• @Nachorella
    link
    29 months ago

    If you’re not willing to vote for the bare minimum you’re not going to vote for anything. The status quo got us into this mess and you’re expecting it to get us out, pathetic.

    • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      -29 months ago

      100% incorrect.

      I would have voted yes if we were guaranteeing something to indigenous people that would actually be guaranteed to help, like 10 senate seats or something. A new indigenous government agency that gives indigenous people money and say over all indigenous things.

      You know what would also really help? Details about the thing I’m voting on, not a vague “just leave the details to us, the government, who have shown we’re not to be trusted over and over again”.

      Voting for the voice as it was was essentially maintaining the status quo while being able to pat ourselves on the back and tell ourselves we saved the indigenous people.

      • @GombeenSysadmin@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        59 months ago

        Could it not have been a start? Now it looks like you’ve all said no to the bare minimum, so there’s no point in continuing with anything at all. And have you seen the reaction from the indigenous community? That doesn’t seem like they felt it was useless. They’ve just been ignored again.

        I’m on the outside looking in, btw. From Ireland it looks like you’ve all been played by the No campaign.

        • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          09 months ago

          No, that couldn’t have been the start because it likely would have been the end too. What was proposed wasn’t the bare minimum, it was a complete embarrassment. It was a giant “trust us guys, we’re the government and we’ll definitely do the right thing”.

          No one got played. Maybe, just maybe, the majority of people saw this ridiculous waste of time and money as just that. A virtue signalling waste of time and money so the rich inner city lefties can feel good about themselves for ending racism by doing the absolutely smallest thing possible.

          • @GombeenSysadmin@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            19 months ago

            Yeah, and if it went all the way, guaranteed senate seats, minimum employee numbers in all companies and universities, that would be going too far, wouldn’t it.

            Fucks sake. It might have had the chance to be the start of something, but you’ve all definitely made sure it’s the end of it now, haven’t ye.

            • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              09 months ago

              It wasn’t going to be the start of anything other than another waste of time. How many indigenous advisory boards have the government already had?

              This was the equivalent of putting a black square as your social media profile picture.

                • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  19 months ago

                  Yet they wouldn’t legislate any real power for it, nor even the size or makeup of the advisory board. Note the proposal didn’t even say that the advisory board had to be made up of or even include an indigenous person.

                  No one is asking for the “perfect” solution, just not a shitty virtue signalling one that will change nothing.

                  • @GombeenSysadmin@feddit.uk
                    link
                    fedilink
                    19 months ago

                    Well you’ve all made sure nothing will change for 20 years, because no politician is going to want to touch it because “the people said no the last time”, so well done there.

      • @Nachorella
        link
        09 months ago

        All the details were on the sheet you wrote No on. Looking forward to all the helpful progressive policies getting passed now that you’ve voted no, what a champ.

        • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          29 months ago

          All the details? Really? How many people would this government put on the board? How would they be selected?

          Point me to those details please.

          • @Nachorella
            link
            1
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            We’re not going to be able to answer those questions because you voted no, were those really your hangups, though? How many people would be on the advisory board? If you’re actually curious to learn more, go have a read https://ulurustatement.org/the-voice/what-is-the-voice/ It’s a bit late, though.

            • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              19 months ago

              Those were some of my hangups, yes.

              That site doesn’t tell me what the Albanese government were going to do if it passed.

              • @Nachorella
                link
                29 months ago

                Recognise aboriginals in the constitution and add an advisory board that can’t simply be removed by the next government. It says it right there. The advisory board wouldn’t change how our government is run in any way, it would just be there to help decision making on things specifically relating to aboriginal affairs. I’m not sure if you’re actually being sincere here, it’s not a nefarious plot or anything. Advisory boards are a very common normal thing and you can read about them here: https://www.directory.gov.au/boards-and-other-entities/what-board There’s also a list of all the advisory boards we currently have. But seriously, there’s a ton of information on how it would have worked. https://voice.gov.au/resources/information-booklet This mentions it would have members from each of the states, territories and Torres Strait islands. So now you know, had you done some basic research you would have gotten your answer.

                • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  19 months ago

                  Recognise aboriginals in the constitution and add an advisory board that can’t simply be removed by the next government. It says it right there.

                  That’s not the details people are asking for. How many people would be on the advisory board? How would they be selected? How long would their terms be?

                  They. Would. Not. Give. Us. Any. Details. This is a huge part of the reason why they lost. People don’t trust the government, and this was a huge “trust us, we’ll definitely do the right thing this time” move. It’s no surprise it backfired so badly.

                  So now you know, had you done some basic research you would have gotten your answer.

                  Maybe try not being so smug when you’re incorrectly answering questions next time.

                  • @Nachorella
                    link
                    19 months ago

                    literally everything you just asked is answered in the links, maybe try learning how to read lol