-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Indigenous Voice Yes or No?
- Thread starter eZyT
- Start date
The proposed indigenous Voice to parliament, and the existing Port Folio of Indigenous Affairs are vastly different things General.
A minister for indigenous affairs isnt elected by black fellas.
They are arbitarily selected by a government,
To head up a predominantly white beauracracy, the dept of indigenous affairs,
Under the constraints of cabinet and party politics.
And i think we'd agree, that the structures and processes we have tried to make decisions for indigenous Australia - governers, protectorates, ministers. - havnt worked.
This is a new approach. A new beginning.
Most importantly, conceived entirely by indigenous australians
Under the new model, elected Ministers and senior advisors and beauracrats (sorry @DavidSSS , spelling isnt my strong suite) will sit around a big table with the Voice panel, table draft legislation, and ideally listen and make changes to benefit all Australians ,black and white.
Last edited:
Can you give more details on any of our current constitution? or laws?
i really feel those who are saying they will vote no without more detail are just looking for a reason to vote no.
Somethings are so much of a no brainer that its bewildering they have an opposition. But invariably, it happens.
One of the problems with a referendum is that when you see 'Yes' or 'No', your brain likes to see them as two equally weighted and justifiable choices. All our various institutions in debate, politics and media reinforce this.
I'm yet to see the reason behind 'No.' There's the faux high horse 'Oh it won't fix anything, it's not enough, don't you even know how hard indigenous Australians have it? There will still be bad things yada yada yada.'
But that seems like a 'Yes, and...' statement, not a no.
Maybe that's how the referendum should be polled. The options are 'Yes' or 'Yes and also...'
One of the problems with a referendum is that when you see 'Yes' or 'No', your brain likes to see them as two equally weighted and justifiable choices. All our various institutions in debate, politics and media reinforce this.
I'm yet to see the reason behind 'No.' There's the faux high horse 'Oh it won't fix anything, it's not enough, don't you even know how hard indigenous Australians have it? There will still be bad things yada yada yada.'
But that seems like a 'Yes, and...' statement, not a no.
Maybe that's how the referendum should be polled. The options are 'Yes' or 'Yes and also...'
I voted on Ezys poll probably yes.
I cant speak for those that will vote No, no doubt some would be racial, others for other reasons perhaps.
My comment was really that currently i dont think they have decided exactly what it looks like so its difficult to accurately gauge how ppl would vote, perhaps im wrong?.
If yes and no was a spectrum,
Outright Yes being 10, outright No being 0, maybe being 5
The answer to your question is a 0
Last edited:
It's a simple yes.
Dutton just confirming how out of touch and irrelevant the LNP have become.
I do get the impression that posters on PRE are more progressive than the mean.
Dutton just confirming how out of touch and irrelevant the LNP have become.
I do get the impression that posters on PRE are more progressive than the mean.
Well terrey, what a profound statement. You have set your bar very very low for your 3rd post on here, I do hope you can lift it a bit or are you just trolling.
As someone who lived and worked for nearly 15 years with Indigenous people in Indigenous communities and a large regional town with a large indigenous population I can say Sintigers posting on this thread is a lot more accurate and insightful than Tigaman from Perth's.
Highlighting exactly the problem here.Just because there is a dissenter he /she is quickly trodden on. I hate this we are right and everyone else is wrong type of zealotry.Allow democracy please.
Agree.
Echo chambers dont help.
I could run a poll asking 'is richmond the best footy team?'
Yes
No.
And aside from check-mating @The Big Richo ,
What would be the point?
YotT write a post highlighting various factors any the referendum to which a poster responded "no". It was a bit of a rubbish post, and not because it possibly disagreed with YotT's view, but because it contributed little, is vague in meaning and doesn't really make sense.
I reckon it would have been more prudent to ask for clarification from the poster,than calling he/she a troll.And one should always take into account not all people are fully conversive in English..Same as your post you say YouT write.I would say YouT wrote.
Well Tigaman from Perth I did reply to Tigerfan's post and acknowledged the fact that the reason why he asked that question is to me a serious risk to the Voice referendum
I am entitled to my view as you are, without the cynicism of postcode assumptions. You have zero knowledge of my background and status in life.
In fact I have had quite a lot to do with urban indigenous populations through my work but I don't profess to understand all indigenous issues and how they feel about them (nor do the vast majority of us) which is ironically probably why they need a "voice".
I am sorry, but a one word answer doesn’t really cut it for me - saying No without any explanation I personally think is a tad rude, verging on arrogance.
I am happy for people to disagree, and I try and make my posts as even and as balanced as I can, but for someone to just say No with nothing else is poor form and adds nothing to the debate. They are saying they are right with no explanation and I am wrong blanket.
So I gently reject your preposition that I jumped on a someone with differing views.
