Australians have resoundingly rejected a proposal to recognise Aboriginal people in its constitution and establish a body to advise parliament on Indigenous issues.

Saturday’s voice to parliament referendum failed, with the defeat clear shortly after polls closed.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[+] 294 points 2 years ago (54 children)
  • [–] 113 points 2 years ago (23 children)

    Oh it's not just us.

    UK, and Canada have sordid pasts as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • load more comments (19 replies)
  • [–] 30 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Quite honestly it was a very confusing referendum. The question seemed simple on the surface but as soon as you ask questions very quickly it was hard to find answers. I think this confusion is the reason the majority voted no, they were scared to choose yes for something they didn't understand. I tried to understand and still couldn't find a straight answer of what this referendum was actually about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (25 replies)
    [–] 90 points 2 years ago (27 children)
  • [–] 47 points 2 years ago (26 children)

    I personally didn’t pay close attention to the campaigns, and think it pretty obvious Australia has a fair way to go on indigenous issues, but my impression is also that the Yes campaign was poorly executed and thought through, failing, in part, to recognise how much of an uphill climb it was going to be and how easy the No campaign was going to be. For instance, while reading the ballot, I was taken aback by how vague and confusing the proposal was, despite having read it before.

    Otherwise, I’m hoping there’s a silver lining in the result where it will prompt an ongoing conversation about what actually happened and get the country closer to getting better at this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 2 years ago (15 children)

    There was a massive, heavily funded FUD campaign by the "no" proponents. Sadly, it was very effective.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 44 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Yeah as soon as I heard the "if you don't know vote no" slogan I knew it was already over.. this one line just forgives people for being racist.

    I'm not saying every No vote was racist just that many would have been and this made it so fucking easy for them to feel no guilt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Yea that’s kinda what I meant. The No campaign here was pretty easy to cook up I think. And for the Liberal party it was a very attractive chance to kick the Labor govt down no matter the cause.

    Which means, IMO, if you were going to do this, you had to be ready for all of that and not rely on calls to be “be on the right side of history”. Australia isn’t there and needs convincing, unfortunately.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • load more comments (10 replies)
  • [–] 83 points 2 years ago (65 children)

    I'm sorry, I'm stupid and not up-to-date with this.

    Taken at face value, Constitutional Recognition for the indigenous population sounds correct.

    So what was wrong with it?

  • source
  • hideshow 65 child comments
  • [–] 57 points 2 years ago (20 children)

    Nothing.

    The no and yes sides to a referendum prepare an informational pamphlet that everyone receives but there's absolutely no requirement that any of it be truthful, so the opposition just openly lied until the whole thing died.

    Actual information was obscured, fear mongering was rampant, the voice was harmless at worst, but could have been the spark that changed Australia for the better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • load more comments (20 replies)
  • [–] 53 points 2 years ago (14 children)

    Leaving the moral arguments aside, there were also massive campaign failures on the Yes side. No had two clear cheerleaders with an absurdly simple catchphrase: “If you don’t know, vote No”. Meanwhile Yes didn’t have a star for the campaign and had made the amendment way too simple/general so there weren’t any included details of the practicalities. So they ended up with 100 people having to re-explain their plans every campaign stop and occasionally tripping over each other’s messages. As a result, the complicated sell from Yes played right into No‘s hands.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago* (6 children)

    It's clear that most of the people responding to you are being deceptive and crying 'racism' to make themselves feel superior.

    This was not a referendum to recognise indigenous people. Whomever titled this article is a liar. It was a referendum to create an advisory body that makes representations to parliament to support a specific race. Contrary to the holier-than-thou crowd around here, many people voted 'No' because they do not agree with permanently enshrining this in the Constitution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • load more comments (22 replies)
    [–] 74 points 2 years ago (25 children)

    It's always so funny when Americans on here, including me, are openly willing to discuss how shitty, racist, and full of bigots the United States is. Around 40% of the population is complete filth and we're happy to openly acknowledge that.

    Meanwhile, Canada, the UK, and Australian users, even if they're on the left, try to find excuses to not acknowledge that their general public is also significantly racist and bigoted. And always have been.

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 2 years ago

    I'm Australian and I acknowledge the levels of racism. I think it's the racists who think it's not racist here. One guy told me he wasn't racist, his hatred and disdain for ALL aboriginal people was valid because he had had traumatic experiences, first hand. (makes me so freaking angry even typing this) his traumatic experiences were absolute bullshit. Racists justify thier racism as "a valid explanation" so they don't call themselves racists. So if people are saying it's not racist here you're probably talking to the racists. And Facebook. I also blame Facebook for this.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

    The Canadian government loves to advertise how open and inclusive they are, while at the same time oppressing indigenous people. For example (although it was a while ago, I don't think a lot has changed), the Oka crisis started over a Golf Course wanting to expand into indigenous territory, which the Canadian Government eventually deployed the military (largest deployment since WWII) to support... the Golf Course.

    Even elected representatives have to deal with racist bullshit while serving their country (like Mumilaaq Qaqqaq of Nunavut). It's so intertwined in Canadian society it often isn't recognized, likely because for the most part it isn't overt. A lot of the racism is subtle, reinforced by inequitable laws & policies and almost always acted on if there's plausible deniability (that is, unless they screw up). It's almost like a lot of Canadians are politely racist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (15 replies)
    [+] 54 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (23 children)
    load more comments (23 replies)
    [–] 48 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    If the Yes campaign are serious about the Voice to the nation being important to the Indigenous people, then no-one is standing in the way of making it happen. The vote to enshrine it in the Constitution failed, but the body can still be created and can still function primarily the same.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 34 points 2 years ago (12 children)

    New to the subject here: why is it a desirable thing to recognise Aboriginal people in the Constitution?

    As I read through the article in the Aboriginal camp not everyone wants this. So I'm puzzled.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 58 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    It's complex. Quite a few in the indigenous "no" camp want treaty instead; a formal legal recognition of aboriginal rights and representation, not just an advisory voice in parliament. Voting no for them was as much a protest as an attempt to send a message saying this should be much more. For them it's all or nothing.

    Others didn't see the point, yet others don't see the problem in the first place, comfortable with the status quo.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (9 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 30 points 2 years ago

    A sad day for Australia. It was cool to see a lot if Australian celebrities come out in support of a yes vote.

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Yeah this fucking sucks. I have to admit I was expecting Yes to win by a landslide, but I guess I give people too much credit.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 24 points 2 years ago (37 children)

    American here, what does it mean to recognize a class of indigenous people in Australia?

    Because we have a very different understanding of the word lol

  • source
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    It was to put them in the constitution as the original inhabitants of Australia and give them the right to a mostly powerless advisory body to the Commonwealth government called "the Voice".

    It was a pretty conservative idea but unfortunately the conservative opposition leader is the arch-racist piece of shit who will never win a real election, but in his desperation to make a name for himself he campaigned against the referendum, and referendums traditionally only succeed with bipartisan support. So now all that's really been accomplished is to disenfranchise our indigenous population even more.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (32 replies)
    [–] 23 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    How grim.

    This is a victory for racists, and bad-faith actors, some some of which have received lots of money from China and Russia to help destabilise another Western country.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Honestly don’t know if that latter bit is true. We manage to be absolutely atrocious to the indigenous population without third parties meddling. I don’t think there’s a single native population that hasn’t been mistreated; had their culture and names taken away, sent for reeducation, eugenics, and so on, so forth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 20 points 2 years ago

    This is shameful. I'm sorry.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›