounds are indigenous people who believe the parliament has no authority over them till there are treaties.

 

[Kram]

I spoke to a lot of people about this, lots,

Yeah. Sure.

 

[Carringbush2010]

People chose to believe what they chose to believe cos it reinforced what wanted to feel and enabled them to be racist in a socially acceptable way.

You must be a mind reader.

 

[ferball]

I choose what I want to believe too.

 

[demondavey]

Yeah I got your simple wallaby level point.

No you didn’t.

 

[demondavey]

Most people vote not on political opinions but rather what works best for them and their community, freinds, family etc., the referendum no different, the difference is that in the referendum there was a lot of misinformation which swayed votes, not because those voters are racist.

I voted yes because I knew (or believed) there'd be no harm to anyone if there was an indigenous voice to parliament, just a better outcome for those that are in need / deserve.

Others voted no because they were misled into believing it would be detrimental to their self interest, not because they're racist.

Obviously there'd be a LOT that voted no because they are racist, but I don't think for one second that's a reflection of the majority of the electorate.

‘Misled’

You seem to have very little faith in the collective brain power of the majority voters who said no. It doesn’t take much to debunk conspiracy driven propaganda if you want to.

 

[FIGJAM]

Vote No did you?

Nah, I voted Yes.

I just refuse to buy into a lot of the post-referendum analysis that the fall from 80% poll results to 40% was a result of a strategic fear campaign and/or a sudden surge in racism.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Nah, I voted Yes.

I just refuse to buy into a lot of the post-referendum analysis that the fall from 80% poll results to 40% was a result of a strategic fear campaign and/or a sudden surge in racism.

What do you attribute it to?

 

[FIGJAM]

What do you attribute it to?

There are a heap of moving parts meaning that people can latch onto whatever suits their arguments best, which is usually politically motivated, or worse in the case of some indigenous Australians; sometimes perceived as a racist vote against them.

As per the Wiki page with polls results, the polls dropped notably from the release of Albanese's model and draft amendment wording. This wording only had one relatively minor change in it at the time of The Constitutional Amendment bill just under a year later.

Albo refused to enter any negotiations in the time on the model and perpetually kicked the can down the road as to what the Voice to parliament set up would look like, as something to worry about after the event. This is a constitutional change and we'll "worry about it later".

I've seen arguments that Dutton wouldn't have given bipartisan support even if some modifications could have been agreed to. This may or may not have been the case, as I wouldn't trust Dutton not to end up in a far right position, but you can't say that for certain.

In light of Albo giving the "my way or the highway" approach, which I think was fuelled by a bit of hubris post a strong election win, this would have been a significant concern for many voters.

Then you throw in the post-pandemic and post-war cost of living crisis as an extra layer of mayo.

Ultimately, like the majority of my inner major city peeps (whether Greens, Liberal, Teal or Labor voters), I voted Yes to extend the olive branch to indigenous Australians, despite my concerns with the uncertainty of the model. The outer burbs and regions mostly voted no.

For mine, arguments that there was a scare campaign is disrespectful to those who had considered concerns with the model and chose to vote no. And any claims that Australia went from 80% yes to 40% no because they suddenly turned racist, is also disrespectful (to our national as a whole!) and in my view a completely idiotic viewpoint.

 

[ferball]

For mine, arguments that there was a scare campaign is disrespectful to those who had considered concerns with the model and chose to vote no. And any claims that Australia went from 80% yes to 40% no because they suddenly turned racist, is also disrespectful (to our national as a whole!) and in my view a completely idiotic viewpoint.

It was a scare campaign.

The vast majority of those concerns are straight up bullshit. Some idiots were saying the Voice would have the power of a fourth branch of Government, equal to the executive, parliament or judiciary. Callinan was whinging that the process would follow what was established Australian law, complaining that the HC would arbitrate disputes about it ffs.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

There are a heap of moving parts meaning that people can latch onto whatever suits their arguments best, which is usually politically motivated, or worse in the case of some indigenous Australians; sometimes perceived as a racist vote against them.

As per the Wiki page with polls results, the polls dropped notably from the release of Albanese's model and draft amendment wording. This wording only had one relatively minor change in it at the time of The Constitutional Amendment bill just under a year later.

Albo refused to enter any negotiations in the time on the model and perpetually kicked the can down the road as to what the Voice to parliament set up would look like, as something to worry about after the event. This is a constitutional change and we'll "worry about it later".

I've seen arguments that Dutton wouldn't have given bipartisan support even if some modifications could have been agreed to. This may or may not have been the case, as I wouldn't trust Dutton not to end up in a far right position, but you can't say that for certain.

In light of Albo giving the "my way or the highway" approach, which I think was fuelled by a bit of hubris post a strong election win, this would have been a significant concern for many voters.

Then you throw in the post-pandemic and post-war cost of living crisis as an extra layer of mayo.

Ultimately, like the majority of my inner major city peeps (whether Greens, Liberal, Teal or Labor voters), I voted Yes to extend the olive branch to indigenous Australians, despite my concerns with the uncertainty of the model. The outer burbs and regions mostly voted no.

For mine, arguments that there was a scare campaign is disrespectful to those who had considered concerns with the model and chose to vote no. And any claims that Australia went from 80% yes to 40% no because they suddenly turned racist, is also disrespectful (to our national as a whole!) and in my view a completely idiotic viewpoint.

Most people were in favour of recognising indigenous Australians in the constitution and would have voted yes to that. Dutton asked and Albo refused to separate recognition and the voice into two separate questions.

 

[FIGJAM]

It was a scare campaign.

The vast majority of those concerns are straight up bullshit. Some idiots were saying the Voice would have the power of a fourth branch of Government, equal to the executive, parliament or judiciary. Callinan was whinging that the process would follow what was established Australian law, complaining that the HC would arbitrate disputes about it ffs.

There were no doubt some idiots engaging in a scare campaign, but as I said in my post, you're only latching onto that which suits your point of view and not taking a step back and observing things more objectively.

How do you explain the fact that the poll numbers were in freefall even before any "scare campaigns"?

 

[ferball]

There were no doubt some idiots engaging in a scare campaign, but as I said in my post, you're only latching onto that which suits your point of view and not taking a step back and observing things more objectively.

How do you explain the fact that the poll numbers were in freefall even before any "scare campaigns"?

As it became socially acceptable to be racist people acted on it.