The 20% of indigenous who live in remote communities need assistance, not just financial. I would like a definition of who qualifies to be called indigenous. I know at least three families whose great, or great great grandmother was part or full aboriginal and these parents today, their adult children, grand children, are considered indigenous, mostly all blonde, blue-eyed; and they take advantage of the benefits of $10 dental service, discounts on vehicles, medical, etc

Do we need to be told why we voted NO? There are too many people of all political persuasions who think they know more about us than we do.

The same bigmouths on both sides lectured us on the evils of Yes and No, believing, as usual, that we are all too stupid to make up our own minds. Millions of dollars were spent because they thought we were too stupid to 'get' their messages.

. There wasn't enough detail
. You were a racist if you didn't vote for the race-based proposal
. Albanese was good/bad
. Dutton was good/bad
. Jacinta Price was an angel.

On and on the twaddle went. Over how long? I've forgotten. It bored me rigid.

No amount of money, no advertising, no wankerdoodle 'celebrities', business moguls, no bishops or sporting 'heroes' or singers, had the slightest effect on my vote of NO, which I decided on the moment the
Voice was announced. It was plain, bloody wrong. That's why it was rejected.

The Australian Financial Review says today that Big Business CEOs and boards should stop meddling in politics and wasting shareholders' money following the resounding defeat of the race-based Voice referendum.

Upcoming AGMs could be interesting.

The whole thing was very badly managed and/or explained by both sides.

Comment-
$100 million war chest of corporate dollars including big banks, retailers and mining companies, Qantas planes had Yes logos and provided free flights to Yes Campaigners.

Answer-
Qantas's gay CEO Alan Joyce endorsed The Voice. Joyce has now been replaced by a gay woman. It seems that their hiring may have been based on DIE policy corrupting western corporate culture along communist lines creating cultural concentration- some call this elitism- elitism based on competence is valid. Now the Qantas Yes logos are a joke. The free flights are concerning. How is this politicization affecting employees within Qantas/ corporate in Australia/ western world- despite discrimination on political beliefs being illegal. There are good reasons in democracy not to discriminate employment based on political beliefs as it corrupts the democratic process if people with certain beliefs are not able to find work.

Apparently activist (communist?) organisations such as The Sleeping Giants have intimidated corporations to destroy pockets of resistance.

DIE (diversity, inclusivity, equality) policy propaganda isn't democratic making the "probability is possibility" fallacy- not "one person one vote" but "one difference at least one vote (see intersectionalism)". DIE propaganda also seems to say that diversity is productivity. DIE propaganda seems to embrace the communist "principle of need" rather than industrialist/ capitalist/ entrepreneurial "value principle".

German philosopher Frederick Nietzsche and Hebrew writer Ayn Rand talked about the fallacies of communism. Nietzsche "Genealogy of Morals" compared Priestly/ Hebrew/ Slave/ Envy/ Need code with Knightly/ Aristocratic/ Value code.

Comment-
Senator Price... advocated an end to "academics and activists" thinking they knew better than people on the ground in remote communities and explained that a new way of thinking was required.

Answer-
"The Academy" has perhaps become the enemy of democracy and local traditionalist communities- in that way they are racist.

The Voice isn't over sadly as state ALP is continuing- showing contempt of Australian people and democracy- if it's not democracy it's (communist) tyranny- the ALP show which side they stand on.

A democracy has one person one vote, no special interests- but the ALP seem to be the enemy of democracy.

The question being, should promises be kept?

At elections time, Anthony promised to have this idiotic referendum.
He must have known that it will fail, he must have known it even then, but a promise is still a promise no matter how stupid it is.

His rival, OTOH, just broke his promise: http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/no-plan-b-jacqui-lambie-fires-up-over-voice-referendum-lashes-prime-minister/news-story/8dd2a4c54a6ca9b87cd2310a08f7c88e

I don't like any politician, to hell with them all, I would send them all to Gaza, but if you must have any, wouldn't you prefer to at least have one that keeps their promises?

one that keeps their promises?
Yuyutsu,
Definitely NO when the promise is an idiotic & divisive one. He also promised lower power prices etc. He didn't keep any of those !
There's a massive difference between ideology & reality !

.

Dear John (the author),

.

You wrote :

« She [Jacinta Price] advocated an end to "academics and activists" thinking they knew better than people on the ground in remote communities and explained that a new way of thinking was required. »
.

That sounds like good advice, John. The only problem is the “people on the ground” she refers to don’t seem to agree with her.

Jacinta’s election to the Senate in 2022 came overwhelmingly from suburban voters in Darwin, Alice Springs and Katherine, not voters in the bush. Her constituency is predominantly white.

Five years ago, in 2018, before she became a senator, a social media petition circulated to protest against her and her mother being represented in local media as community leaders. More than 10,000 people signed the petition which stated: “Neither woman have been elected as Aboriginal leaders by Aboriginal people and we the undersigned, largely disagree with both women’s views”.

Also, declaring, as she did, that “there’s no ongoing negative impacts of colonisation” seems more like the “thinking” of East Coast conservatives than that of remote outback Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island communities.

In the Lingiari electorate of the Northern Territory, 74% of the 11,000 people who live in the electorate’s remote areas voted YES and in Yuendemu, the community home of Jacinta’s family, 75% voted YES.

The NO vote majority in the Northern Territory as a whole, came from suburban voters in Darwin, Alice Springs and Katherine – not from “people on the ground in the remote communities”. In their large majority, they voted “YES”.

Strange, isn’t it ? None of this seems to corroborate Jacinta’s inference that "academics and activists" were responsible for promoting the YES vote “thinking they knew better than people on the ground in remote communities and … that a new way of thinking was required”.

People on the ground in remote communities did not reject the thinking of "academics and activists", they rejected Jacinta and her mother and overwhelmingly voted YES at the Voice referendum.

.

Yuyutsu,
Dutton is not 'walking away' from a promise, he's changed into a direction that won't waste another lot of funding wasted !

Dear Indyvidual,

Levy Eshkol, Israel's 3rd prime-minister, was known for his saying: "Yes I promised, but I have not promised to keep my promise".

How would you liked it if you voted for a politician because you believed in their stated policies, who day after the elections turned them all 180º?

Best, of course, is to never promise anything:

"Do not be quick with your mouth, do not be hasty in your heart to utter anything before God. God is in heaven and you are on earth, so let your words be few.
A dream comes when there are many cares, and many words mark the speech of a fool.
When you make a vow to God, do not delay to fulfill it. He has no pleasure in fools; fulfill your vow.
It is better not to make a vow than to make one and not fulfill it.
Do not let your mouth lead you into sin. And do not protest to the temple messenger, “My vow was a mistake.” Why should God be angry at what you say and destroy the work of your hands?"
[Ecclesiastes 5:2-6]

You are correct in saying that "There's a massive difference between ideology & reality!", so why did Anthony and Peter respectively not say instead: "my ideology is to hold a referendum"? Then at least they would be saying the truth.

On the one hand I respect Anthony for keeping his promise, no matter how idiotic.
On the other hand, he only promised to hold that particular referendum, he never promised to make it divisive, so instead he could declare:

"Fellow Australians, I promised you to hold a referendum regarding an aboriginal Voice to parliament. While I no longer believe that such a referendum is needed, it will nevertheless be held on October 14th. To save costs, no public funds will be used to advocate for or against the proposal; privately-funded advocacy will not be tax-deductible; and since the referendum will be held anyway, it will also include other constitutional issues that arose in recent years, such as the repealing of section 44."

On the one hand I respect Anthony for keeping his promise, no matter how idiotic.
Yuyutsu,
Are you listening to yourself ? How could Dutton possibly stand by his promise with that result ?
Only someone as insipid as a Labor voter can't see that !

Dear Indyvidual,

Why an absolute crock.

Frydenburg had set aside money in his last budget to run a referendum on a Voice to parliament.

Virtually all the process was done under the Liberal government from Uluru up to the referendum council.

Labor agreed and promised to run the referendum.

Now suddenly it was idiotic and a waste of money and all Albos fault?

That is a profoundly ignorant take and you should be ashamed of it.

Dear Indyvidual,

«Are you listening to yourself ? How could Dutton possibly stand by his promise with that result ?»

A promise is a promise - he should not have made such a promise in the first place.

Alternately he could have promised: "If the result is going to be close then I will call for another referendum" - but he didn't.

Virtually all the process was done under the Liberal government from Uluru up to the referendum council.
SteeleRedux & Yuyutsu,
Under but not with, the with was Labor !

Dear Indyvidual,

Why did you address your last post also to me?

I said nothing about processes and political parties, nor do I care about any of them - all I wrote was that promises ought to be kept.

Yuyutsu,
Your argument is just so typical of why things are so difficult. Do you approve of the money spent for this Voice debacle & do you want more wasted ?
Or, would you rather waste no more funding on a meaningless argument about changing a policy which now has no more relevance ? I'm sure Dutton would stick to the original suggestion to hold another referendum if the outcome were to have been so close that it would cause too much unrest. As it turned out there is no need to waste anymore time & money on a closed case !
We have the NIAA & if they can't do their job, dismantle them along with other useless but expensive sections of Departments !

Dear Indyvidual,

Of course I am unhappy with that hassle of referendum - especially with all those disturbing "Vote YES" placards that distract drivers and must have caused that many road accidents and domestic violence.

But I rather live in a world where promises are kept.

As for the expenses, sure it's a waste, but no promise was made to have campaigns, so even while keeping promises we could at least have had a campaign-less referendum!

What is "NIAA"? While I don't know what it means, I would indeed like it dismantled along all other government sections and departments.

What is "NIAA"?
Yuyutsu,
I'm glad you asked, it's literally the same as the advisory part of the Voice only turbo-charged & utterly unaffordable in every which way !