|
The voice will likely be pretty ineffectual and not case much lasting improvement but voting no would also be pretty ineffectual at causing lasting change so don't know why people would go for that.
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 09:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 10:06 |
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:But does making it part of the constitution prevent them from fooling around with it other ways? it will depend on the exact wording of the constitutional amendment, but the draft one labor put forward a few months ago proposed basically only enshrining that the indigenous voice exists and that it has the ability to give advice to the government & parliament on indigenous issues etc. so in theory a government could pass a law to say "the indigenous voice consists of scott morrison and his three best friends" if they really wanted to gently caress around with it, but in practice they'd just be able to ignore anything it says anyway i don't think there are particularly strong yes or no arguments. i'm not really convinced it will be very effective since it has no real power and can just be ignored/practically abolished if the government wants, and the main proposed system of elections etc. for it is a real mess (though labor hasn't committed to that model or anything at all there), but i also don't think it's going to somehow be a barrier to future progress - it's not going to make indigenous activists who are demanding something better go away and i'm not sure how the referendum failing would somehow lead to a better outcome there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 09:23
|
|
|
NPR Journalizard posted:Its not as simple as good or bad imo. thank you lizard man for this knowledge
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 10:36
|
|
|
Ranter posted:The voice will do nothing to improve the material conditions for indigenous people. It grants no power, and consultation will be ignored like it always has been. Tell me what you think happens to advance indigenous interests after the referendum fails.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 10:58
|
|
|
If the referendum fails it will absolutely be taken as meaning that the Australian public at large do not care about indigenous rights and give further license to all sorts of horrible poo poo
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 11:03
|
|
|
Ranter posted:The voice will do nothing to improve the material conditions for indigenous people. It grants no power, and consultation will be ignored like it always has been. You must be a lot smarter than the vast majority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders that support it then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 11:09
|
|
|
The voice is also a cudgel that can be used against the liberal party forever and is good 4d chess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 11:16
|
|
|
My 2c on the Voice is less about the "yes" and more about the "no" And if, as a nation, we vote "no", we are publicly saying that "No, the indigenous people of this country should not get a formal say in it's governance, and indeed we are actively voting to exclude them from doing this thing." So indeed, a yes vote would just create another performative jobs for the boys committee, with no real power that will likely be mostly ignored and will do little to actually improve the lot of the indigenous community. A "no" vote does so much worse. And in a perfect world, the Voice might possibly be able to do some good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 11:37
|
|
|
The jobs for boys are also very likely to include a whole bunch of indigenous jobs for indigenous boys. Which if you like the idea of transferring commonwealth money directly into indigenous hands, then why not?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 11:41
|
|
|
fez_machine posted:The jobs for boys are also very likely to include a whole bunch of indigenous jobs for indigenous boys. parliamentary basics card
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 11:47
|
|
|
Who cares what Kyle Sandilands, Meghan Trainor, Amy Shark and Harry Connick Jr. think anyway?
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 12:32
|
|
|
Cartoon posted:Who cares what Kyle Sandilands, Meghan Trainor, Amy Shark and Harry Connick Jr. think anyway? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 12:47
|
|
|
Solution. Only allow first nations people to vote on it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 14:27
|
|
|
I feel like a yes vote would be a symbolic gesture that we'd like to see more things done for first nations Australians. Not knowing the exact form it would take however, I'm hoping it mostly manifests in a group of people who call the government out on their poo poo endlessly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
i think its fair to be suss on it but i am also deeply suspicious of the ranter argument that voting no will somehow generate fewer bad material outcomes when the material conditions are already so fuckin dire. anyway kill all white people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 15:10
|
|
|
it doesnt help that the debate has come before apparently any actual information about what the voice entails has been decided which seems like a pathetic way to have a referendum
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 15:11
|
|
|
the government are deeply scared that proposing a specific model will be too divisive based on the republic referendum. albanese is absolutely terrible at communicating this sort of stuff too and will sometimes answer questions on it like he has a clear idea of the details, sometimes defer to currently ongoing consultation (which, why are you campaigning before you have that consultation done?), sometimes insist that it's just about the principle and they can figure out the details afterward, and sometimes points to a proposed model which he has also refused to actually endorse none of that is very effective at all at getting anything across to anyone, it's all a very confused approach
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 15:35
|
|
|
I feel it's a bit disingenuous to frame the debate as "Yes" and "No" when it's actually "voice", "treaty" and "I'm a racist turd". The primary argument by Indigenous people who are against Voice is less that it's going to make things worse for Indigenous Australians, but more that it won't do anything to make things better. Brass tacks, it's a performative measure intended to avoid the establishment of a treaty between the Commonwealth and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Not delay, but outright avoid. Treaty requires both parties to accept the terms and sign on, which would require genuine concessions and active measures by the government to actually do SOMETHING to improve the lives of first nations people. Neither major party has any plan to do this, and if you look at their actions and policies over the past 50 years, it seems highly likely that both parties would use a Voice to parliament to legitimise their continued agenda of marginalisation - most likely by hand-picking participants who will best support the narrative that works for them. It won't be good. I wouldn't vote no myself because that feeds an even worse narrative, but ideally the referendum should be over Voice or Treaty, not "Voice?" or "Nah, fuckem".
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 18:37
|
|
|
agree with dumpster fire there on what it should be and how it's framed currently. i think we need more, i think it should be more, but i'm not going to vote no on that basis because, i don't believe that a no will help advance the cause more than i think voting yes would. at work we're inviting in different members of different nations to talk about it at different times, making sure to hear from those who are for it and against it and why to help flesh it out a bit more for staff that have flagged they want to know more / hear more. the boomers at work are fuming at the idea. it's ace.
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 22:33
|
|
|
hambeet posted:the boomers at work are fuming at the idea. it's ace. All you need to know to vote yes
|
|
#
?
Mar 7, 2023 23:37
|
|
|
eh, most referendums fail. They fail because gently caress change and we don't vote yes to referendums. What is it about again? I mean, I'll vote no anyway because I tried voting yes for a republic when I was young and impressionable and now we have King Charles. So I haven't voted yes since.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 00:09
|
|
|
I voted once, but I didn't win! I'll never vote again!
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 00:38
|
|
|
oh hi USpol poster.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 00:39
|
|
|
Don Dongington posted:I feel it's a bit disingenuous to frame the debate as "Yes" and "No" when it's actually "voice", "treaty" and "I'm a racist turd". labor has plans to do treaty (& truth-telling) too, it's part of the uluru statement & they're going to start setting up the commission for those this year too. one certainly doesn't preclude the other. the issue between different indigenous groups is about the order things happen in and what the objective of the treaty should be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 00:46
|
|
|
lih posted:the issue between different indigenous groups is about the order things happen in and what the objective of the treaty should be. You've just grossly ignored the indigenous people and organizations that are against treaty and voice entirely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 01:17
|
|
|
not sorry for ignoring the right-wingers
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 01:36
|
|
|
lih posted:not sorry for ignoring the right-wingers This is incredibly racist holy poo poo
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 01:42
|
|
|
there are certainly some indigenous people not on the right wing that arent supportive of the idea of treaty but the main issue i see is primarily that a homogenous treaty of all atsi people as one group will actually strip individual nations of their agency rather than address the huge range of cultures encompassed under our white idea of 'indigenous'
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 01:44
|
|
|
treaties should be with each individual, like in The Acharnians
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 01:52
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf-jHCdafZY
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 01:56
|
|
|
We used to play this when it was time to close the bar. I always liked it but it drove the drunks out like nothing else
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 02:50
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:What? Macrobusiness has been pretty consistent on this stuff for as long as i've been reading it. Consistent on which stuff? https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2023/03/rba-crashes-economy-into-wall-of-woke/ Calling things they don't like "woke"? https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2023/03/proof-immigration-is-driving-unemployment-up/ Confusing correlation with causation to push racism? I've never read macrobusiness before, and these are just two articles from today. I don't feel like I'm cherrypicking here. I mean, if you're saying that Macrobusiness consistently thinks immigration is bad and will use any excuse to bash it, ok. But the real consistent thing I see here is absolutely dogshit dogwhistle journalism.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 04:07
|
|
|
Lol yes everything is racism
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 04:17
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Lol yes everything is racism this but unironically
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 05:14
|
|
|
hooman posted:I've never read macrobusiness before, and these are just two articles from today. I don't feel like I'm cherrypicking here. the macrobusiness guy is a huge weirdo who called for australia to invade the solomon islands last year lol
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 07:17
|
|
|
Guardian AU posted:Department withheld key documents from watchdog that flagged potential illegality of robodebt Surely... surely at some point someone is going to jail.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 08:27
|
|
|
withholding documents from the ombudsman is illegal, yes. i'd be surprised if prosecutions don't happen on that & possibly other issues
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 08:38
|
|
|
Chris Minns can thank the meltdown of Sydney Trains today for the coming landslide election win
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 09:31
|
|
|
CAT INTERCEPTOR posted:Chris Minns can thank the meltdown of Sydney Trains today for the coming landslide election win Never, I repeat never bet on NSW Labor winning anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 12:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 10:06 |
|
|
lih posted:withholding documents from the ombudsman is illegal, yes. i'd be surprised if prosecutions don't happen on that & possibly other issues i'd be surprised if prosecutions don't happen on that. They can blame it on all that one person whose now dead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2023 13:40
|
|
