 |
| Image courtesy Depositphotos |
Now that the referendum is done, gentle reader, it's time for an analysis - or maybe a post mortem.
The proposition was dead from the day that Littleproud, looking over his shoulder at the 5% of PHON voters that stalk the Nationals in Queensland, scurried away from the idea like a rabbit on the run.
This left Dutton with the possibility of blowing up the Coalition agreement if he supported the "Yes" case, and although many in his party were supportive, he also took the coward's option.
From that moment, given the history of referenda lacking bipartisan support, the enterprise was doomed.
The disinformation spread on social media by the keyboard warriors didn't help, but probably wasn't a decisive issue. Disregard, complacency, and general disengagement were complicit. Unfortunately, much of the casual nascent racism that persists on the edges of our culture emerged in this media. Some of it was also apparent on what is called mainstream media.
We used to have a saying in Vietnam - "Thumb in bum - brain in neutral". It was applied to soldiers who had become so complacent, patrolling in a "switched-off" state of mind, that they were a risk to themselves and other soldiers.
This complacency exists in perhaps half our voting population. If they're not affected, they really couldn't care less. The same cynical political principle applied fifty years ago when 1/12 of twenty year olds were conscripted to fight overseas in a civil war in peacetime. Despite that fact that the policy was morally bankrupt and anti-democratic, it persisted for about ten years until Australian voters woke up.
So that's the "why".
Let's look at the "what".
First up, indigenous Australians were supportive. This is evident when you examine voting patterns in the remote mobile booths in Lingiari, and on Palm Island. Mornington Island, Hopevale and Yarrabah showed a similar pattern.
Secondly, the electorates that the Coalition lost in 2022 to Green and Teal independents voted solidly "Yes". This means that voters in these electorates are feeling more than a little aggrieved. What are the odds that they will return to the Coalition next federal poll?
Dutton may have begun a journey towards the complete demise of his Coalition.
Update - This map of the voting patterns in indigenous communities gives the lie to the statement from Jacinta Price that they didn't support it.
9 comments:
15300 constripts served in the funny country.
the majority of people in Australia voted NO, a loud NO, so why not now shut up and accept that the majority did not want a third house of parliament that acted for just less than 4% of the population of this country. Bad losers are just that, bad losers so it is time to accept the majority and just do something else with your time, and after being a discharged soldier for so many years why dont you stop telling warries, we all have our warries but the old saying is those that did it dont talk about it, those that didnt, talk to much about what they imagine they did, I did my 38 years and dont bother to talk about it, it is past, so why dont you get a life and talk about something else we dont need to hear about your brave service for a short time as a misplaced and not happy soldier, you must have been great fun to your platoon, did you drive them round the bed with your bitching?
First up, the Voice would have been an advisory body, not a third house of parliament. The "third chamber" meme was a myth. As pointed out in my references to remote communities, most Murris in these locations voted "yes". That's a statement of fact. As for what I do with my time, I've just completed a thesis into national service, which has revealed the lie about "volunteer Nashos". You can read it here -https://sear.unisq.edu.au/52069/3/A%20Sweet%20Use%20of%20Adversity%20%E2%80%93%20National%20Servicemen%20in%20Vietnam_Redacted.pdf As for forgetting the past (or worse - reinventing it), I believe that if we do that, we are destined to relive it. If I drove anyone around the bend, they don't bring it up at reunions. We remain firm friends after 53 years. If you don't want to hear about my history, just avoid reading my blog. It's not compulsory.
I was in Puckapunyal from 1968 to 1971 and heard the CO of one of the two National Service battalions ask on a bn parade for any one on parade who was willing to serve in SVN to please go to their orderly room some time over the next week and sign a form to say they volunteered to serve in SVN and I have seen you state that was not true, they were not asked to volunteer. I know at least two NS men who did not volunteer and were not sent and others, in the platoon of my brother who was a volunteer soldier enlisted before he was 18 who told me they had signed form to state they were volunteers for service in SVN, so who is talling porkies, who is it that says ns men were not asked to volunteer. Where did you do your recruit training\?
First of all, this comment is off-topic and on the wrong post, but I'll reply here, anyway. Only one of the men I interviewed made any mention of people in recruit battalions being asked to volunteer, and that was right at the end of the Australian commitment, when a trip to Vietnam was offered by a Townsville battalion commander when he heard that a complete withdrawal was imminent. Given that these men were only in the army because their birthdates were drawn in a ballot, describing them as"volunteers" is nonsense. They were conscripts. You can use the term "National Servicemen" as a substitute for conscripts if you want, but that doesn't alter the fact that they weren't in the army as a matter of choice. This anecdote has been thoroughly debunked by both official historians and people like Dapin ('The Nashos War' and 'Australia's Vietnam - Myth Vs History'), but persists because it is attractive. Historians have for years been trying to find evidence of these alleged "forms", but they don't exist. I have viewed copies of National Servicemen's files, including my own, and no such forms are filed. Any battalion CO who did this would have been in breach of the National Service Act, by the way. What is clearly evident through my research, and that of scores of others who have gone through this issue with a fine tooth comb is that these stories are anecdotes have no basis in evidential fact. Apart from anything else, how can you "be asked to volunteer"? That is a contradiction in terms. If you claim people are talking porkies, you'd better ask the men I interviewed. They told me what they remembered. In any case, you are in no position to discuss my findings unless you have read my thesis. I'm happy to discuss the material once you have. You'll find it here -https://sear.unisq.edu.au/52069/3/A%20Sweet%20Use%20of%20Adversity%20%E2%80%93%20National%20Servicemen%20in%20Vietnam_Redacted.pdf
this 1735099 does not like to lose an argument he says the Voice was an advisory-only thing, was it, not according to Albo who said they would be drafting the documents for treaties, truth-telling and have a huge team of white people who identify as being indigenous working in the public service to make sure they got everything they asked for so the taxpayers could be paying for more of all they want. Has 1735099 identified as being aboriginal as well, my wife is one eighth part her great grandpa was a full blood aboriginal born in the Port Stevens area of NSW and lived most of his early life in the Dungog area, and she has identified and has always ticked the box identifying since that first started to appear on forms, but to date has not had anything for free and doubts that being of aboriginal descent will give her anything, at present, that we dont pay for, nor does she expect to get anything for free and did not vote Yes
Perhaps you have forgotten what you were voting against. Here is the proposed amendment -
"There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander voice"
"The Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Straight Peoples"
"The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures"
Nowhere is there any mention of treaty, reconciliation or reparations. This was a scare tactic used to fool the ignorant about the actual role of the Voice - an advisory group which could not make anything happen without the assent of parliament. By the way, identifying as Aboriginal does not get you anything for free. That's another tactic using envy, rather than fear.
have you heard of Closing the Gap - people of aboriginal and torres straits island descent get all of their PBS prescriptions for absolutely no payment by themselves so is that FREE do you think?
That's complete misinformation. A & TSI People are eligible for exactly the same PBS concessions as pensioners and veterans like me, and any application has to be endorsed by a GP. It's not "free", but available at a concessional rate, which is exactly my entitlement, and I don't identify as indigenous. If the GP of a self-identifying person believes that person would have setbacks in preventing or managing a medical condition if they didn't take the medicine, the concession is available. To quote the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care "If you would normally pay full price, you can get your PBS medicines at the concession price of $7.30." The only time it's "free" is if the patient can't pay at all, a situation that applies for every Australian, indigenous or otherwise, though Medicare at every public hospital.
When you post misinformation alleging that indigenous people are getting something undeserved and that is not provided to others (as this service is) you are revealing your closet racism and using envy as a weapon.
This nonsense has been around for decades, and eats away at reconciliation. Go to the CDHAC website and check it out.
Post a Comment