The “yes” vote in Australia

Whether we like the fact or not, Australia's indigenous population was very badly treated by the British for centuries in the same way as many other idigenous populations were in other parts of what our ancestors, assuming that we are Europeans blithely called the "New World" and because our
ancestors regarded these people as savages, or at best, child-like simpeltons who had to be educated to their ways.

There is no point in blinking these unfortunate facts or trying to ignore that they may well be the chief reason why so many so-called indigenous populations have given up their fight for equality and have succumbed to alcoholism or drug-abuse, and as one poster put it, "just sit around drinking."

Obviously, any indigenous population should be represented in the parliament of their country. They may "have refused to be integrated" but on the other hand, why on earth should they wish to be integrated in a society that has treated them like dirt? Unless the majority in any country starts trying to treat minorities as equals, nothing will be achieved.

Take away hunter-gatherers' land, stick them in a little bit of the country with nothing to do as their old life style is no longer possible in a small space (compared to the whole country that used to be their's), introduce static housing and, worst of all alcohol to a people who have never had it before and yet some are surprised they don't INTEGRATE??? WHAT? They have been treated appallingly by past white settlers. Shame on anyone living in Australia who fails to recognise this. The past has gone, unfortunately for the first people and they cannot return, so more empowerment for coming generations is vital. It will cost more than money, but I hope those with the power will use it to try and stop the travesty from continuing.

Very strange, we’re often told on here, and other forums, that immigration has been very beneficial to the UK. We’re told that immigration has brought skills, diversity, and wealth to the UK.
Why is immigration beneficial to the UK but not to Australia?
Double standards?

Callistemon21

No-one has to integrate if they do not wish to Eloethan and many Aboriginal people still live their lives as they always have on their land. All children go to school, however. We can learn much from their ancient knowledge and culture, knowledge that has been lost in the rush to modern 'civilisation'.

However, many have embraced a more modern way of life, going to college and university, working, entering politics, becoming part of the extensive and diverse mix of peoples that make up Australia today,

But they can’t can they?

Their culture is the whole land of Australia - the colonists have taken it away - they have been left with nothing - which is why they are so disaffected.

My goodness giving them a voice is not a lot to ask, and yet those who have it all are not prepared to do so.

maddyone

Very strange, we’re often told on here, and other forums, that immigration has been very beneficial to the UK. We’re told that immigration has brought skills, diversity, and wealth to the UK.
Why is immigration beneficial to the UK but not to Australia?
Double standards?

I’m sure if the immigrants were taking away your culture, your land, and your understanding of what makes you, you - we would be absolutely right in rejecting the immigrants as that would colonialism - but it isn’t it is immigration

Words used are important.

In answer to previous questions raised….There are 8 senators and 3 members of the House of Representatives who identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander so there is already some representation. I will be voting”No” purely on the basis that, despite the good intentions of the liberal left, I believe it is profoundly wrong to discriminate on the basis of race and we should not be changing the constitution to do this. We have the terrifying example of Nazi Germany to show us how this can be used negatively. All citizens should be regarded as equal in the constitution. If specific communities need additional economic and social assistance that is a different matter.

Whitewavemark2

maddyone

Very strange, we’re often told on here, and other forums, that immigration has been very beneficial to the UK. We’re told that immigration has brought skills, diversity, and wealth to the UK.
Why is immigration beneficial to the UK but not to Australia?
Double standards?

I’m sure if the immigrants were taking away your culture, your land, and your understanding of what makes you, you - we would be absolutely right in rejecting the immigrants as that would colonialism - but it isn’t it is immigration

Words used are important.

Exactly what I was going to say, plus the fact that a lot of the immigrants here are from countries that we colonised in the first place. We had a duty to allow them to come here.

Katie59

Colonization is a fact of life it’s not going to be reversed in Australia, the indigenous population is in exactly the same position as the North and South American indigenous populations and have learned to live alongside the majority, some have integrated, others continue with their traditions on the margins.

It’s never going to be fair because the majority will always make the rules, this vote is not going change anything quickly

I don't pretend to know as much about it as other posters on here even though I know a lot of Australians including those whose ancestors arrived 50,000 years ago and more recent arrivals.

I’m trying to think of a country that hasn’t been colonised and I can’t. Damn those Vikings. The Welsh are the only indigenous people in the UK.

I was going to mention the Welsh, but I am only one quarter Welsh living in Wales

Does that mean I could start campaigning for a referendum to set up a committee to advise the UK Government where they're going wrong?

bluebird51 Jacinta Nampijinpa Price says that Aboriginal Australians are not victims of colonialism and it’s all their own fault if they are underprivileged.

She was not brought up as a true aboriginal because her father is of Anglo-Celtic descent, therefore influenced her young views and had doors opened to an education that her peers could not have.

She says that she speaks on behalf of the aboriginal people but she doesn’t because she is against the changes to Australia Day but Indigenous people were protesting on 26th January, also she defends John Stuart’s reputation when his statue was vandalised even though the history records show he was involve in the massacres.

What happened to the Stolen Generations was a disgrace but I don't know that any children now are not allowed an education.

Certainly there has been a lot of progress since then but there is hot debate about whether or not the referendum will further the progress or not.

She was not brought up as a true aboriginal
I'm not sure what that means?

It means she holds views the writer disagrees with.

Callistemon21

^She was not brought up as a true aboriginal^
I'm not sure what that means?

She says she is an aboriginal but her father was not, she was bought as a European.

I still don't understand.

Do you mean that only Aboriginal people with no other heritage, brought up in a traditional way, should have a say in the future of their people in a multi-cultural country?

The children all go to the same schools on the whole.

she was bought as a European.

But people of European descent, Chinese descent, Vietnamese, Indian, Brazilian descent etc etc, all vary in their ideas and cultures too.

Are they all colonialists? I think the ones I know think of themselves as Australians whilst still retaining elements of their culture which combines to make a diverse, colourful and interesting nation.

she was bought as a European

Not as an Australian then?

The 24 representatives of The Voice will be chosen by Aborigines. They will be representative of all Aboriginal men, women, youth etc. but I'm not sure exactly which Aborigines will do the choosing.
I will vote no because although I agree that Aborigines should be listened to, and they haven't in the past because the powers that be are too arrogant, I don't think a Voice to parliament is the way to go. We do have a number of First Nations MPs, and high achievers in other fields and I think these people need to educate their own so that they will integrate properly and learn that if they want modern advantages they have to accept and respect modern culture while maintaining their own. Aboriginal languages are being revived and many place names are being dual named or changed to the original names, so they already have recognition, but here is a lot of resentment by (mostly) disadvantaged white people because Aboriginals have/had many concessions and benefits not available to whites and my fear is that this will become worse.
First Nations people (appear to) believe that they own the land and have culturally significant sites in a great many places all over the country. At any function or meeting there already has to be a Welcome to Country or Acknowledgement of Country and I believe that the Voice will be used by some (many?) to delay and control any activity that anyone wants to do. (This already happened in WA when the Heritage Act designed to protect culturally significant sites was put in place.) Aboriginal people have access to education, health, work and any benefits of western culture that they want, but many do not take full advantage of it, except perhaps the social security benefits. While many Aboriginal people have fully and successfully integrated into western society, some choose not to and/or live in remote areas, contribute very little to Australia as a whole, yet demand all the benefits of the western world. They readily consume alcohol, bought by money given to them in the form of social security and sadly this often results in children being abused, neglected and allowed to run riot, hence so much crime. A great deal of money has been given to First Nations people over the years and it has not necessarily been put to best use and many projects intended to improve the lives of Aboriginal people have failed, and I think the Voice will not really make a positive difference.

Seen on Facebook:

We ought be very very sure that we know what we are voting for.
If our indigenous Australians are not united on this …
Who are the rest of us to be making a decision, allegedly on their behalf, because we ‘think’ we are doing the right thing?
When anything is aggressively marketed it is wise to seek more information from a variety of sources.
And only then can we make an informed decision.

I personally find it difficult that an Aboriginal person who grew up as a second class citizen, in not having a good education, would say that they are not a victim of colonialism and it’s all their own fault if they are underprivileged.

I was pointing out, because Jacinta Nampijinpa Price differs from other Aboriginal people views, was because she had a ‘slightly’ different upbringing to them. Her Anglo-Celtic father was an English teacher.

there are under-privileged people from all ethnic backgrounds in Austealia (as everywhere) and no, I wouldn't point the finger of blame at them for their own circumstances, you're right.

However, I'm not sure this referendum is the answer.

It is interesting to read your opinions, I think that to keep our democracy we need to be careful of race based legislation. We are all human beings all equal and I think that whatever the wrongs done in the past there need to be other ways of righting the wrongs without enshrining race into a constitution. We don’t know what the future holds and a legacy of non equality could and does lead to discord and violence.
I have been watching the Aussie news with interest as I am. New Zealander and we have a different but a similar situation.
There is a lot of uncertainty as to what the voice actually means. It seems that how much power is to be given is not stated or obvious. I am not saying that wrongs should not be addressed.
In New Zealand our government has brought in legislation which give Māori the power of veto specifically in local government and health. I am concerned about this direction as I can easily see how our lovely country could be destroyed by even the perception of inequality. Māori are at least 16 percent of our population so higher than Australia.
Our government did not campaign on any racial based legislation and many think it has been done by stealth, I expect there are some in Australia who feel the Albanese government intends to do the same.
There must we ways of getting good outcomes for disadvantaged people than using racially based laws.

In regards to calling us colonisers I also find that offensive, people have moved about the world for millennia until recently it has been the spoils go to the victors. It is not fair to do so but the world is not fair. The British as an example brought good and bad, both with modern technology and people. There were some rascals that came over here but the majority were ordinary hard working folk who wanted a chance at making a better life for themselves. Many were economic migrants in modern terms, they came out of the clearances in Scotland, the Irish potato famine and the poverty of the industrial midlands.
The was much done that was reprehensible and in this day and age wrongs should be made right but we shouldn’t give out children a legacy of inequality.

The problem for the natives of Australia is that one the whole their way of life has been completely wrecked. They did not ask to be industrialized and live in houses. their relationship with nature and the land was their life. They were self sufficient. Now they are marginalized and prevented from travelling across their land. We have introduced alcohol which they cannot metabolize. Originally we forced Chines to import opium. We have had no respect as colonizers for native people and their way of life. They are now asking for respect and to be a considered as citizens in their own country. So they quite naturally would like a voice.

The Voice design principles
The Prime Minister also released the principles of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. You can read the detailed design principles here.

In summary, these principles are:

The Voice will give independent advice to the Parliament and Government
The Voice will be chosen by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people based on the wishes of local communities
The Voice will be representative of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, gender balanced and include youth
The Voice will be empowering, community-led, inclusive, respectful and culturally informed
The Voice will be accountable and transparent
The Voice will work alongside existing organisations and traditional structures
The Voice will not have a program delivery function
The Voice will not have a veto power.
These principles were developed by the First Nations Referendum Working Group and endorsed by the Australian Government.

www.niaa.gov.au/indigenous-affairs/referendum-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-voice

They should be given a voice. I have a sister and son in Australia with their families.

No wonder these indigenous peoples are still lacking in hope and direction, they are a people still suffering grief from having had their children taken from them and given to white families to raise. This was happening in the 50s, not that long ago. They are a people (like the North American Indian) who had a dialogue with the land when travelling through. When an aborigine travels in a car their language speeds up. Both people’s have been, over the years, confined to reservations which for them is like being confined to prison. Australian settlers need to make reparation for this shameful recent, history. The first step is to give these indigenous peoples a voice and then plenty of financial support and help for as long as it takes. Share the wealth with these people.