The Voice

[SirRumpole]

Are they the most disadvantaged group in Australia?

No they are not.

People with disabilities are the most disadvantaged group in Australia.

761,000 children live in poverty in this country which is almost the entire aboriginal population of 880,000.

 

[sptrawler]

Were they the original inhabitants of Australia?
Were they thrown off their land after 10k plus years,
Do they have a unique culture of up to 60k years?
Were they murdered, massacred by police and settlers women and children?
Are they the most disadvantaged group in Australia?

Will the voice change the issues, will it encourage the aboriginals to change their self harming behavior, or will it cause a different set of problems that are even more difficult to address.
In remote communities, where there is minimal contact with white people there are still serious social problems.
They are given outside financial help already and to a large degree are self regulated, but they stil have huge social issues.
How would a voice reverse that underlying behaviour, when they are currently in control of it now?

 

[SirRumpole]

Will the voice change the issues, will it encourage the aboriginals to change their self harming behavior, or will it cause a different set of problems that are even more difficult to address.
In remote communities, where there is minimal contact with white people there are still serious social problems.
They are given outside financial help already and to a large degree are self regulated, but they stil have huge social issues.
How would a voice reverse that underlying behaviour, when they are currently in control of it now?

Thats why I think the elders should be talking to their own people first to rectify the internal issues.

They wont listen to the whities.

 

[sptrawler]

Thats why I think the elders should be talking to their own people first to rectify the internal issues.

They wont listen to the whities.

Yes but most of the issues are with the young and as happens in the cities, the young don't have the same respect for their elders, that they had 30 years ago.

It isn't as though 90 % of aboriginals live in remote communities, most live in towns, regional centres and cities.
So how do the elders influence urbanised youth, who have a new socially aware, technically connected social network? It all becomes a one size doesn't fit all.
The remote communities have their issues, the regional towns have a different set of issues and the urbanised city ones have a different set of issues.
That is probably the very reason for the voice, but as many say, it could cause a whole new set of problems that may be more difficult to address due to the voice.
But as IFocus said, if not the voice, what.
That is the problem the NO side has, everyone knows there's a problem and I don't think another layer of complexity is the answer, but something needs to be done.
At the moment we have Laborites saying the voice because they agree with everything Labor say, you have Liberalites saying no, because they disagree with everything Labor says, it is those in the middle that have to be convinced one way or the other and at the moment the voice yes or no is the only option.
I wish the rhetoric would change from this or nothing, to this or come up with something else, at least it has become a mainstream issue, if nothing else.

 

[IFocus]

Yes but most of the issues are with the young and as happens in the cities, the young don't have the same respect for their elders, that they had 30 years ago.

It isn't as though 90 % of aboriginals live in remote communities, most live in towns, regional centres and cities.
So how do the elders influence urbanised youth, who have a new socially aware, technically connected social network? It all becomes a one size doesn't fit all.
The remote communities have their issues, the regional towns have a different set of issues and the urbanised city ones have a different set of issues.
That is probably the very reason for the voice, but as many say, it could cause a whole new set of problems that may be more difficult to address due to the voice.
But as IFocus said, if not the voice, what.
That is the problem the NO side has, everyone knows there's a problem and I don't think another layer of complexity is the answer, but something needs to be done.
At the moment we have Laborites saying the voice because they agree with everything Labor say, you have Liberalites saying no, because they disagree with everything Labor says, it is those in the middle that have to be convinced one way or the other and at the moment the voice yes or no is the only option.
I wish the rhetoric would change from this or nothing, to this or come up with something else, at least it has become a mainstream issue, if nothing else.

A couple of things the political hard right and religious right are against the Voice many conservatives are are for, the rusted on conservatives will follow the party line.

As for hard Labor supporters I couldn’t say suspect a level of racism / prejudice there as well.

My observations from recently looking through the NW and Kimberley’s In terms of issues its not just the kids disfunction in families is pretty bad (I was surprised at how bad) plus lots of other stuff.

The uniqueness of a Voice would be buy in from Aboriginal's and all parties including government/ bureaucrats etc being held to account unlike now though transparency public accountability how anyone can see that as being bad is beyond me.

 

[sptrawler]

A couple of things the political hard right and religious right are against the Voice many conservatives are are for, the rusted on conservatives will follow the party line.

As for hard Labor supporters I couldn’t say suspect a level of racism / prejudice there as well.

My observations from recently looking through the NW and Kimberley’s In terms of issues its not just the kids disfunction in families is pretty bad (I was surprised at how bad) plus lots of other stuff.

The uniqueness of a Voice would be buy in from Aboriginal's and all parties including government/ bureaucrats etc being held to account unlike now though transparency public accountability how anyone can see that as being bad is beyond me.

I dont think anyone sees it as bad, I think people are wary of the enshrining bit, hard to reverse if it goes pear shaped bit, trust us it will be right bit, have we ever told you any porkies bit.
That is a big hump to get over and it goes back to what I said, pizz poor planning, pizz poor presentation, pizz poor selling, I still wonder if they had their heart in it, or were just having one each way.
The other obvious question is, if the voice will hold people to account and bring transparency, why isnt the existing departments held to account for failure and lack of transparency, it just rings hollow.

 

[Smurf1976]

My observations from recently looking through the NW and Kimberley’s In terms of issues its not just the kids disfunction in families is pretty bad (I was surprised at how bad) plus lots of other stuff.

Taking these kids you refer to, what's the practical way to "close the gap" in the context of their adult life?

I'll suggest there's many options at the detail level but they all have a few things in common. They all involve getting them to a place with opportunity, putting them through proper education in the manner most understand that to mean, then as adults they pursue and become established in whatever trade, profession or other occupation.

Putting aside all issues of ancestry, for anyone living in Australia that's what it comes down to, their life success does heavily come down to economic factors. It requires that opportunity exists, that the person is motivated to grab it and that they have the means to do so.

Where I have doubts about the Voice and indeed Aboriginal Elders in general is with how committed they really will be to their youth achieving success? As an outsider, a non-ATSI person, my perception is there's a definite rusted on aspect to this whole "traditional culture" thing which stands as a barrier.

 

[StockyGuy]

I'm trying to follow this thread in terms of the Hegelian dialectic (thesis, antithesis, followed by a synthesis). I respect the red one and the Galah in that they do not deviate an iota - they give no ground whatsoever. Red reminds me of a fiery Christian polemicist taking no prisoners in a debate against a Muslim or atheist,

While those who know the Voice would be utterly unfair and discriminatory (a priori logic is QUITE enough for this simple topic - no need to refer to blather in endless reports that normal folks do not have time to read), often seem to be trying to synthesise / compromise / resolve the tension by saying they'd prefer a treaty (!!) or legislated Voice, or maybe a one off big payment to anyone to with one drop (?!?), or something else. For me it's just a "No", end of, no consolation prize. Sometimes a (hypo)thesis is just wrong. with no useful aspects (except maybe the laughs).

 

[sptrawler]

I'm trying to follow this thread in terms of the Hegelian dialectic (thesis, antithesis, followed by a synthesis). I respect the red one and the Galah in that they do not deviate an iota - they give no ground whatsoever. Red reminds me of a fiery Christian polemicist taking no prisoners in a debate against a Muslim or atheist,

While those who know the Voice would be utterly unfair and discriminatory (a priori logic is QUITE enough for this simple topic - no need to refer to blather in endless reports that normal folks do not have time to read), often seem to be trying to synthesise / compromise / resolve the tension by saying they'd prefer a treaty (!!) or legislated Voice, or maybe a one off big payment to anyone to with one drop (?!?), or something else. For me it's just a "No", end of, no consolation prize. Sometimes a (hypo)thesis is just wrong. with no useful aspects (except maybe the laughs).

Well the thing with "No" that's the end of the discussion, the negotiation, the issue.
But the issue doesn't go away, if it did, that would be great, but it doesn't.
It's a bit like being married and disagreeing with the missus over an important issue and saying I've told you no get over it, usually it doesn't end well. Lol

 

[StockyGuy]

Well the thing with "No" that's the end of the discussion, the negotiation, the issue.
But the issue doesn't go away, if it did, that would be great, but it doesn't.

There'll never be equal outcomes in this world, it's a tough place (always was... you know the rest) - sadly I could never have played in the NBA . Australia offers a good social safety net - in the end, beyond that, people are responsible for their own progress in life.

 

[StockyGuy]

It's a bit like being married and disagreeing with the missus over an important issue and saying I've told you no get over it, usually it doesn't end well. Lol

You added that little analogy in the edit. It wasn't a marriage - it was an age of conquest. Some modern nation-states still operate with that type of view on taking over territory - so we should be much more mindful of our defences and alliances than we are; that would be a tangible lesson we could learn from the ATSIs,

Did you happen to know those with Norman-derived surnames still even now almost a thousand years after the conquest have a typically higher social status in England?

 

[Smurf1976]

No they are not.

People with disabilities are the most disadvantaged group in Australia.

761,000 children live in poverty in this country which is almost the entire aboriginal population of 880,000.

The old divide and conquer trick is what this comes down to.

Rather than focusing on the problem itself, in this case disadvantage, instead create artificial groupings and pit one against the other. From there it's endless conflict and the issue itself never gets resolved.

Standard political and corporate management tactics for a very long time. Create internal division and that takes the focus off the real issues. An effective tool to avoid everything from giving the workers a pay rise to answering inconvenient questions from the media.

The losers from this are those suffering genuine disadvantage no matter what colour their skin.

 

[sptrawler]

You added that little analogy in the edit. It wasn't a marriage - it was an age of conquest. Some modern nation-states still operate with that type of view on taking over territory - so we should be much more mindful of our defences and alliances than we are; that would be a tangible lesson we could learn from the ATSIs,

Did you happen to know those with Norman-derived surnames still even now almost a thousand years after the conquest have a typically higher social status in England?

Apologies about the late edition, schòol holidays, grandkids, using a phone instead of a computer, too many moving parts. Lol
I agree with you, but the world has changed, especially in Australia.
We have gone from being seen as one of the toughest, no nonsense, say it as you see it, get it done nations.
To pretty well the complete opposite, so the narrative isn't letting this go in the near future and even though apparently the aboriginals have the shortest life expectancy and the worst health, they are the only sector of the population where the numbers are growing!.
The problem isn't getting smaller and neither will the repatriation requests.

Discovery of more artefacts on WA continental shelf

The new discovery of ancient stone artefacts at an underwater spring off the WA Pilbara coast has confirmed the location is a submerged archaeological

www.miragenews.com

 

[Smurf1976]

The problem isn't getting smaller and neither will the repatriation requests.

I could put all this in simpler terms:

If the people vote "YES" to the Voice then can we trust that the Voice and parliament will get in with it, the issues will be worked through and resolved in a timely manner, and public debate can shift onto any of the rather long list of other matters facing Australia and its people?

Or does it become like climate change with debate turning into a 36 year (and counting) circus of short sightedness at best, pure politics at worst, whilst the climate scientists, engineers and others who know the details of the problem and/or how to fix it watch from the sidelines truly amazed at the circus before them?

Will we see action on the ground? Or will we see ongoing politics and nothing gets resolved?

That might be a hard question to answer but I expect it's what's in the mind of many.

 

[SirRumpole]

Or does it become like climate change with debate turning into a 36 year (and counting) circus of short sightedness at best, pure politics at worst, whilst the climate scientists, engineers and others who know the details of the problem and/or how to fix it watch from the sidelines truly amazed at the circus before them?

I feel the Voice could be used by activists to push for more hard case political 'reforms' like sovereignty which is useless to the grass roots but gives those activists a sense of power that they don't deserve.

 

[rederob]

No they are not.

People with disabilities are the most disadvantaged group in Australia.

This is a false equivalence.
For a start, according to Census data the level of assistance required by the indigenous population was twice as high as that required by the overall Australian population.
Furthermore, the plight of ATSI people with disabilities is significantly greater due to the broader range of system structural disadvantage they face, and is more often further exacerbated by remoteness.

761,000 children live in poverty in this country which is almost the entire aboriginal population of 880,000.

How does that explain the greater percentage of ATSI children that live in poverty?
While definitions vary, on average over 40% of indigenous families live below the poverty line, compared with less about 15% of non-indigenous families. From that we can estimate that about half of all indigenous children live in families with incomes below the poverty line, compared with about 20 per cent of non-indigenous children.

Your whataboutist excuses lack credibility.

 

[rederob]

I feel the Voice could be used by activists to push for more hard case political 'reforms' like sovereignty which is useless to the grass roots but gives those activists a sense of power that they don't deserve.

You constantly make comments that you cannot back up.
While activists can push for anything they like, the Voice cannot be used as a vehicle for sovereignty as this is a concept already enshrined in the Constitution.

 

[Sean K]

 

[rederob]

While those who know the Voice would be utterly unfair and discriminatory (a priori logic is QUITE enough for this simple topic....

Your logic is poor.
How can giving advice be unfair if we can all do it?
Furthermore, as the Voice is the symbol of recognition of First Nations peoples, and there are no others that can have this claim bestowed, it cannot be discriminatory.
Added to this, nobody's rights nor powers are altered in any way, so if you claim discrimination you need to show where it lies.
Bottom line is that your points do not withstand reason.

The Voice is a very clever mechanism in a government framework regulated by the Constitution. The Voice will be transparent and accountable, meaning its activities will be published for all to see, so cannot afford to lose public trust On the other hand, by being enshrined in the Constitution it can't be wiped out when governments change. In that regard it will also mean that program funding is more likely to endure changes of government as pulling monies from those that are shown to be successful will reflect poorly on those making such decisions.

 

[IFocus]

Taking these kids you refer to, what's the practical way to "close the gap" in the context of their adult life?

I'll suggest there's many options at the detail level but they all have a few things in common. They all involve getting them to a place with opportunity, putting them through proper education in the manner most understand that to mean, then as adults they pursue and become established in whatever trade, profession or other occupation.

Putting aside all issues of ancestry, for anyone living in Australia that's what it comes down to, their life success does heavily come down to economic factors. It requires that opportunity exists, that the person is motivated to grab it and that they have the means to do so.

Where I have doubts about the Voice and indeed Aboriginal Elders in general is with how committed they really will be to their youth achieving success? As an outsider, a non-ATSI person, my perception is there's a definite rusted on aspect to this whole "traditional culture" thing which stands as a barrier.

Smurf i am no expert, you cannot solve the kids problem without addressing the family disfunction that starts it all amongst relationship disfunction domestic violence and all round trauma.

Thats tip of the iceberg there are a few papers written and a couple of people well experienced in the field.

Bandyup detention centre has a 80 to 90 reoffending rate for Aboriginal kids locking them up doesn’t work