Further Effects of "The Voice" debate

[Old Koreelah]

Once again, a few powerful foreigners are shaking the Australian jar and watching the inevitable conflict. They know how easy it is to awaken the great Australian Cultural Cringe.
We can’t change anything in this country without broad, bipartisan political support. The NO side made up its mind even before they heard the shape of the proposal. 
 

How embarassing, when all we wanted to do is give our indigenous people a Voice. Some very successful democracies gave them a Treaty and reserved seats in Parliament, but no, Australia gives foreign-owned corporations more access to government.

[Bruce Tuncks]

I like the idea that we give overseas corporations too much power, but I have to disagree with old K  about the Maories ( yep I know that they were only obliquely referred to ).

They are tough fighters for sure and the whites relied on ships coming with ammo etc to keep assured of winning. So the treaty of Waitangi was really a bit between equals. Sure, the whites did a doublecross much later when they could no longer lose, but that treaty was a legal document .

I have said it before, but I reckon our abos are darned lucky that the Maories did not find their way to Australia. I reckon in time they would have, and the abos would have been eaten, literally.

[facthunter]

When I first started going to Papua New Guinea there were isolated tribes who were Cannibals.  Nev

[Bruce Tuncks]

Yep, no land rights for the Chatham islanders huh? If you ask a present day Maori, they will say that the invaders were just following their culture.

[Old Koreelah]

1 hour ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

…I reckon our abos are darned lucky that the Maories did not find their way to Australia. I reckon in time they would have, and the abos would have been eaten, literally.

Bruce I totally agree about this point; it could be argued that our original people were lucky it was the British (slightly constrained by Magna Carta and the rule of law) who took over their country. At the same time, the Japanese were expandng north, exterminating the natives and the Americans were doing the same to their First Nations, breaking promises and Treaties at will.

 

On the other hand, the French seemed to have a much more enlightened attitude to the locals; French explorers set up camp, planted gardens and learned from the natives.

 

Having said all that, just because most of our natives were more welcoming and peaceful than the Maoris is not an arguement against giving them some overdue recognition and a voice.

[facthunter]

The football teams recognise them, The french treated the Indians much better than the british and americans. Russians were hanging around New Zealand quite a lot in earlier times.  Nev

[pmccarthy]

I would support a treaty, which is negotiated between two parties. A treaty would require a lot of sit-down negotiation and we could all see what it was about.

[Old Koreelah]

4 minutes ago, pmccarthy said:

I would support a treaty, which is negotiated between two parties. A treaty would require a lot of sit-down negotiation and we could all see what it was about.

PM I hope that is possible, but Aboriginal Australia is not a single party-unless it elects a representative body- something the anti-voice group seem determined to prevent. We had about 255 language groups, many of which have survived.

 

I’d like to know why Bob Hawke didn’t follow through on his promise of a Treaty. That was decades ago and this country has changed a lot since then.

 

[facthunter]

"NO CHILD will live in Poverty"  too. Words are the  easy part . Whitlam was more genuine than Hawke.  Nev

[spacesailor]

A lot has  been said about the no vote dividing this nation  , .

but

A yes vote Will do the same, as a No vote .

All those immigrant's children Born here in Australia,  will  NOT have a  VOICE .

Better sharpen those spears. 

 

In Aotearoa (NZ) should a mixed ( maori & pakiha ) marriage  end , the parents go to a  MAORI Court for child custody 

NOT THE STANDARD COURT . TO CHOOSE WHO GETS CUSTODY. 

Divided nation. With two court's and two different judges. 

Pakeha and maori .

spacesailor

 

[octave]

8 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

In Aotearoa (NZ) should a mixed ( maori & pakiha ) marriage  end , the parents go to a  MAORI Court for child custody 

 

Can you post a link to that, I can't find any reference.  I can only see a Maori land court.

Edited July 24, 2023 by octave

[spacesailor]

Justice.govt.nz

" Victims rights and the justice system  " .

Hopefully it will get to a little , of a split system .

spacesailor

 

 

[octave]

3 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

Justice.govt.nz

" Victims rights and the justice system  " .

Hopefully it will get to a little , of a split system .

spacesailor

 

 

 

I searched that site and I can find any reference to it.  Are you sure it is not one of those myths? 

[Jerry_Atrick]

36 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

A lot has  been said about the no vote dividing this nation  , .

but

A yes vote Will do the same, as a No vote .

It is more a lot has been said about how the No arguments don't stack up - and not only in this forum.  A debate on the true facts and merit can usually lead to consensus; using disingenuous at best and out lies at worst is what polarises people.

 

36 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

All those immigrant's children Born here in Australia,  will  NOT have a  VOICE .

As an immigrant to the UK, I chose to come here and expect to live in accordance with the laws and customs of the UK. I would expect the same of those coming to Australia. And the irony is, there is plenty of representation in Australian politics of ensuring these people integrate into society while having the freedom to practice their customs and religion as long as they don't harm others. Aboriginals don't have that luxury.

36 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

Better sharpen those spears. 

Rhetoric designed to be divisive?

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Jerry_Atrick

[spacesailor]

Divisive

What happens when people are ' divided ' .

Antagonism towards those that have More , ( a voice in parliament) .

 isn't that what I have said , will be the outcome of a referendum. 

Some one will ' NOT BE HAPPY ' whichever  way it ends. 

spacesailor

[Jerry_Atrick]

There are always going to be issues that divide people.. However, I would have thought the pursuit of improving the lives of indigenous people would not be divisive; of course the way to go about it can be.

 

My point is, if people brought their point of view and arguemnts to the table in good faith - that would probably not be divisive as people bringing genuine issues to the table often results in compromise in a democracy; bringing disingenuiity and lies becomes divisive because they are not playing fair and those with a different point of view can see it. So far, the No campaign has excelled in the latter.

 

I say again,

37 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

Better sharpen those spears. 

is a jibe (in the context of this discussion) and is divisive.

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by Jerry_Atrick

[spacesailor]

AND

the " knives are out " .

Told you .

Divisive! ! .

spacesailor

[Jerry_Atrick]

Knives maybe out, but who is drawing them out? And who is driving the divide rather than engaging in the topic?

 

I have never maintained the Voice is perfect or will work; I agree, Albo should have let his reign settle down before he brought it out. And in fact, when it was announced, I was not definitely in the Yes camp; go to early posts and I was questioning the need for it in the constitution at all. And, yes, I also posted I woudl like more information. So, no kinves out this way..

 

But, even outside of these forums, believe it or not, I have been reading up various sources, and yes, I take into account how Aboriginal affairs law has developed in the WA. But I have come to the conclusion that it is more progressive than regressive to support it. I have done that on the basis of what fact (and behaviour of the two sides) I can find. I may be missing something, but I am all eyes and ears.. if someone can articulate it.. rather than the jibes and divisiveness they are spewing out..

Remember they were saying the wording would behold Australia to the Voice because of special legal meaning given to the wording proposed by the constitution? Utter BS, and the start of the divisiveness. As has been a lot of what they have said and promoted since.

 

You're right, Specey,. it is divisive.. But not because it has been proposed.. Because the people who claim it to be divisive are the ones instigating divisiveness

Edited July 24, 2023 by Jerry_Atrick

[octave]

Spacey, my son moved to New Zealand 9 years ago and even became a citizen recently. He does not feel he lives under some kind of apartheid.  He gets on with his Maori neighbours and people from many different cultures  He doesn't rant and rave about Maori representation.   When we visit we don't observe a hugely divided society. No society is perfect.

 

What is it that you think you will lose if the referendum passes?

 

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

"NO CHILD will live in Poverty"  too. Words are the  easy part . Whitlam was more genuine than Hawke.  Nev

Hawke was a clever politician who could create a wave and ride it, but his legacy faded.
 

Whitlam was a Statesman, driven to achieve his vision of a better Australia.

He was too far, too fast, but if he’d prevailed, Australia would now be like Norway; we’d own our resources and have trillions in savings.
Instead, we are a trillion in debt.

 

 

 

  

[spacesailor]

W A is reporting " numbers of bulldozers have been stopped because of indecision , about the 

New law , & it's impact on their work . ' 

The fines for breaching this new law are humongous.  & they won't know they have brokenn any 

law ! At the time they were working . ( until some elder says so ) .

One farmer needed a ' dam ' and did everything to get the paperwork in order.

But 

Then needed it ' now ' not in the dry season. ( I saw the fine dollars  ) they are more than I thought a farmer could afford . ( was 6 figure or five ) hundreds of thousands .

spacesailor

[red750]

ABC News ditches English name of famous city in favour of description in indigenous language

 

• ABC uses local Maori name for Wellington in New Zealand 
• Has been ABC policy in Australia for over two years

The ABC has been praised for using a local indigenous place name during the coverage of the Women's World Cup.

 

Coverage of the 1-1 draw in Wellington, New Zealand, between the United States and the Netherlands on Thursday afternoon was accompanied by the place name 'Te Whanganui-a-Tara', in the Indigenous Maori language. 

 

The phrase, which is what Wellington was originally called, literally translates as the 'great harbour of Tara'.

 

Tara was the son of a famous Maori navigator called Whatonga sent down from the Mahia Peninsula by his father to explore southern lands for their people to settle.

 

'Love seeing the ABC using te reo Māori for the placenames in their FIFA coverage!', tweeted  Andrew Macfarlane, Australia Correspondent for Television New Zealand's 1NewsNZ.

 

It is not clear if this is an ABC policy for all foreign locations. 

 

 

[red750]

[octave]

2 minutes ago, red750 said:

 

Because a city often takes its name from the land it is built on. This may be a geographical feature or a historic name that may be from Western history or pre-colonisation history.  I used to own a property near the village of Mongarlowe near Mount Budawang.  These are both pre white settlement names. Is this a problem?   

[Bruce Tuncks]

It is a problem to me. Some place names I don't mind changing, for example Ayer's rock. Ayre didn't venture out of Adelaide as far as I know, but he did finance some explorers.

Some I do mind, like lake Eyre. Eyre was a great explorer. I would particularly dislike changing the Stuart Highway to some indigenous name.

 Getting back to Ayer's rock, or Uluru as it is now called, what have the blacks ever done to deserve the name?   And why can't a place have 2 names? Many countries have names different from what we call them.