The Voice

[sptrawler]

I must say it was hillarious hearing mainstream media saying saying social media is turning free speach into poison, they must be upset another platform is taking over their patch, obviously they havent been keeping track of the amount of defamation cases that mainstream are having to defend for the poison they spew. Lol
There was a time when the mainstream media was held in high esteem and their honesty and impartial reporting carried a lot of weight, sadly that trust has been thrown to wind, as all sides of the media IMO has prostituted itself to push an agenda or chase a headline and in doing so has lost all credibility IMO.
Just my thoughts, but I actually think it wont be long before all those in the lower socio economic group will be just as disadvantaged as the urban aboriginal and Torres strait Isanders.
How that will be addressed will be interesting.

 

[Smurf1976]

"It has been extraordinary to watch the initial public enthusiasm for the Voice referendum fall away under the barrage of misinformation, fear-mongering and straight lies from the No camp. Generating fear and doubt is the recommended tactic for No volunteers.

I think the biggest mistake the "yes" side are making is to argue that the voters have been fooled by the "no" side.

Rather, it's the "yes" side's refusal to answer questions, failing to remember that politicians are there to serve the public, along with a perception the proposal hasn't been properly thought through and that government has become obsessively focused on a single issue, at a time of serious problems in other areas, that has alienated many.

 

[farmerge]

I think the biggest mistake the "yes" side are making is to argue that the voters have been fooled by the "no" side.

Rather, it's the "yes" side's refusal to answer questions, failing to remember that politicians are there to serve the public, along with a perception the proposal hasn't been properly thought through and that government has become obsessively focused on a single issue, at a time of serious problems in other areas, that has alienated many.

@Smurf1976 At last a retort that is so true.
I would think that if "Yes" followers are so worried/confused by the "No" side then perhaps some deep soul searching maybe required.
Time to ask themselves why is the "No" population so against voting"Yes"
To me it is bleedingly obvious.

 

[Smurf1976]

I agree it's taking up a lot of oxygen that should be put into housing, the economy, health and the shortage of labour in almost every industry.

Labor spent years trying to shake off the perception of being a party that governs for minorities and which had turned its back on the working class.

They finally managed to shake that off and get themselves elected to government.

The very next thing they've done is prove the critics correct with an almost exclusive focus on a single minority group, and a very stereotypical one at that, meanwhile the broad working class are being ignored in their pain.

I'm no fan of the Coalition, I've said plenty about them in the past, but there's a fair chance this ushers in another extended period of successive Coalition governments simply as the only alternative. Labor's burning an entire generation of voters here and the younger generation at that.

Even a good portion of Aboriginal people are going to be more worried about house prices, utility bills, labour shortages, interest rates, food and grocery prices, wages and so on as far more tangible and immediate problems.

 

[farmerge]

Labor spent years trying to shake off the perception of being a party that governs for minorities and which had turned its back on the working class.

They finally managed to shake that off and get themselves elected to government.

The very next thing they've done is prove the critics correct with an almost exclusive focus on a single minority group, and a very stereotypical one at that, meanwhile the broad working class are being ignored in their pain.

I'm no fan of the Coalition, I've said plenty about them in the past, but there's a fair chance this ushers in another extended period of successive Coalition governments simply as the only alternative. Labor's burning an entire generation of voters here and the younger generation at that.

Even a good portion of Aboriginal people are going to be more worried about house prices, utility bills, labour shortages, interest rates, food and grocery prices, wages and so on as far more tangible and immediate problems.

It makes one wonder just how dinkum the Labour Party is when it comes to controlling the Treasury bench.
It would appear that shooting oneself in the foot, nah feet, is their speciality.
Are they going to be a one term Govt when the next election is called????

 

[IFocus]

So , give us a few of the "lies and misinformation".

The point of the article is this

"Australia’s local right reliably mimics whatever the ratbag end of American politics does next, meaning we can expect to see the tools they’ve used to oppose the Voice become standard practice – lies and conspiracy theories constantly fed into the echo chambers, Australians going down the American path of constant division."

Reading this thread its clearly the case.

 

[wayneL]

I'm no fan of the Coalition, I've said plenty about them in the past, but there's a fair chance this ushers in another extended period of successive Coalition governments simply as the only alternative. Labor's burning an entire generation of voters here and the younger generation at that.

That's actually a bad thing IMO. As much as I despise the current iteration of the Labor Party, there is no way the foetid cabal of chinless cretins that is the current Coalition, deserve to be anywhere near government.

The reality is that because of tribalism and the putrid voting system, we get stuck with one or the other, both WEF stooges.

@#$&ing depressing.

 

[SirRumpole]

The point of the article is this

"Australia’s local right reliably mimics whatever the ratbag end of American politics does next, meaning we can expect to see the tools they’ve used to oppose the Voice become standard practice – lies and conspiracy theories constantly fed into the echo chambers, Australians going down the American path of constant division."

Reading this thread its clearly the case.

Do you want to be more specific about what you consider to be lies and disinformation in the Yes Case ?

 

[TimeISmoney]

The point of the article is this

"Australia’s local right reliably mimics whatever the ratbag end of American politics does next, meaning we can expect to see the tools they’ve used to oppose the Voice become standard practice – lies and conspiracy theories constantly fed into the echo chambers, Australians going down the American path of constant division."

Reading this thread its clearly the case.

The No campaign just needs to sit back and watch for the rest of the game because the Yes campaign has played so badly. It's ironic because most of the damage to the Yes campaign was done by itself.

A lot of people had their minds made up before this thread even started. It's just when they dug deeper into facts, they found more reason to enforce their decision about it.

 

[JohnDe]

“There has been an inability to explain how the voice would work and, in the absence of substance, the vacuum has filled with trivia and invective.”​

Anthony Albanese has miscalculated and the Indigenous voice to parliament could be doomed

Anthony Albanese is letting down Indigenous Australians because of a lack of real leadership and a failure in his duty, not only to Indigenous people but also to the nation.


The Prime Minister has miscalculated on the political strategy for the October 14 referendum for an Indigenous voice to parliament and executive government, having already lost enormous public goodwill and designing a debate without substance.

As a result, public support for the Yes campaign has slumped and the referendum already could be doomed to failure. There has been an inability to explain how the voice would work and, in the absence of substance, the vacuum has filled with trivia and invective.

Indigenous Australians have been given what looks like a false hope and the nation has been delivered division.

Even if the referendum passes on the strength of a $100m advertising campaign in the next four weeks and a desperate turn to negativity, damage to Indigenous reconciliation has already been done through the bitter vitriol, fearmongering, moral bullying and racial sledging of some on the warring sides.

The explosion of racist language this week and the diversion of the debate into name-calling after voice architect and Yes campaigner Marcia Langton said the No campaign was based on “base racism and sheer stupidity” demonstrated how febrile and divisive the referendum campaign has become.

Both sides trotted out examples of racist language and sought apologies or condemnation as Peter Dutton sought to entwine Albanese in all the worst aspects of the debate and detract from the government’s political success in getting its $10bn housing fund through the Senate.

“They’re just providing a look through the window of what the voice might be as a body if it’s successful on October 14. It will be divisive, it will divide Australians, and you hear it in the language of Marcia Langton,” the Opposition Leader said on Thursday.

Albanese was warned of all of this, including by voice supporters, but was dismissive and remained convinced of the inevitability of success based on public goodwill without detailed arguments.

Indeed, the only major factor the Yes campaign was not warned about was the emergence of Jacinta Nampijinpa Price as a powerful new force in politics as the face of the No campaign who has completely overshadowed Labor’s hapless Indigenous Australians Minister, Linda Burney.

With public polling showing the Yes vote is below 50 per cent even in the ACT – the only jurisdiction to vote in favour of a republic in 1999 – there is growing pessimism and embittered frustration within Labor and the Yes campaign but no retreat or change from Albanese.

In the closing hours of the final parliamentary sitting before the voice referendum, Albanese remained committed to his original strategy: appealing to the emotion of love to reject the “powerful emotion of fear”, deriding appeals for details of the scope of the voice and doggedly determined to continue. Although, as support for the referendum has fallen, there is now a concession about how hard it will be to succeed.

“Changing a constitution is tough. It’s hard. We knew that at the beginning of this journey. It didn’t stop us from stepping out. And not for a day, not for a day have I regretted that decision,” Albanese said.

“I want the Yes campaign to be positive. The Yes campaign is about embracing a message of reconciliation and unity and, yes, love. Fear is a powerful emotion. Fear is a powerful emotion, but it’s not one that advances a country. What advances a country is bringing people together and a positive message.”

Albanese called on MPs to carry a “message of love and hope and reconciliation. Away from the parliament and back to the people in our electorates.”

“In the next four weeks Australians can take the next step to a better future. By writing Yes. That is all we are being asked to do. To write Yes. Walk those few steps is what we are being asked to do,” he said.

But moments later he attacked the character of the Coalition, describing it as: “Negative. It’s angry. It’s hostile and seeks to divide. Never seeks to bring people together.”

Yet much of this criticism could be directed towards the results of Albanese’s own miscalculation.

Albanese’s failure of leadership for all Australians rests on two of his basic decisions at the start of the referendum process on election night in May last year.

First, as Prime Minister, he did not seek any compromise from the Indigenous leaders and architects of the voice to parliament to give the referendum the best chance of being passed. Second, having committed to a difficult model, he did not do everything he could to ensure success.

When he enthusiastically committed to a referendum this term to enshrine a voice to parliament, Albanese was operating on the basis that there was goodwill towards Indigenous Australians and his Labor government could win by appealing to that emotional goodwill without relying on a constitutional convention or providing details of how a voice to parliament would work.

Public polling clearly showed there was goodwill towards Indigenous people, even towards constitutional recognition, and Albanese believed an emotional campaign that did not get into detail would easily succeed and politically marginalise and damage Dutton.

Albanese’s mantra on the timing and style of the voice referendum was always that when Indigenous leaders asked him to hold a referendum he couldn’t “say nup” and argued “if not now, when?”. He did not use the authority of his office and the strength of his offer to argue for a less radical, less difficult model to sell, nor did he consider the haste of the venture could be its undoing.

With no discussion or mandate from a constitutional convention, emotional support drained, the demand for detail grew and the No campaign delivered a devastating slogan: “If you don’t know, vote no.”

Albanese’s lack of regret this week for embarking on his campaign and his continued expression of confidence in the referendum being passed by a majority of Australians and states is a clear indication of his faith in the emotional campaign and refusal to offer any detail or legislative outline. Yet even Labor senator Pat Dodson – the father of reconciliation – conceded the effectiveness of the No campaign was boosted by the lack of detail about the voice advisory body, which made the Yes campaign more difficult.

“I think that it’s difficult, as everyone knows, to promote the Yes campaign in terms of the detail, what the proposition is, what the provision is, why this is important, how it’s going to benefit us?” he told The Australian.

On the No campaign side, opposition Indigenous Australians spokeswoman Price has effectively countered Labor’s emotional strategy with deeply personal stories of domestic violence, sexual assault of children and murders, demonstrating the reality of life for the most marginalised and arguing the voice will not address their practical problems.

Price’s effectiveness as a campaigner, given she has been in the Senate for only just more than a year, has altered the trajectory of the voice debate and turned her into a new force within the Coalition. Just as Kevin Rudd was able to use the Iraqi wheat scandal as the issue to lift his profile to the point of being a Labor leadership contender and Peter Reith used referendum opposition to be seen as a possible Liberal leadership candidate, Price will emerge from this referendum campaign with an authority and political credibility that will have to be recognised and rewarded within the Coalition.

This is especially so given the inversion of Albanese’s strategy to use the referendum to terminally damage the Opposition Leader and the Coalition for opposing the voice to parliament.

A defeat for the referendum is now unequivocally a defeat for Albanese, who acted in haste and with hubris.

DENNIS SHANAHAN​

NATIONAL EDITOR

 

[SirRumpole]

Warren Mundine put David Speers in his place on Insiders.

Worth watching if you haven't already seen it.

 

[TimeISmoney]

It makes one wonder just how dinkum the Labour Party is when it comes to controlling the Treasury bench.
It would appear that shooting oneself in the foot, nah feet, is their speciality.
Are they going to be a one term Govt when the next election is called????

Even the One Nation Party is making more sense than what Labor is doing at the moment and Hansen has said some of the dumbest things I've heard a politician say in their life. Sara Game brought a bill into the upper house where politicians have to disclose expenditures for travel rorts.

 

[JohnDe]

Warren Mundine put David Speers in his place on Insiders.

Worth watching if you haven't already seen it.

Not up on their website yet, I’ll keep an eye out.

 

[TimeISmoney]

“There has been an inability to explain how the voice would work and, in the absence of substance, the vacuum has filled with trivia and invective.”​

Close to 13 years in the making, one of the most important parts of the whole committee, and not one person can give a decisive answer.

I think they should refund the rest of Australia for all the money they wasted on this committee or at least have a royal commission into where funding has vanished.

How many migrants come to Australia that have suffered generational trauma from genocide get on with their lives, by getting a job, and becoming part of society? Australia has had enough of these BS excuses, time to spend the money on psychologists and life coaches to help these people climb out of the rut, make something meaningful of their lives, and not fund things that constantly keep them in the same place.

 

[TimeISmoney]

Not up on their website yet, I’ll keep an eye out.

You have to log into the ABC site to see it.


https://iview.abc.net.au/show/insid...evvQfra262ZDF9eDiUBoC2_EQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds

 

[wayneL]

“There has been an inability to explain how the voice would work and, in the absence of substance, the vacuum has filled with trivia and invective.”​

Hah, I wouldn't call highlighting the stated agenda and goals, as voiced by Mayo, Langdon et al, as trivia and invective.

These journos certainly have a problem with objectivity

 

[TimeISmoney]

Hah, I wouldn't call highlighting the stated agenda and goals, as voiced by Mayo, Langdon et al, as trivia and invective.

These journos certainly have a problem with objectivity

They disassociated themselves from Mayo & Tealy Reid really fast, the problem with trying that with a person such as Langton with a big ego and matriarchal figure is a bit hard.

You've heard of the term selective hearing, the journos have selective hearing and selective reporting.

 

[sptrawler]

Warren Mundine put David Speers in his place on Insiders.

Worth watching if you haven't already seen it.

David Speers explaining why an aboriginal is wrong for having his opinion and trying to trip him up with loaded questions, so what has changed in the ABC? Nothing, elites telling everyone what to think, situation normal.
The war orphans that were sent to Australia and abused, do they qualify as disadvantaged, in effect they were stolen from their country transported and in many cases abused.
They are seeking compensation as should happen, sectionalising a sector of the community based on race wont end well IMO.

Compensation I can understand, enshrining ongoing special treatment based on race will end badly, IMO it is just another disaster in the making.

 

[sptrawler]

Warren Mundine put David Speers in his place on Insiders.

Worth watching if you haven't already seen it.

As per usual you get the media presenting what they want to take from the Mundine interview. As Mundine said, there needs to be discussion to arrive at what best suits the aboriginal situation, but as usual the media cherry pick points to cause division, magic.

Maybe the reporter could focus on the point they both agree that the voice to parliament isn't their chosen way forward, rather than whether they agree on Australia day and or treaties, those issues as Albo says aren't on the agenda, but when has that worried the media.

‘All over the shop’: Yes campaign takes aim at No side division

As an estimated 200,000 people rallied in favour of the Voice, Noel Pearson leapt upon Warren Mundine’s comments backing treaties and changing Australia Day.

www.smh.com.au

Warren Mundine says voting against a voice to Parliament will make it easier for Indigenous people to secure treaties while backing a change to the date of Australia Day, two positions strikingly at odds with those of other prominent No campaigners.
High-profile opponents of constitutional change such as opposition Indigenous affairs spokeswoman Jacinta Nampijinpa Price have argued that voters should reject a voice to parliament because the body would open the door to treaties and lobby to shift Australia Day away from January 26.

 

[TimeISmoney]

David Speers explaining why an aboriginal is wrong for having his opinion and trying to trip him up with loaded questions, so what has changed in the ABC? Nothing, elites telling everyone what to think, situation normal.
The war orphans that were sent to Australia and abused, do they qualify as disadvantaged, in effect they were stolen from their country transported and in many cases abused.
They are seeking compensation as should happen, sectionalising a sector of the community based on race wont end well IMO.

Compensation I can understand, enshrining ongoing special treatment based on race will end badly, IMO it is just another disaster in the making.

Do yourselves a favour and look at a series of videos by Peter Santello that visits Native Indian reverses in the US on Y-Tube. They are very well done from a neutral perspective and a respectful point of view. He looks into the richest to the poorest reserves and they all basically have the same problems at different levels, some even amplified by the self-governance. They went into reparation and treaties years ago.


https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list