Play Nice Referendum - Indigenous Voice in Parliament - Part 2

[Gethelred]

Link to the proposed Referendum, from the Referendum Working Group:

(Edited 6 April 2023)

These are the words that will be put to the Australian people in the upcoming referendum as agreed by the Referendum Working Group (made up of representatives of First Nations communities from around Australia):

"A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?"

As well as that, it will be put to Australians that the constitution be amended to include a new chapter titled "Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples".

The details would be:


View attachment 1636890

The Prime Minister has committed to the government introducing legislation with this wording to parliament on 30 March 2023 and to establishing a joint parliamentary committee to consider it and receive submissions on the wording, providing ALL members of Parliament with the opportunity to consider and debate the full details of the proposal.

Parliament will then vote on the wording in June in the lead up to a National Referendum.

The ANU has issued a paper responding to common public concerns expressed in relation to the proposed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice here:

Indigenous Voice to Parliament | Australian National University

Responding to common concerns about an aboriginal and torres strait islander voice First Nations portfolio Background

www.anu.edu.au

Summary details of the key points from this paper may be found in Chief post here:

The Uluru Statement from the Heart:

Not specifically No. In any case it does not form part of the Referendum proposal.

View attachment 1769742

Seeing as things have gotten a bit toxic in here, let's try to return things to a more civil tone.

The following will result in warnings to begin with, and if said behaviour continues will be escalated:

• referring to another poster as racist without direct provocation.
• dismissing or deriding another poster's lived experience.
• personal attacks or one line posts designed solely to insult or deride.

You might notice that the final rule is from the board rules. Thought we should probably remember that this is against the rules in case it's been forgotten.

Let's play nicely from here, people.

 

[Romeoh1]

No? When did I ever implicitly or explicitly argue that it does?

The message these ceremonies convey implicitly is that an ethnic group has a right to morally gatekeep the activities that occur within certain parts of the country.

Enabling these groups to ‘welcome’ people also, by implication, means we are recognising their right to object to the use of land or peoples presence in that land.

As an Australian - I think that’s offensive.

The concept of ‘traditional ownership’ is also confusing. Does that mean that the borders controlled Aboriginal groups/cultures didn’t change at all in the 60,000 years or so from original habitation up until colonisation? I seriously doubt that. Did they not have wars and conflicts as between themselves - meaning land was ‘stolen’? It seems inaccurate and has the effect of homogenising Aboriginal cultures and entrenching an ‘us v them’ mentality and perspective of history.

Crikey- you get this upset over a welcome ceremony-hate to think how you‘d feel if your country was stolen from you.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

It might - but to accept that belief would be to contradict fundamental tenants of liberalism

What does that mean? Can you answer the question? Does the fact that it's the longest living culture in the world mean anything to you?

 

[CM86]

the laptop class

I know you meant this genuinely.
But it has to be one of the funniest things I've read all month!!

 

[CM86]

I didn't realise they haven't been able to vote for the last sixty years? What are the 11 ATSI federal Parliamentarians up to? Where has all the hundreds of millions (probably more like billions) of dollars spent on ATSI lobby groups, organisations etc. gone? What does the Native Title Act do?

They do have a say - I would hazard a guess that they are overrepresented on a per capita basis in the federal Parliament. That's not 'absolutely no input', is it?

Why do you think ATSI Fed members represent ATSI people?!?

Do white Fed members only represent white people?
Do male Fed members only represent male people?

Why do you view ATSI people as separate to non-ATSI people?
And if you do view them as separate, why would you vote against them having a Voice?...

 

[Jabba73]

From a civic/legal perspective I am a citizen - a shareholder - of the Commonwealth. I pay taxes, I vote to decide who runs it. If all other shareholders were to perish, I would find myself in sole command of the legislature and executive - it would be my country alone (ignoring entitlements of the Crown). So maybe I do have a proprietary claim to the country. But beyond that, from an identity perspective - I was born here, of Australian parents, and raised here. My culture is from here.

I am glad you feel such an affinity for the land in which you were born and raised.

If a foreign country were to invade us tomorrow, lets use Russia as an example given they have current form for this sort of thing, and they decide to change how things are done around here:

Do you just roll over and forget everything you love about Australia now and embrace the "New Russia" as the cultural example you wish to follow?
Will you never pine for how things were and wish you could get your property, voting rights and livelihood back?
Will you never mention the pre-Russia Australia to your kids and their kids so that they may live by the new rules and culture that has been forced upon them?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I didn't realise they haven't been able to vote for the last sixty years? What are the 11 ATSI federal Parliamentarians up to? Where has all the hundreds of millions (probably more like billions) of dollars spent on ATSI lobby groups, organisations etc. gone? What does the Native Title Act do?

They do have a say - I would hazard a guess that they are overrepresented on a per capita basis in the federal Parliament. That's not 'absolutely no input', is it?

Welcome to BigFooty. It's been determined that Geelong has been over represented in this thread over the past couple of days.

But we'll still allow you to have a voice, for the time being.

 

[HaroLad]

Why do you think ATSI Fed members represent ATSI people?!?

Do white Fed members only represent white people?
Do male Fed members only represent male people?

Why do you view ATSI people as separate to non-ATSI people?
And if you do view them as separate, why would you vote against them having a Voice?...

No, I don't actually, but the presumption seems to be that they do. I think it's harmful for people in a multi-ethnic democracy to view individual legislators as owing political allegiances based on the concept of race - it creates a Balkinised political atmosphere.

But OP implied ATSI people have had no influence in how the country has been run for 250 years - 11 ATSI federal Parliamentarians (even if they are taken not to represent the views of their culture - by mere fact of them being Federal Parliamentarians and having such a background) says otherwise.

What does that mean? Can you answer the question? Does the fact that it's the longest living culture in the world mean anything to you?

I am a staunch liberal - I believe in the tenants of liberalism!

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

No, I don't actually, but the presumption seems to be that they do. I think it's harmful for people in a multi-ethnic democracy to view individual legislators as owing political allegiances based on the concept of race - it creates a Balkinised political atmosphere.

But OP implied ATSI people have had no influence in how the country has been run for 250 years - 11 ATSI federal Parliamentarians (even if they are taken not to represent the views of their culture - by mere fact of them being Federal Parliamentarians and having such a background) says otherwise.


I am a staunch liberal - I believe in the tenants of liberalism!

Nice word to hide behind plus liberalism has nothing to do with this.
It's a 2 minute welcome from the true custodians of the land. Stolen land.
You're a bit confused mentioning the word Liberalism

 

[HaroLad]

I am glad you feel such an affinity for the land in which you were born and raised.

If a foreign country were to invade us tomorrow, lets use Russia as an example given they have current form for this sort of thing, and they decide to change how things are done around here:

Do you just roll over and forget everything you love about Australia now and embrace the "New Russia" as the cultural example you wish to follow?
Will you never pine for how things were and wish you could get your property, voting rights and livelihood back?
Will you never mention the pre-Russia Australia to your kids and their kids so that they may live by the new rules and culture that has been forced upon them?

Of course I wouldn't just roll over and accept it. And 250 years later I would suspect that the descendants of the New-Russian colonisers would be making arguments similar to the ones I am making, and my descendants would be making similar arguments many ATSI people are making today.

 

[CM86]

No, I don't actually, but the presumption seems to be that they do. I think it's harmful for people in a multi-ethnic democracy to view individual legislators as owing political allegiances based on the concept of race - it creates a Balkinised political atmosphere.

But OP implied ATSI people have had no influence in how the country has been run for 250 years - 11 ATSI federal Parliamentarians (even if they are taken not to represent the views of their culture - by mere fact of them being Federal Parliamentarians and having such a background) says otherwise.

If you oppose that idealism, and support the fundamental reasons that it doesn't exist...
Why do you then question why it does exist, in your opinion?

My position is that it doesn't exist.

My position is that there is a difference between representation and representing.
Your position seems to be that there isn't.

Can you explain why you are calling out Indigenous MPs, and not non-Indigenous MPs?

 

[HaroLad]

Nice word to hide behind plus liberalism has nothing to do with this.
It's a 2 minute welcome from the true custodians of the land. Stolen land.
You're a bit confused mentioning the word Liberalism

But - isn't all land stolen land? Lands have been lost, won, amalgamated, and fragmented in a ceaseless dance that has been choreographed by the ambitions of empires, tribes, and nations since the dawn of man! Is conquest not, historically, the most common means by which ownership of land has been transferred, from group to group? I think you'd do well to find a chunk of land that hasn't been stolen at one point or another! What do you propose to do...?

Even among ATSI groups land, I'm sure, was 'stolen' over the tens of thousands of years they inhabited this continent!

 

[CM86]

But - isn't all land stolen land? Lands have been lost, won, amalgamated, and fragmented in a ceaseless dance that has been choreographed by the ambitions of empires, tribes, and nations since the dawn of man! Is conquest not, historically, the most common means by which ownership of land has been transferred, from group to group? I think you'd do well to find a chunk of land that hasn't been stolen at one point or another! What do you propose to do...?

Even among ATSI groups land, I'm sure, was 'stolen' over the tens of thousands of years they inhabited this continent!

OK, give us your address, and let's see if it can be stolen from you.

As is tradition.

Or... Do you agree, like the majority of society... Than harm done in the past, and continued for generations is no longer something we support or engage with?

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

But - isn't all land stolen land? Lands have been lost, won, amalgamated, and fragmented in a ceaseless dance that has been choreographed by the ambitions of empires, tribes, and nations since the dawn of man! Is conquest not, historically, the most common means by which ownership of land has been transferred, from group to group? I think you'd do well to find a chunk of land that hasn't been stolen at one point or another! What do you propose to do...?

Even among ATSI groups land, I'm sure, was 'stolen' over the tens of thousands of years they inhabited this continent!

You don't respect Indigenous people or their long culture and ties to their land. I don't know why, maybe it's your prejudice .

 

[Jabba73]

Of course I wouldn't just roll over and accept it. And 250 years later I would suspect that the descendants of the New-Russian colonisers would be making arguments similar to the ones I am making, and my descendants would be making similar arguments many ATSI people are making today.

So you understand that First Nations people are asking to be recognised as being here first, yet you don't want to support their request?

They are also asking for their input into policies that affect them to be considered, yet this seems unreasonable somehow?

Not understanding your objection given you are able to empathise with their position.

 

[HaroLad]

OK, give us your address, and let's see if it can be stolen from you.

As is tradition.

Or... Do you agree, like the majority of society... Than harm done in the past, and continued for generations is no longer something we support or engage with?

Well, it might be tradition, but it's not really seen as acceptable any more...

Harm done in the past - how far back do we go? Should the Turks pay reparations for the their continued occupation of 'stolen' land? Should the Normans? Should the Romans?

I'm not saying that there aren't wrongs to be righted over the last decades - I'm just saying that reparations - or apologies - with respect to land is something very egregious and outrageous indeed! I just think that 250 years is too far back for a moral right of 'clawback', that's all. Maybe 100 years, maybe 150... but 250 is too far, for me, anyway.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Thoughtwould blank votes and other invalids contribute to the denominator? (Ie favours no)

what would you suggest are the major reasons for opposing the 'voice'. excluding racism and mindless fear?

the progressive no view that it isn’t enough would not be in those categories

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Well, it might be tradition, but it's not really seen as acceptable any more...

Harm done in the past - how far back do we go? Should the Turks pay reparations for the their continued occupation of 'stolen' land? Should the Normans? Should the Romans?

I'm not saying that there aren't wrongs to be righted over the last decades - I'm just saying that reparations - or apologies - with respect to land is something very egregious and outrageous indeed! I just think that 250 years is too far back for a moral right of 'clawback', that's all. Maybe 100 years, maybe 150... but 250 is too far, for me, anyway.

The stolen generation was within 100 years. You are aware of that yeah?

 

[CM86]

Well, it might be tradition, but it's not really seen as acceptable any more...

Harm done in the past - how far back do we go? Should the Turks pay reparations for the their continued occupation of 'stolen' land? Should the Normans? Should the Romans?

I'm not saying that there aren't wrongs to be righted over the last decades - I'm just saying that reparations - or apologies - with respect to land is something very egregious and outrageous indeed! I just think that 250 years is too far back for a moral right of 'clawback', that's all. Maybe 100 years, maybe 150... but 250 is too far, for me, anyway.

Welcome to Country isn't around any of that.

Have you spent any time actually looking this up?

Or is this based on your opinion that Indigenous outcomes today are purely based on being Indigenous, rather than external factors??

 

[HaroLad]

So you understand that First Nations people are asking to be recognised as being here first, yet you don't want to support their request?

They are also asking for their input into policies that affect them to be considered, yet this seems unreasonable somehow?

Not understanding your objection given you are able to empathise with their position.

Oh, if they were here first, absolutely that should be recognised!

And of course, they are very welcome to give input into policies and the law through their right to form political parties and vote for members of the House of Representative and the Senate. Oh, and they are very welcome to form lobbying groups, also. But you seem to be suggesting that this is not sufficient, correct? That they should have a greater right to representation than the rest of the citizenry? I'm not sure I agree with that...

 

[HaroLad]

The stolen generation was within 100 years. You are aware of that yeah?

Yes, but I fail to see what that has to do with land.

 

[CM86]

Oh, if they were here first, absolutely that should be recognised!

If??


Wait...
Do you also believe The Stolen Generation was beneficial???

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Yes, but I fail to see what that has to do with land.

Children were taken from their land.

 

[CM86]

Yes, but I fail to see what that has to do with land.

Welcome to Country isn't about Land.

 

[HaroLad]

If??


Wait...
Do you also believe The Stolen Generation was beneficial???

I'm talking about ATSI people being the first inhabitants of Australia. Nothing to do with that.

Children were taken from their land.

I'm talking about British colonisation - when they claimed Australia as property of the Crown.

 

[CM86]

I'm talking about ATSI people being the first inhabitants of Australia. Nothing to do with that.

I'm talking about British colonisation - when they claimed Australia as property of the Crown.

I'll ask again, more clearly.

Oh, if they were here first, absolutely that should be recognised!

What do you mean, "IF"?

Is this the QLD pygmy myth??