And the polls show that around 60% of the population will vote NO.  What does that depict?

Everyone I know, who is voting NO, they all want the best for our Aborigine community - but in a way that puts all Australians on an equal level under the Constitution.
It shows the level of gutter-campaigning that it is even suggested that a person voting NO is a racist.
The YES and NO votes define two approaches for helping the Aborigine community.
It is terrible to define it as non-racist and racist.

It could be argued that any Constitution that gives different rights to different communities based on skin colour and ancestry ... by definition, is segregating people by race.

The only way that the Left, in 2023, could conceive of "the Voice" is that they have rejected the basis of Martin Luther King's ideal: that people not be judged by the colour of their skin, but the content of their character. If you ask many young people in Australia, they reject Martin Luther King's "Dream" speech -- or they will twist it to mean something away from its plain meaning.

To give you an example of how twisted the thinking is, people are being taught that black people are incapable of being racist. I lived many years in Asia, and Asians will readily tell you that Asians are racists against other Asians. That is why, this "critical race theory" is essentially "racism against whites".

I am against ALL racism -- that includes "racism against blacks", "racism against whites", "racism against Asians", "racism against aborigines".

Anyone who is for racism against certain skin colours - and being a Caucasian is a certain skin colour - is racism against a certain race.

Equality is just that: E Q U A L I T Y - all races being equal under the Constitution.

I recognise that the YES voters see that as the best way to help aborigines. But they must recognise that the NO voters also see their NO vote as the best way to help aborigines.

Do not paint the NO-voters are racist who don't care about the aborigines. That is gutter tactics, and using racism as a weapon.

The type of people who use racism as an attack weapon are the biggest racists.

@John.  You've fallen for the predicable progressive tactic of using emotion rather than facts to win their argument.  Anyone who's opinion they don't agree with is labelled some type of "ist".  racist, sexist, mysogynist, denialist, hell even capitalist is morally repugnant to them, for they are the self pro-claimed gatekeepers of morality. Words and labels are their weapons.  Once those words come out, don't engage, don't apologize.  Ignore.  They might be even racists, but worse than that they're c*#s

Probably that it'll fail.

I think the 'If you don't know, vote no' is a perfect example of what sort of society we've become. This attitude has pretty much seeped into every aspect of politics and discourse these days.

It's almost like people are  proud of being ignorant. Ignorance is one thing, wilful ignorance is unacceptable.

Really 'IF YOU DON'T KNOW', and this goes for anything, then you should try and find out.

That is how we've progressed as a civilisation after all.


Will also say that the sky was going to cave in after they introduced seatbelts, DUI and random breath testing, banned smoking from pubs, when Mabo went to court and was going to take everyone's back yards and of course the same sex marriage plebiscite.

All baseless scare campaigns with no net tangible downside. 

It's just more of the same from your usual fearmongers.

I do wonder Enzo is there no 'progressive' cause you'd ever get behind? 

You blokes are pretty good at that yourselves. Leftards, communists, socialists, fascists because the right is the self proclaimed keeper of Western civilisation and Christian morality.

Holy shit, in America if you suggest universal health care you're labelled a commie pinko that needs to go and live in Russia or China. FFS.

I'm almost sure that 170 years ago you'd be railing against abolition of slavery because, you know, progressives and libtards are trying to ruin the US.

The preferential voting system is fantastic (IMO) but if you're anti that then that's another argument.

I nearly always vote for a minor party first and then my main choice because I think democracy is strengthened by having multiple viewpoints and multiple parties that are elected. (Even if you do get the occasional fool like Malcolm Roberts and Lydia Thorpe.)  A lot of people also vote like I do hence your undesired (my desired) outcome.

As an aside why don't you fire up about the fact a senator can get voted in with 16 votes to their name? If you want to talk about wonky voting systems then what about that?

It'll make some bogans feel good for a day that there is someone below them in the social hierarchy, so that'll be nice.

I wonder what will be the next thing the ruskie bots get the cookers mobilised against next.

Also how annoying is that Lidia Thorpe. She was perfect for the greens. 

She is awful. (And not just for yesterday's carry on.)

Some right wing nazi threatens her and it's Albo's fault?

WTF? How?

The nazi is a fucking grub, like all nazis, but blaming Albo is a long bow.

(Oh yeah wait, something about the referendum.)



Not that anyone voting 'no' will care but this is going to make Australia look pretty ordinary on the world stage.

Pretty sure most of the headlines overseas will lead with 'Australians have voted against recognising their First Nations people in the constitution on the weekend' or some such variation.

It will definitely make us look poor on the world stage. 

Some people might have a legitimate reason for voting no - and it’s a democracy so yeah. But doing it because ‘you’re don’t know’ says you’re simply a fucking idiot
and too thick to even read and make a critical choice, which is bad. Being proud of it is even worse 😂

Many people from all political sides are saying they are being asked to vote for something without the details being revealed how it will play out like in reality.  The detail is missing.   

And of  the things that they do know will happen, these do not require a change to the Constitution.

Indigenous communities ALREADY have a voice.  We spend $4.5 billion per year on it:

National Indigenous Australians Agency

The National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA) vision is to ensure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are heard, recognised and empowered.

https://www.niaa.gov.au/

Budget portfolio statements for the agency — which has only existed since 2019 — reveal that its "total resourcing" was $4.5 billion in 2022-23, which was higher than in previous years.

https://www.rmit.edu.au/news/factlab-meta/niaa-does-not-spend-$30b-on-indigenous-programs-annually

The Voice is just a scam for more  "committees" and "agencies", all staffed by an interminable number of middle class mostly white Arts graduates who are  "doing something about it".  That "something" of course is lining their own pockets.

Don't forget these fuckers already have $billions of dollars given to them every year, and yet here we are.  The Voice when it speaks will ask for MORE MONEY, more taxes, of course.  You can bet your life on it.

it may surprise you Muz, I'm a champion of the disadvantaged, and an advocate for equality of opportunity. Always have been. Grew up in Melbourne's West, live in Melbourne's West, work in Melbourne's West.  The area has one of the fastest growing populations in the nation.  It has needed trains, hospitals , schools and better law enforcement for decades now, and hasn't got it, all under Progressive rule.  So getting rid of these self-styled progressives out of our State is one progressive cause I would get behind.

Leftard is an insult, for sure. Fascists is stretching it.  Socialism pretty close to the truth, and then its only hop skip and jump to communism to be fair.

Universal health care is good in principle but in large populations becomes too big and bureaucratic, subject to overuse because its free, and quality care becomes a lottery according to which health provider rocks up on the day you need them. 

Besides, why should someone who can afford overseas holidays, $100,000 utes, $3000 handbags and $1500 phones get free health care?

As for 170 years ago, I would have been a product of those times.  For me and my ancestors that would mean living in oppression, poverty and hardship under the Ottoman Turks that would make life as an American slave a big step up.

Thats why I, and many others, wish this was thought through, planned and implemented alot better than it has been... If this vote fails (which I really believe it will) it is ALL on Albo rushing through a bullshit "trust us it will be great" touchy felly wishy washy setniment... At this stage both sides are disgusting.... Im donkey voting...

I really CBF lining up for this one 

the main voice proponents seem to be academic race grifters looking for gibs

and 80%+ of the indigenous population if polling is correct

Why? Because they're paying proportionally more than someone on a lower income. Someone on $200k is paying 5 times what someone on $40k is contributing through the medicare levy so why shouldn't they be able to access the public health system? 

Why do I have to pay twice?

Private hospital, and schools, almost shouldn't exist. (Pretty sure private schools are almost non-existent in the Scando countries.) If I pay 5, 6,10 times the taxes of someone else why do I then have to take out private health care and send my kid to a private school if I want a decent health education. Ridiculous.

Universal health care is either 'universal' or it's not.

If we can't afford to do away with private hospitals and schools because of funding then taxes need to go up.

Yeah not really an answer about abolition and what side you'd be on.

Had a shit life under oppression so would rather be trafficked from Africa to be a chattel slave because that'd be an improvement on what I had somewhere else?

Most of the smaller percentage of Indigenous Aussies who advocate No, under 20%, want more than The Voice. They want a Treaty first. This is more than a  Voice to Parliament.

Then the Noalition is a  combination  of insidious Right Wing think tanks/organisations, such as  The Institute For Public Affairs, Fair Australia, Advance Australia and the good old hard right of the Liberal Party and National Party - plus Pauline Hanson's One Nation and Clive Palmer.

An American campaign company that oversaw Trump's election campaigns, who specialise in conservative Christian campaigning, has also been sought to undertake the  polarising, polarised  No campaign  in Aus.

Clive Palmer has committed millions to the No campaign too, as has Rupert Murdoch.

Given the number of  people I've seen on this forum who intend to vote NO, do most of you realise that you have  been manipulated by extreme Christian conservative thinking?

I'm not sure that I've thought the general football opinions expressed on this forum are analogous to  conservative Christian ideology? Yet in this thread many expressing their support for No, have well and truly been indoctrinated by this sort of campaigning.  

I love that the same ‘do your own research’ and the same people saying ‘if you don’t know votw no’ 😂

"Indoctrinated" and "Manipulated"?  Its sanctimonious, pompous, dogshit rhetoric like this which will fail to get the outcome you so desperately crave in order to validate your intrinsic "goodness".... Good luck on the weekend, Im off to ask a priest or an American lobby group which way I should vote. .... 

I love that the same "equal rights for all Australians, regardless of gender, race, colour or religion" are also asking us to vote for an amendment to the constitution which will benefit ONLY  persons of a specific race....

To answer both questions

1. If I lived in the US at the time as a white person, I'd support the party that wanted to free the slaves.  That'd be the Republican Party.

2. As opposed to staying and have a high chance of being dead by 30, or enslaved by the Ottoman's if I'm lucky or my family being ethnically-cleansed if I'm not.  Let me see.....

Its hard for 21st century privileged white Australians to appreciate that not all white Australians had lived their privileged lives in the past and nor do they in the present.

There is a comic strip in the British satirical mag called 'The Daily Male' (obvious play on words with Daily Mail)- I swear they track your posts 😂😂😂

https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/this-referendum-should-have-been-built-on-a-stable-foundation-not-disunity-20231009-p5eauv.html

Bravo! What a measured, factual article. 

Reflects everything I've been saying.

Lawyers, consultants, grant recipients, land councils and academics were predominant in representations to the parliamentary committee that looked at the words for this constitutional change, and I expect we see will much more of them if the result is successful for Yes.

Spot on.  All those fuckers always find a way to infiltrate government programs to line their own pockets.

We’ve been asking for a Senate committee inquiry to investigate and hold to account the organisations that receive Commonwealth funding to provide services to disadvantaged Indigenous communities. The inquiry would look at any maladministration, fraud or poor performance and hear from organisations and programs that are delivering positive change, so they can be recognised, applauded and their work expanded and replicated. The Albanese government and the Greens have blocked such an inquiry three times this year.

Of course they have!  They're socialists who love big government and more of other people's money.

It's almost like the Libs that were in power for a decade and had ample opportunity to do something about it did sweet FA.

Interesting.....

Yeah that one works in the first 6 months.  Sometimes.  Whatever happens after that the current government owns it

But doesn't that just expose the folly that is the Voice, that you have all these vocal right wing nutters advocating against it, with virtually no credible celebrity or sportsperson speaking out against it, and yet even about half a Labor supporters are aligning with them rather than all the trendy progressives on the Left?

It takes two sides to tango. Do you think the architects of the Voice and the Uluru Statement, would accept a watered down version of the Voice that amount to mere symbolic recognition that was acceptable to the Liberal party, rather than an actual grab for power in its current and original form?

I'm not sure what your point is. Don't get me wrong I'm not blaming the Libs for failing. Every government for the last 100 years has struggled.

It's just disingenuous  to blame Labour when the other mob had plenty of time and opportunity to shake the system up. But didn't.

May, just maybe, it's more complicated than we're led to believe from your Bolt and Sky news nutjobs.