The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices

bluediamond started the topic in

Sunday, 25 Jul 2021 at 1:26pm

Uni assignment i did a few years ago. This is my take on things. I'm sure this will ruffle many feathers. I hope so.
Love Blue Diamond x

Introduction – Compensatory Justice
Disparities between the standards of living of humans on this planet have long been a part of our history on this planet. From the wealthy nations of the West to the developing and undeveloped nations on this globe, the diversity in the quality of life when viewed from a moral standpoint are without a doubt grossly unfair.
In this paper I will look at why historic injustices do require some form of reparation. I take a strong stance that we are more obliged to solve current injustices than to provide reparation for every act of injustice in the past. In doing this I will first investigate the historic injustice of the Aboriginal people of Australia and I will look at the argument that they are entitled to some form of reparation and why.
I will incoroporate some interesting views from Jeremy Waldron, Robert Nozick and others which will help me slowly build to my conclusion that reparation should be in the form of Non Indigenous Australians surrendering some of our priveleges as a form of reparation.

Historic Injustices to Indigenous Australians:
Australia the continent was well inhabited for many years long before white settlement. It is commonly known that in 1788 Australia was colonised as a country under the rule of the British Empire, with total contempt for the fact that it was already inhabited by a native indigenous race of people.
The way the original inhabitants have been treated, including forced assimilation, execution, stolen families and not even allowed to be recognised as citizens for a large part of white Australia’s history are also well known facts. (Poole, 1999,pp114-142)
There exists now a situation where there is a large divide between Aboriginal and non Aboriginal Australian’s that can be traced back to the moment Australia was invaded by English settlers and the brutal and unfair treatment that has followed.
So at this point now, in 2013 what is the just and fair way to make amends for past actions?
I would argue that a moderate to large amount of reparation is overdue for this nation of people, the Aboriginal people. But there are many challenges to this view point especially that of how much reparation, and what sort of compensation.

Past injustices or present suffering?
One of the questions raised in an issue like this is whether it is better to provide compensation or reparation for past deeds, which have already been done in a previous generation and cannot be changed, or whether it is better to now provide assistance to those who are suffering in their current situations and consider that as a form of moral duty.
To understand this we need to delve a little deeper into this issue and hear some differing viewpoints.
Firstly we need to understand what the best way to provide reparation. How do we judge what is the best way of giving back and how much? Jeremy Waldron states “The historic record has a fragility that consists, …in the sheer contingency of what happened in the past” (Waldron,1992,p5 )
This is saying that we can’t trace every single injustice back to the original act therefore reparation for every act would be almost impossible because it would ultimately be guess work.
In this statement he has an objection from Robert Nozick who believes it is in fact possible to address this problem by “changing the present so that it resembles how the past would have looked had the injustice not taken place” (McKenzie, 2013)
This would be a way to ultimately provide maximum reparation, but is it the correct approach? I believe this is a fairly radical approach, although it does have some merits in the fact it would be working in a positive way for indigenous people, I don’t think it is entirely the right way to deal with these issues but it is on the right track.
Waldron argues that it is based on too many unknowns. “The status of counterfactual reasoning about the exercising of human reasoning of human freedom is unclear”(Waldron 1993,p10)
Which leaves the question somewhat open about the sort of reparation that is required, but provides one clear answer to the key question. Both agree that yes, reparation to some extent is required. But how much and in what form?
Another philosopher who leans more towards Waldron’s views is Kymlicka. He is somewhat more straightforward in his assessment that property rights in particular for Aboriginals would create “massive unfairness” and also he maintains the argument “Aboriginal rights must be grounded in concerns about equality and contemporary disadvantage. (McKenzie, 2013) I agree with both these views but I don’t think they provide any active solutions.

The Solution?
So if its not handing back all of Australia’s land to the original inhabitants that is the most appropriate way to deal with past injustices, then what is?
I look at the current country I grew up in, as a white Australian. I ask myself why I never had Aboriginal friends growing up, no understanding of Aboriginal culture and why my basic understanding of Indigenous Australians is mostly 200 years old. I look at our flag, a symbol of a nation that stole a country from its original inhabitants, with no recognition of the Indigenous people at all on it. I see that Australia considered Indigenous people as less than people until only 40 years ago and I see the way that Indigenous Australians live a completely separate life to the way of life I know as an Australian. I see that the only indigenous politician I am aware of is a former Olympian and it is because of this fact of her sporting status that I know this. I see no collective power or representation of Indigenous Australians and I see non Indigenous Australians,( a culture built on a history of stealing a land and mistreating its people) still taking, taking as much out of this land as they can, with little to no regard of sharing or giving to the original inhabitants. I see a government that says lots of words about ‘closing the gap’ and bringing the living standards of non- indigenous and indigenous Australians closer together, but apart from nice words, there is no conviction, no follow through, just assimilation , and all that still remains are injustices.
As stated by Sparrow, “Continuity gives rise to responsibility on part of present generations of Australians for our history”.(McKenzie,2013). Although deeds happened in the past beyond our control, what we do now to either ignore, or rectify these issues will reflect on us in history. So if we choose to do nothing, we are contributing to the history of the mistreatment of non- indigenous Australians. And this is simply unacceptable in my opinion.

Conclusion
So what is fair? I believe that the way forward is a surrendering of some of our privileges as non- indigenous Australians. The simple fact is it was morally wrong without a doubt what has happened in the past. And it is also morally wrong without a doubt to ignore these facts and not offer some form of reparation in the present. But how much?
I think that going back to Robert Nozick’s argument is a start. I think Nozick is wrong to make the present resemble the past in every aspect. But I do think that it would be reasonable to restore some aspects of the way things should be. The things that happened in the past were out of our control and we can’t go back to changing the way things were. But we could change the way things are.
For some examples. Why not give at least 50% of political power to indigenous people? It surely would be a fair thing to do considering this is their country. Media control. 50 percent. Industry. Realestate. The list goes on. Why do we not acknowledge the indigenous people on our flag, or better still use their flag? Why is Australia still a part of the Commonwealth when it serves little purpose to any of us and serves as a constant reminder to Indigenous Australians that they are still controlled by the original invaders. These to me are fairly simple reparations that would have minimal impact on Australia as a whole. Perhaps, it would alter the way we live but I think it is our responsibility, morally to forfeit some of our privileges for the greater good. Basically a little bit goes a long way.
In closing, it is a fact that a huge injustice occurred to the Indigenous population and suffering continues to this day. There is no easy solution to such a burden of pain. I believe the only solutions are for the non- Indigenous population to take responsibility and sacrifice our own way of life to bring about an overall equality. Sacrifice is not an easy word. But it all comes down to right and wrong. We are in a position to give, in this current generation. What are we so scared to lose, that was never ours in the first place??

Bibliography
McKenzie,C.”Prof” (2013), Lecture, Historic Injustices and Indigenous Rights, Macquarie University
Poole, R. (1999). Nation and Identity.Routledge, London, pp.114-142
Waldron,J. (1992). ‘Superseding Historic Injustice’. Ethics, 103 (1), 4-28

References
Poole, R. (1999). Nation and Identity.Routledge, London, pp.114-142
Waldron,J. (1992). ‘Superseding Historic Injustice’. Ethics, 103 (1), 4-28

indo-dreaming Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 9:14am

@adam12

If it aint a racial slur, it's damn close, but i highly doubt the person on the receiving end of it would agree with you or anyone else's opinion that it's not.

Just the view that a certain ethnic group should feel, act, think in a certain way is kind of racist in itself, all people of any ethnic group should be free to be individuals and not be pigeon holed into a certain mindest on how they must think.

IMHO putting an indigenous person down like Warren because they dont fit the way you think they should based on ethnicity is kinda racist

Obviously you missed the conversation on a similar racial slur "coconut"

Supafreak Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 10:23am

Marcia Langton went to the lectern after Albanese. There is a reed of anger in her voice when she speaks. She has seen everything, sees everything. The balance of this editorial belongs to her wisdom. “I want to acknowledge people who are not here today,” she said. “You know, there’s wonderful people who have been with us on this journey: Noel Pearson and, particularly, Galarrwuy Yunupingu. He taught me many years ago that you know when you’re being told the truth, because the truth burns. And truth is very much an Aboriginal value and a Torres Strait Islander value across the country. So that is a part, very much a part, of our thinking. That’s why the Uluru Statement from the Heart calls for a Voice, makarrata, and truth-telling. So before you all rush off and recite what was said yesterday by a person who has never participated in any of these processes, I would like you to look for the evidence for such assertions. But believe us … in each case, we have doggedly recommended changes to stop the deaths, the incarceration, the early deaths and the miserable lives, and it is so infrequently that our recommendations are adopted. This is why we cannot report on many improvements in the Closing the Gap indicators. And each year, people like you come along to listen to that misery fest, and each year, people go away wringing their hands. We’re here to draw a line in the sand and say: this has to change; people’s lives have to improve. And we know from the evidence that what improves people’s lives is when they get a say. And that’s what this is about.” https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/opinion/editorial/2023/03/25/the-tru...

AndyM Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 10:51am

She’s a formidable intellect.

GuySmiley Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 11:53am

seeds wrote:
Indo. Who’s penning those tales of history you refer to? Guy made a great counter argument to your position that’s sounds legit. You haven’t responded.
It’s sad that this has been hijacked by political allegiances. Bloody hell, are we becoming the USA.

To correct the record.

@info insists that ATSIC was advisory body and it was shut down because of widespread corruption.

While I personally did not work in/at ATSIC I worked closely with State/Regional Managers and with Project Officers for several years so I have firsthand knowledge of its purpose and its operational procedures. As previously stated above ATSIC's primary role was to provide direct grants at a State ir Regional level to community Co-ops for a range of community advancement purposes. You could argue that through these consultations and grant approvals AT A LOCAL LEVEL government at both a STATE and NATIONAL LEVEL were informed about community needs BUT IT WAS NEVER A NATIONAL ADVISORY BODY AS PROPOSED IN THE VOICE. Any suggestion that ATSIC was an advisory body is a straight up LIE.

@info loves talking about corruption except when talking about Morrison Govt corruption etc.

Corruption is a hard word and it infers the worse in human behaviour. Critics of ATSIC love talking about how corrupt the program was and this is why it got shut down. The facts tell a different story.

Yes there was some very isolated examples of (real) corruption but the main issue was local Co-ops providing properly audited accounts showing where the money had been spent. Think about it, you typically had Aboriginal office holders with little education and no background in bookkeeping or financial management expected to manage, in effect, a small - medium business and properly account for every dollar spent. In my experience, the money was spent correctly but properly accounting for it initially was an issue in some Co-ops. The funds were not misused at all and this in my eyes was not corruption.

There is not changing @info but hopefully this addresses some of his baldfaced lies.

Supafreak Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 12:03pm

GuySmiley wrote:
Supafreak wrote:
The Abbott government’s 2014 budget defunded Aboriginal-specific childcare centres, taking away $81 million and the financial support for 38 Aboriginal child and family centres. It cut more than $500 million from Indigenous programs. That has resulted in a decade of lost opportunity for a generation of Aboriginal children. https://www.smh.com.au/national/do-ask-alice-why-my-people-need-a-voice-...

These child and family centres were initially known as Multifunctional Aboriginal Children's Services (MACS) and the initiative/funding came directly from the recommendations of wide ranging Aboriginal Deaths in Custody Royal Commission. I had the overseeing role here in Vic to get them established from the ground up and to ensure their ongoing financial viability. Many were great successes and a positive vehicle to bridge gaps both within the Aboriginal and between the Aboriginal and broader communities (kids from all backgrounds were warmly welcomed). The MACS initiative also created formal early childhood training programs thru the universities and colleges to allow Aboriginal staff to manage/ work in these centres. Typing this I'm remembering the many great community people I had the honour to meet and work with, all now gone. Vale. Sadly, the defunding of these programs is just another example of how the Aboriginal communities have been screwed over.

A prime example of what Professor Marcia Langton is talking about. LNP loved cost cutting everything, especially when it came to indigenous programs. And look where the kids in Alice Springs are now , remember Jacinta Price was on the council in Alice Springs but didn’t do a full term even after assuring everyone she would . Didn’t do zip anyway .

southernraw Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 12:51pm

The dumb get dumber and the ignorant get blinder.
Indo wrote " lets not derail the current topic of the voice and in particular why on earth you would cement something in the constitution that is completely unproven and based on history more likely to fail than succeed."
after i'd written..
"the Australian political sphere currently wholly represents the face of how indigenous people may likely view the loss of their land and culture, as it has for 200 odd years.....
Which i guess is the whole point of changing the constitution, installing an indigenous voice in that same political sphere, to represent the indigenous people of their own country.
One small step, one small gesture, but a shift in consciousness especially for those who carry the burden of intergenerational trauma."
Not sure how this is derailing the conversation when it specifically highlights one of the main reasons indigenous Australians should have a voice in parliament to represent themselves and why it should be put into the constitution.
I think the label of the Andrew Bolt of SN was too kind.
Maybe more this guy.

indo-dreaming Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 1:29pm

GuySmiley wrote:
seeds wrote:
Indo. Who’s penning those tales of history you refer to? Guy made a great counter argument to your position that’s sounds legit. You haven’t responded.
It’s sad that this has been hijacked by political allegiances. Bloody hell, are we becoming the USA.

To correct the record.

@info insists that ATSIC was advisory body and it was shut down because of widespread corruption.

While I personally did not work in/at ATSIC I worked closely with State/Regional Managers and with Project Officers for several years so I have firsthand knowledge of its purpose and its operational procedures. As previously stated above ATSIC's primary role was to provide direct grants at a State ir Regional level to community Co-ops for a range of community advancement purposes. You could argue that through these consultations and grant approvals AT A LOCAL LEVEL government at both a STATE and NATIONAL LEVEL were informed about community needs BUT IT WAS NEVER A NATIONAL ADVISORY BODY AS PROPOSED IN THE VOICE. Any suggestion that ATSIC was an advisory body is a straight up LIE.

@info loves talking about corruption except when talking about Morrison Govt corruption etc.

Corruption is a hard word and it infers the worse in human behaviour. Critics of ATSIC love talking about how corrupt the program was and this is why it got shut down. The facts tell a different story.

Yes there was some very isolated examples of (real) corruption but the main issue was local Co-ops providing properly audited accounts showing where the money had been spent. Think about it, you typically had Aboriginal office holders with little education and no background in bookkeeping or financial management expected to manage, in effect, a small - medium business and properly account for every dollar spent. In my experience, the money was spent correctly but properly accounting for it initially was an issue in some Co-ops. The funds were not misused at all and this in my eyes was not corruption.

There is not changing @info but hopefully this addresses some of his baldfaced lies.

Okay so who are we going to believe some random Guy on an internet forum, who has a history of talking shit, or the most official source possible and from those who over saw the program, the government????

I mean FFS even the government website list ATSIC under " Examples of advisory structures"

And you can see clearly its held many similarities with the voice, is it different yeah sure, Empire strikes back was different to Star Wars too, although the voice is probably more like the Disney sequel's.

https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Former_Co...'s%20Indigenous%20Advisory%20Council&text=The%20IAC%20is%20appointed%20by,for%20up%20to%20three%20years.

I mean FFS if you dont want to believe the government for some reason, i will use possibly the most bias pro indigenous source online " creative spirits" whom even state

"In order to achieve its objectives, ATSIC was to - ADVISE governments at all levels on Aboriginal issues"

https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/selfdetermination/abo...

Anyway its kind of irrelevant really, the main point is, it make's zero sense to cement something in the constitution on the off chance it might work, show us it works then we can talk about cementing in the constitution.

Anyway footy is on.

BTW. I didn't say ATSIC was scrapped because of corruption if you read my statement as such, im sorry thats not what i was suggesting, i was only pointing out it had issues with corruption, i wasn't going into the reasons why it was scrapped.

waveman Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 2:28pm

https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/03/rowan-dean-we-dont-need-a-voice-bec...

truebluebasher Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 3:51pm

Excellent comments here & for a good while now...
Oz most successful Leader's recent Indigenous Referendum was soundly defeated.
Yet not one sole or media wishes to discuss why it failed?

Oct 2007 Liberal Party Indigenous Referendum Election Policy
Voting for...
* {Within 100 days} "Statement of Reconciliation incorporated into Oz Constitution Preamble!"
* Repeal Sect 25 That prevents States from barring Aboriginal Voting!
* {Within 18 months} "2008 > June 2009 Indigenous Referendum"
Referendum Wording : "To Formally Recognize Indigenous Australians in our Constitution, their History as First Inhabitants of our country, their unique heritage of culture & language, their special, though not separate place within a Reconciled, Indivisible Nation!"
https://www.smh.com.au/national/pm-promises-referendum-20071012-gdrbm9.html

(vs)

Nov 2007 Labor Party Indigenous Apology Election Policy
Voting for...
* "No Referendum on Reconciliation in First Term of his Govt, if at all!"
* "Instead would act quickly to make a Formal Apology in New Parliament on behalf of The Nation."

~ Noel Pearson : "Disgraceful abandonment of a Promise and called Rudd a Heartless Snake!"
https://www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/we-will-say-sorry-rudd-200711...

2007 Indigenous Policy Election Results ( Drum Roll )
43.38% ALP (Sorry but No Referendum Ever Party) Gained +5.74% of Vote to win Election!
36.28% Lib (Constitutional Indigenous Referendum Party) Lost -4.62% of vote to lose Election!

PM Howard / Very Popular Leader of Indigenous Referendum Party lost his seat.
Most popular leader of our time > Locked in Stand Alone Indigenous Referendum! (Soundly defeated!)

Anyone surprised that no Party/Media give a shit about 2007 AEC Poll on Indigenous Referendum
Thought not...coz nor do they give a shit about current Indesicive Referendum ramping racism.
Weekly Racial Community Discrimination upon First Nation!
29.7% May 2017
30.2% Dec 2017
54.1% Dec 2018
54.9% Dec 2019
51.0% Dec 2020 (Covid Lockdown Dip > Racists targeted Chinese)
60.0% Nov 2022 (AFL 31.5%)

Expert :"Racism should end sometime next Financial Year on a Saturday somewhere between Oct-Dec."
More Dumbarse Media [Factchecks]
* No mention of Mass rejection of 2007 Indigenous Referendum?
* No mention of Indecisive Next Financial Year thingy ramping Racism to peak on the Day of the Brawl!
* No mention of Date, effectively ransoms Aussie's Spring / Summer Holidays to drive down polls?
* No mention of Govt's disrespectful Indecisiveness legitimizes the Racism by not giving a shit!

Biggest laziest shit faced cowardly fuck up since VIP Rollout...
Just kinda thought that either #1/#2/#3/#4 Referendum Pitfalls might make the News!
Just like the VIP Rollout...can't state the obvious > Hire more Factcheckerz to massage the message!

Green Ant Bully : "AEC / Natcab will likely orchestrate another Mass Covid Spike for Polling Day!"
Only when they agree on their Peak Outbreak date will the crew's Voice be heard! (Cough!)

Then why expect First Nation to enroll or partake in this Shitstorm.
They deserve better...nothing short of a fair go...at least give them that! Please!

PS : Not even started with the Bankrolling of both camps...
Reckon this Referendum falls well outside General AEC Election purse caps.
Coz some are braggin' about $1m backers without raising eyebrows!
Not sure where they hide that rogues gallery.

GuySmiley Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 4:06pm

“ Okay so who are we going to believe some random Guy on an internet forum, who has a history of talking shit, …” @info now you truly do have an insight into how the world sees you!!!

Nice link @info with paragraphs 4:21, - 4:23 fully supporting my point that ATSIC first and foremost was a funding agency….. next

goofyfoot Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 5:06pm

southernraw wrote:
The dumb get dumber and the ignorant get blinder.
Indo wrote " lets not derail the current topic of the voice and in particular why on earth you would cement something in the constitution that is completely unproven and based on history more likely to fail than succeed."
after i'd written..
"the Australian political sphere currently wholly represents the face of how indigenous people may likely view the loss of their land and culture, as it has for 200 odd years.....
Which i guess is the whole point of changing the constitution, installing an indigenous voice in that same political sphere, to represent the indigenous people of their own country.
One small step, one small gesture, but a shift in consciousness especially for those who carry the burden of intergenerational trauma."
Not sure how this is derailing the conversation when it specifically highlights one of the main reasons indigenous Australians should have a voice in parliament to represent themselves and why it should be put into the constitution.
I think the label of the Andrew Bolt of SN was too kind.
Maybe more this guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC7Y04k5Tbo

You’re not resorting to petty personal attacks are you SouthR? You know after you are always on about contributing to a discussion instead of lowering yourself to petty insults?
FWIW it’s been what, 15 years of Indo going against the grain on here? Pissing people off. The lads got stamina!

adam12 Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 6:16pm

Indo "IMHO putting an indigenous person down like Warren because they dont fit the way you think they should based on ethnicity is kinda racist

Obviously you missed the conversation on a similar racial slur "coconut""

I didn't use that term, I am aware of the conversation you refer to. You accused me of using a racial slur, I provided you historical, factual detail on why that term is not a racial slur. You don't agree, fair enough, but don't project your own ignorance and make unfounded accusations at me. My criticism of Warren Mundine is based upon my belief his advocacy against the Voice is as a result of him taking money from The Center for Independent Studies, a libertarian think tank funded by the mining industry who fear the Voice will threaten the unfettered access they have to the common heritage of all Australians, our natural resources. He is a sell out, willing to sacrifice the interests of all Australians, including and more significantly his indigenous brothers and sisters, for money in his own pocket. The CIS recruit sell outs like him, and Jacinta Price, in an attempt to muddy the waters and maintain control of exploiting our country's resources for themselves. That is what I believe, his race and ethnicity is the reason he was recruited and is handsomely paid. That doesn't make me "kinda racist", it reflects like that on his employers, and so called "conservatives" like you who hold him up as a legitimate counter argument to the Referendum on the Voice, when he is just a "paid for Uncle Tom" as I called him.

southernraw Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 6:18pm

goofyfoot wrote:
southernraw wrote:
The dumb get dumber and the ignorant get blinder.
Indo wrote " lets not derail the current topic of the voice and in particular why on earth you would cement something in the constitution that is completely unproven and based on history more likely to fail than succeed."
after i'd written..
"the Australian political sphere currently wholly represents the face of how indigenous people may likely view the loss of their land and culture, as it has for 200 odd years.....
Which i guess is the whole point of changing the constitution, installing an indigenous voice in that same political sphere, to represent the indigenous people of their own country.
One small step, one small gesture, but a shift in consciousness especially for those who carry the burden of intergenerational trauma."
Not sure how this is derailing the conversation when it specifically highlights one of the main reasons indigenous Australians should have a voice in parliament to represent themselves and why it should be put into the constitution.
I think the label of the Andrew Bolt of SN was too kind.
Maybe more this guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC7Y04k5Tbo

You’re not resorting to petty personal attacks are you SouthR? You know after you are always on about contributing to a discussion instead of lowering yourself to petty insults?
FWIW it’s been what, 15 years of Indo going against the grain on here? Pissing people off. The lads got stamina!

Geez you're a bore Goofy. Always have been.
And you've always been his greatest supporter so nothing new there.
Personal attacks?
Nothing personal, just the plain and obvious truth if you read the response...or lack there of to the points i brought up.
Derailing an argument when i'm actually doing the opposite can only be seen,..as well sheer stupidity and ignorance.
Unless you dispute that?

goofyfoot Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 6:32pm

Hahaha well at least I’m consistent, you know, same user name all the time, same boring personality, all that.
That’s another personal attack no??? ;-)
It was just a question anyway. Not a statement.

Indo’s greatest supporter??? Nah.
If you didn’t post blind drunk half the time you would of seen me disagree with Indo plenty of times over the years. In fact the only time I agree or enjoy reading his posts is when he’s actually talking about surfing and specifically surfing in Indonesia.
Most of what he says frustrates me no end.

Anyway I’m signing off for the night, off to organise my sock draw, boring and all that…

southernraw Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 6:42pm

goofyfoot wrote:
Hahaha well at least I’m consistent, you know, same user name all the time, same boring personality, all that.
That’s another personal attack no??? ;-)
It was just a question anyway. Not a statement.

Indo’s greatest supporter??? Nah.
If you didn’t post blind drunk half the time you would of seen me disagree with Indo plenty of times over the years. In fact the only time I agree or enjoy reading his posts is when he’s actually talking about surfing and specifically surfing in Indonesia.
Most of what he says frustrates me no end.

Anyway I’m signing off for the night, off to organise my sock draw, boring and all that…

Well a sock draw is kinda exciting so i guess you get points for that.
Not sure what you've contributed to this convo except jumping in with little sniper attacks without actually stating a stance, that kinda bores me.
And as for different names? I'm pretty sure the person you're referring to got eaten by an indigenous feminist shark of colour somewhere up near the Casino abbotoir. Dunno what yer on about with different names and all.
But will take your points and critique into consideration nonetheless.
Night goofy.

indo-dreaming Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 6:49pm

Ha ha Guy, you do know people can click on the link and see for themselves that you are taking one point of the article " Examples of advisory structures"and ignoring many others that explain the advisory aspects

Yes it also managed funding

And as point 4:10 says "ATSIC consisted of two parts: a representative arm and an administrative arm."

I see Adam is also still trying to save face justifying his racial slurs, dude just let it go that was yesterday., we have all moved on.

What is this national saving face day or something?

adam12 Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 9:04pm

Indo "I see Adam is also still trying to save face justifying his racial slurs, dude just let it go that was yesterday., we have all moved on.

What is this national saving face day or something?"
Typical response from you Indo when you lose an argument, get owned and have nothing but bullshit talking points you glean from Sky News. "Oh, that was yesterday, move on". The Andrew Bolt of Swellnet. Ignorance, stupidity and arrogance on display daily. O.K. let's move on, I'm sure you will provide plenty of new material. Ever wonder why your posts attract almost unanimous dissent?

Supafreak Saturday, 25 Mar 2023 at 9:07pm

indo-dreaming Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 9:35am

adam12 wrote:
Indo "I see Adam is also still trying to save face justifying his racial slurs, dude just let it go that was yesterday., we have all moved on.

What is this national saving face day or something?"
Typical response from you Indo when you lose an argument, get owned and have nothing but bullshit talking points you glean from Sky News. "Oh, that was yesterday, move on". The Andrew Bolt of Swellnet. Ignorance, stupidity and arrogance on display daily. O.K. let's move on, I'm sure you will provide plenty of new material. Ever wonder why your posts attract almost unanimous dissent?

Dude once you had been caught out claiming others are racist while using racial slurs, the best thing to do would be.

A- Not reply and bring more attention to the fact, and learn from your mistake, just let it float on by, these things get forgotten very quickly, generally when comments move on to the next page.

B- Admit you were wrong and move on, it would have been very easy to say "okay Indo you have a point, but i still think, and then bag my points or me, or whatever"

But nah you keep bringing attention to your utter hypocrisy and trying to some how justify your racial slur which just makes your look pathetic.

BTW. No i dont think you are racist because you said that, naive and ignorant 100%, but im not into pointing fingers at people claiming they are racist to try to silence opposing opinion, it's boring, i dont think anyone here is racist.

Im happy to keep talking about this as long as you want, it only works in my favour and against you

But id much prefer we move onto more constructive more civil discussion.

indo-dreaming Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 9:55am

For instance i still havent had one person even try to answer the very simple question of why you would cement something in the constitution that is so unproven???

Why not just implement it as program/policy and even have the opposition agree to a set trial period where its agreed it wont be scrapped???

Better still have things independently assessed at certain time period, if ten years is too short go for fifteen.

Even if people are opposed to a voice and believe its not going to achieve anything, the opposition if it wasn't going to be cemented in the constitution would be far less, and wouldn't need a expensive plebacide and im sure would get up, its called compromise.

What most people have an issue with is changing the constitution because it is not something to be taken lightly and you should have a very good reason to do so and the change should be one that you know is 100% going to work.

To me this is all just political

It's about Labor wanting to appear progressive and Albo wanting some type of legacy.

Its also just a chess move to try to make LNP appear the opposite, hence why LNP need to be smart and not fall for Labor's tactics and make it clear, say they dont oppose the voice as such and willing to test it out to see if it helps, but oppose the changing of the constitution for something that is so unproven.

The plebacide result is also a win win for Albo, no matter the result.

A Yes result- is a victory and gives Albo his legacy win, it keeps progressive's happy who always need things to appear as they are changing, then when nothing changes around indigenous issue's in five years, it will be easy to paint it as being too soon to judge and when no change in ten years or longer thgere will be some other excuse, probably because we dont have a treaty or something, and of course Albo will be long gone by then.

A No result- Labor/Albo can forever claim that the continuing indigenous problems are because there is no voice etc, it will always be the scape goat and if LNP oppose it they will always be the bad guys for opposing it.

Forgot who it was, but we even saw this excuse used by Labor for Alice springs issues, claiming it wouldn't happen if we had a voice..

southernraw Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 10:11am

indo-dreaming wrote:
adam12 wrote:
Indo "I see Adam is also still trying to save face justifying his racial slurs, dude just let it go that was yesterday., we have all moved on.

What is this national saving face day or something?"
Typical response from you Indo when you lose an argument, get owned and have nothing but bullshit talking points you glean from Sky News. "Oh, that was yesterday, move on". The Andrew Bolt of Swellnet. Ignorance, stupidity and arrogance on display daily. O.K. let's move on, I'm sure you will provide plenty of new material. Ever wonder why your posts attract almost unanimous dissent?

Dude once you had been caught out claiming others are racist while using racial slurs, the best thing to do would be.

A- Not reply and bring more attention to the fact, and learn from your mistake, just let it float on by, these things get forgotten very quickly, generally when comments move on to the next page.

B- Admit you were wrong and move on, it would have been very easy to say "okay Indo you have a point, but i still think, and then bag my points or me, or whatever"

But nah you keep bringing attention to your utter hypocrisy and trying to some how justify your racial slur which just makes your look pathetic.

BTW. No i dont think you are racist because you said that, naive and ignorant 100%, but im not into pointing fingers at people claiming they are racist to try to silence opposing opinion, it's boring, i dont think anyone here is racist.

Im happy to keep talking about this as long as you want, it only works in my favour and against you

But id much prefer we move onto more constructive more civil discussion.

WTF?? Haha!

Supafreak Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 10:34am

If only all the First Nations People who put the voice together had first consulted Indo dreaming, he could have set them straight on where they have gone so very wrong. I’m a bit of a dummy and will still be voting yes . I won’t gain or lose anything no matter how Australians vote .

Supafreak Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 10:50am

For instance i still havent had one person even try to answer the very simple question of why you would cement something in the constitution that is so unproven???Indo's dreaming……..” And we know from the evidence that what improves people’s lives is when they get a say. And that’s what this is about.” Marcia Langton…….. Many were great successes and a positive vehicle to bridge gaps both within the Aboriginal and between the Aboriginal and broader communities .Guy Smiley……….some get it some don’t.

GuySmiley Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 11:00am

“ For instance i still havent had one person even try to answer the very simple question of why you would cement something in the constitution that is so unproven??? …”

Two things

First, your question ignores the unquestionable fact that when the Australian constitution was written and enacted by parliament the entire document, every single word, phrase, sentence, paragraph and page was unproven…. So using @info logic the founding fathers shouldn’t have bothered

Second, why would anyone bother? You’re not for changing your opinion on anything, never have never will, you’re only here to antagonise.

seeds Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 11:10am

It needs to be in the constitution so it can’t be scrapped. If it isn’t working it has to be fixed no matter who’s in power.

groundswell Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 12:49pm

Anyone a fan of giving indigenous folk of summer cloud mission housing estate the break back to them?
Aussies have ruined it and maybe they deserve a quality break to themselves?

adam12 Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 1:01pm

Indo, again, below is the reason why 'Uncle Tom' is NOT a racial slur, written by a highly credentialed African American scholar, read it, then fucken google "Is Uncle Tom a racial slur" and you will find reams of material why is is not regarded as a racial slur, not here, not in the US. That's what I did. The only racist here is you,
As for your "A- Not reply and bring more attention to the fact, and learn from your mistake, just let it float on by, these things get forgotten very quickly, generally when comments move on to the next page.

B- Admit you were wrong and move on, it would have been very easy to say "okay Indo you have a point, but i still think, and then bag my points or me, or whatever"

A. I am not mistaken, you are. You may forget things quickly, I don't.
B. I have no problems admitting I am wrong when I am, do it all the time, but on this matter I took the time to read up on the topic and found I was correct. You didn't, you ignored what i posted and went on with your mistaken bullshit accusation in a lame attempt to discredit me, and defend Mundine, the black man selling out his own people, the very definition of an "Uncle Tom". As for saying "okay Indo you have a point,'" I doubt that would ever occur because the 'points' you make are usually so fucken' stupid and laced with anti left Sky news trolling that they never qualify as 'good'. If you ever do make a good point I will go out of my way to let you know.

""Is “Uncle Tom” a racial slur?
No.
Uncle Tom was a character in the book, “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” written by Harriet Beecher Stowe, and published in 1852. Though a novel, the book was groundbreaking and a runaway bestseller, chiefly because it exposed the realities of slavery to people who had no personal experience or knowledge of the abhorrent custom. Harriet Beecher Stowe was an unabashed abolitionist, and her goal in writing the novel was to expose slavery in all its ugly reality. In the book, Uncle Tom is eventually murdered by a slave master.

When President Lincoln met Stowe in 1862, he is alleged to have said, “So you're the little woman who wrote the book that made this Great War?”

It wasn’t until 1919 that the term “Uncle Tom” became an insult, used when a black person condemns another black person for kowtowing to white authority, or for being excessively subservient to whites. The term in its new meaning was coined by Rev. George Alexander McGuire, who in a speech to the first meeting of the Universal Negro Improvement Association, proclaimed, “the Uncle Tom nigger has got to go, and his place must be taken by the new leader of the Negro race, not a black man with a white heart, but a black man with a black heart."

Today, it’s one of the greatest insults a black person can apply to another black person. It’s derogatory and condemnatory, but it isn’t “racist.”." by James Keenley, Educator/Author (from Quora)

I have been guilty many times in my life of making racial slurs, I've slurred many people many times, not just racially. I've slurred you on these pages often. I have no problem admitting that to you or anyone. But calling Mundine an Uncle Tom is not racially slurring him, it is more a statement of fact and how indigenous Australians I know and others I follow on twitter regard him.
Also, why did you respond again? I thought it was "yesterdays news" and we were "moving on" in your words.

Supafreak Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 1:30pm

I bothered to google it . https://theconversation.com/how-uncle-tom-still-impacts-racial-politics-... https://www.theroot.com/when-uncle-tom-became-an-insult-1790879561 plenty of articles on the meaning, I’m sure Andrew will dismiss them though.

blackers Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 1:39pm

seeds wrote:
It needs to be in the constitution so it can’t be scrapped. If it isn’t working it has to be fixed no matter who’s in power.

Yup.

truebluebasher Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 1:59pm

Previous Referendum was Govt Funded $7m each No / Yes.
ALBO : "2023 Voice has Zero Govt Funding for Campaigns".

Earlier tbb stated this dodgy Reffo funding needed a closer look.

Govt reckon Reffo will fall under Fed Election Guidelines...But!
Parliament are now voting on a swathe of flexi changes in Machinery Bill.
Govt weren't even gonna run a Reffo flyer but all opposition forced them to do so!

$160m Reffo Reserve (Standard)
2023 ~ $75m for Referendum (Breakdown)
$52.6m AEC / Ads
$16.1m for Indigenous Enrollment (Only!) No Youth / Migrant enrolment in Package.
$6.5m Structure Groups
Govt assures no funding is directed to Yes camp?

Aboriginal Voting Roll (Guide 2016-58% represents as 50%)
Crew may recall recent Fed Election / Vax fuck ups in these departments!
Different States / Fed Counting methods
Only 20-30% of First Nation cast Legitimate AEC approved Votes!
Usually one super picky glitch of Protocol voids their Vote.

2017-74.7% > 2018-76.4% > 2019-76.6% > 2020-78% > 2021-79.3%
2022(Mid) 81.9% > 2022(end) 84.6% ...[Oz Roll 97.2 was ramped by Gay Vote Yes Plebiscite]
Voice campaign is likewise driving up Aboriginal Voters on Roll (But > 87,000 still not on roll)
Facts :10% higher than reality as many First Nation live off Grid...(Re: Birth / Fear / Law)
Mostly in Reffo Battle ground wild frontier states WA / Qld...(Can shift some votes here & here!)

Here's the State of Play (Each Fed Election lowers Govt Vote > now 32.58% lowest % Govt ever!
It makes sense to lock in low hanging fruit...Scomo tried to suppress First Nation votes in swing seats.
15 marginal Aboriginal Seats (5-7 are locked in...not expected to be affected by Voice)

(Voice Prize) 8-10 Aboriginal Swing seats with up to 3% margin over Last 2 elections
Be easy for Govt to lock these seats in by way of parenting a personalized Voice. (Win / Lose / Draw)
Especially if ya can send the bill to Tax payers...saves on Party trying to buy votes!

Voice corruptly by default targets (Only/Strictly) Black Voters (vs) No campaign targets ALL voters!

(Examples)
YES Campaign (Voice support Down + Racist Attacks Up = Aboriginal Enrollment is Skyrocketing)
First Nation enrollment is the Priority to lock in Left Vote...by prolonging the Voice Chaos.
ALP : Voice campaigning is fast winning over 8-10 First Nation Seats (Locking in 3 terms Govt)
Oz UN :"Everyone Should Vote"
Get Up : Same Day Rego
https://www.sbs.com.au/nitv/article/calls-to-boost-indigenous-voter-numb...
Greens : Same Day Rego + Full Prisoner Votes + More Phone Votes
https://nit.com.au/22-03-2023/5356/greens-push-to-allow-prisoners-to-vot...
Ind : Total Social Media Lockout > Trolls!

All Yes groups are corrupting Policy & Funds to Boost Only / Strictly Aboriginal Vote by Default.
Recall All Posh White Parties Campaigned on 2022 Red Hot Yuppie Youth Vote Agenda !
See: Can't mention that Now...Only Black Vote is precious for 2023 Poll...(Parties are openly Corrupt!)
tbb tries to take these AEC Voting Matters seriously...never once kept a straight face!

NO Campaign...Try to curb Aboriginal Votes as Scomo Aboriginal Voter ID Checks aimed to do in 2022!
One Nation : Run poll with Next Election to curb Roll Uptake + New Citizen Votes (Drown out the Voice!)
(Pause!) Why else would Pauline wish for New Migrants to Vote...ever...Full Stop! C'mon?

Each side is Openly corrupting Aboriginal Vote Numbers...too late to call a Fair Reffo!

Machinery Act... In parliament.
By default this act will fudge hand outs to Yes Campaign messaging thru "Voice Awareness"
But also scrutinizes No vote with trendy [Factchecking] Can display 2 Extreme machinery examples...
tbb recalls one might have Govt Machining Link...maybe!
https://blog.google/intl/en-au/three-ways-were-helping-australians-prepa...
https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/03/big-tech-only-wants-to-hear-one-voice/
Pretty sure our learned crew are across this mandated machine like censorship to protect sacred Vote!

Tax (Deductible Gift Status)
Govt 'back granted' Yes Team DGR (July 2022- June 2025) but have so far refused NO camps DGR
See: Machinery Bill >
Once No Voice has Voice Box removed or Vote to Muzzle themselves > Then Albo will grant NO DGR.

Referendum YES/NO Backers are kept off register until 24 weeks after Referendum.
MSM say they can't say, but tbb easily tracked down Main Patrons / Player's Contributions & amounts.
There is enough big noting about to reasonably check on current accountability of Vote!

YES ~ AICR - Australians for Indigenous Constitutional Recognition
YES 23 (Official Site)
https://yes23.com.au/
Here's the Earlier Kitchen Table Teal Style Promo YES site...
Important to share that Vic Teals zhooshed up the YES marketing.
https://togetheryes.com.au/our-team

Patrons : Former Lib Director Tony Nutt / Noel Pearson / Wesfarmer M.Chaney / AFL Exec Tania Hosch
Backers : $5m Paul Ramsay Foundation
$1m Anthony Pratt VISY (Usually backs Libs $1.3m > ALP $10k)
23rd March : Total $9.5m
Current Total $10m (W.Mundine confirms YES has Double Figure Millions (vs) their Single Millions)

NO ~ Advance Australia (Fund Raiser) > Fair Australia (80,000 Members)
MSM think they're different groups but they're one of the same beast.
Can see that here....bring up both, even the whole Trio.
https://www.advanceaustralia.org.au/
https://www.fairaustralia.com.au/
https://ipa.org.au/people-ipa
Patrons : (Main Players) Jacinta Price / Tony Abbott
Backer : MSM try to pretend it's some Mystery Man...(Puppet Master > Simon Fenwick)
Notice Simon hand picks former PM as a plaything for IPA / Advance Australia
http://newharvestim.com/our-team/simon-fenwick/
S. Fenwick is Finance wizard on Ed' boards > funds Oldschool / Unis > 1st nation Student grants.
re: Ring Master > Anti Vax Rallies / Climate change denier.
Big but silent Qld Player > Targets purse strings of Grumpy Qld Seniors to back his agenda.
Promised to match Dollar 4 Dollar - Yes Campaign
Qldurr tbb apologizes for failing to connect conservative Qldurrz Simon / Clive
Simon's Hand outs to Advance Australia No Vote.
2020 = $1m
2021 = $650K + $350K
Feb 2022 = $1.3m + End 2022 $1m
March 2023 = $250K
Fair Australia Group are also oddly...currently raising their own $500K

NO ~ Recognise a Better Way
https://www.recogniseabetterway.org.au/
Patrons : Former ALP Gary Johns / Warren Mundine / Alan Jones / Barnaby Joyce / Pauline Hanson
(Heads up!) Last 2 wrecking balls will soon obliterate your Towns...gonna get real wild...real soon!
Funding is said to be 20% of big Players...mostly small backers.
Current Total = $2m
Pauline has suggested to divert "Recognise" funding to Tax Free 'One Nation' kitty for better Value!

NO ~ Black Greens (Withdrawn) Lidia Thorpe "The Loudest Voice"
See: CPAC row "Warren Mundine CPAC" Power Grab to lure the Loudest Voice as a money spinner!
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/09/lidia-thorpe-shoc...

Round Up...of all Groups
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/20/voice-referendum-...

Reckon we're all gifted with equal Voice now...Happy to share!

indo-dreaming Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 2:35pm

Supafreak wrote:
I bothered to google it . https://theconversation.com/how-uncle-tom-still-impacts-racial-politics-... https://www.theroot.com/when-uncle-tom-became-an-insult-1790879561 plenty of articles on the meaning, I’m sure Andrew will dismiss them though.

Look dude interesting historically aspects of the word are irrelevant, it's a slur based on ethnicity, its' a slur that suggest that people of one ethnicity dont think and act the way a stereo type view of them suggest they should.

That very fact means its a racial slur.

People like you and Adam absolutely hate the fact there is people of colour who dont think the way you believe they should, (which is generally as victims) that's why you attack people like Jacinta price or Avi so much.

indo-dreaming Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 2:44pm

blackers wrote:
seeds wrote:
It needs to be in the constitution so it can’t be scrapped. If it isn’t working it has to be fixed no matter who’s in power.

Yup.

Ha ha classic the typical arrogance of progressives .

So much for proper discussion, i guess there really is no reason other than i dont want my thing changed cause im right, i have to be right, so i dont want anybody changing it.

At least your honest i guess.

southernraw Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 3:00pm

indo-dreaming wrote:
blackers wrote:
seeds wrote:
It needs to be in the constitution so it can’t be scrapped. If it isn’t working it has to be fixed no matter who’s in power.

Yup.

Ha ha classic the typical arrogance of progressives .

So much for proper discussion, i guess there really is no reason other than i dont want my thing changed cause im right, i have to be right, so i dont want anybody changing it.

At least your honest i guess.

Hey Indo.
I listed some pretty damn good reasons a few posts above based around the last 200 years of politics in Australia primarily being based in the Western way of thinking and also around the topic of trauma and asked for your thoughts on it and how it relates to why this is one of the fundamental reasons that the constitution should be changed...yet...you completely dismissed it and keep carrying on about how nobody can tell you why it should go ahead.
I'm challenging you to address the issue of trauma, inter-generational trauma in Indigenous Australian history, and how it may possibly contribute to todays issues as well as the opportunity for indigenous Australians to finally establish a permanent place in what has been a Westernized, colonizers politics and parliament.
What are your thoughts on this trauma and how it plays out to the current day?

indo-dreaming Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 4:06pm

southernraw wrote:
indo-dreaming wrote:
blackers wrote:
seeds wrote:
It needs to be in the constitution so it can’t be scrapped. If it isn’t working it has to be fixed no matter who’s in power.

Yup.

Ha ha classic the typical arrogance of progressives .

So much for proper discussion, i guess there really is no reason other than i dont want my thing changed cause im right, i have to be right, so i dont want anybody changing it.

At least your honest i guess.

Hey Indo.
I listed some pretty damn good reasons a few posts above based around the last 200 years of politics in Australia primarily being based in the Western way of thinking and also around the topic of trauma and asked for your thoughts on it and how it relates to why this is one of the fundamental reasons that the constitution should be changed...yet...you completely dismissed it and keep carrying on about how nobody can tell you why it should go ahead.
I'm challenging you to address the issue of trauma, inter-generational trauma in Indigenous Australian history, and how it may possibly contribute to todays issues as well as the opportunity for indigenous Australians to finally establish a permanent place in what has been a Westernized, colonizers politics and parliament.
What are your thoughts on this trauma and how it plays out to the current day?

@southernraw

Do you honestly want to go over that whole issue again???

I honestly dont think it's going to do anyone any good rehashing that old ground as we both know we strongly disagree with each other in these areas, i disagree strongly about your views and also believe they are extremely damaging to Indigenous people who believe them, and i know the views that i hold you dont agree with at all and probably feel they are damaging to Indigenous people, so unless we can really bring something new to the discussion(which i highly doubt) is it really worth it?

We both know it's just going to end up getting heated and a little ugly, just seems a little pointless to do it again when its all been said before, maybe if i had read a book on it recently i might have motivation to do it again, but i kind of lack the motivation at the moment..

Also i think it would get pretty old very quick for everyone who has read it all before.

Plus to be honest while there isn't much i agree with you on, as strange as it must sound i actually have a soft spot for you, while i dont agree with you on the whole Covid/freedom thing, i did like the fact you could think for yourself and not just go, hey my political/.social ideology is this and atomically take this set view on Covid or lockdowns etc, so you earnt respect from me there. (not that you care, im just saying)

And while i still don't think you were totally correct, with the beauty of hindsight i do think you and others had some decent points, i do think we went to far, i guess i also just wanted to get back to Indo :D (basically get your jab karnts so we can get this shit over with)

Plus after seeing your facebook profile last year or whatever i saw you were just a normal surfer, real profile pic, feed not full of political garbage, basically someone that in real life id most likely get along with and just disagree on politics/social issues that i rarely talk about in real life anyway.

Oh and i notice you are one of the rare people here that can apologies or admit they are wrong sometimes ( i recal us making peace after it got heated one day), basically i think your a good guy, we just dont agree on a lot of shit, while many other people here that i disagree with i think are just complete tossers.

Ha ha sorry for the honest compliments, just telling it how i see it, you can still bag the shit out of me, im cool with that no offence taken :D

Maybe in the future id be up for doing it all again, but not now, heart just wouldn't be in it.

southernraw Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 5:29pm

indo-dreaming wrote:
southernraw wrote:
indo-dreaming wrote:
blackers wrote:
seeds wrote:
It needs to be in the constitution so it can’t be scrapped. If it isn’t working it has to be fixed no matter who’s in power.

Yup.

Geez Indo. How can i possibly be mean to you now!!!!! Bastard!!
Nah was thinking the same, don't wanna get into a heated tit for tat, but thought i may have raised some valid points to answer your question about the referendum. But you're right, we'll never see eye to eye on it, so will have to just agree to disagree and i'll try not to take that personally.
Yeah no doubt about it, you're a goer. And i respect that.
Can't always agree on everything but no doubt could sit down and have a beer and accept the differences that we do have.
Cheers for your honest response and kind words.
Thats a great trait and i respect that.
Now if only we could get you over to barrack for the Bombers instead of bloody Collingwood!

Ha ha classic the typical arrogance of progressives .

So much for proper discussion, i guess there really is no reason other than i dont want my thing changed cause im right, i have to be right, so i dont want anybody changing it.

At least your honest i guess.

Hey Indo.
I listed some pretty damn good reasons a few posts above based around the last 200 years of politics in Australia primarily being based in the Western way of thinking and also around the topic of trauma and asked for your thoughts on it and how it relates to why this is one of the fundamental reasons that the constitution should be changed...yet...you completely dismissed it and keep carrying on about how nobody can tell you why it should go ahead.
I'm challenging you to address the issue of trauma, inter-generational trauma in Indigenous Australian history, and how it may possibly contribute to todays issues as well as the opportunity for indigenous Australians to finally establish a permanent place in what has been a Westernized, colonizers politics and parliament.
What are your thoughts on this trauma and how it plays out to the current day?

@southernraw

Do you honestly want to go over that whole issue again???

I honestly dont think it's going to do anyone any good rehashing that old ground as we both know we strongly disagree with each other in these areas, i disagree strongly about your views and also believe they are extremely damaging to Indigenous people who believe them, and i know the views that i hold you dont agree with at all and probably feel they are damaging to Indigenous people, so unless we can really bring something new to the discussion(which i highly doubt) is it really worth it?

We both know it's just going to end up getting heated and a little ugly, just seems a little pointless to do it again when its all been said before, maybe if i had read a book on it recently i might have motivation to do it again, but i kind of lack the motivation at the moment..

Also i think it would get pretty old very quick for everyone who has read it all before.

Plus to be honest while there isn't much i agree with you on, as strange as it must sound i actually have a soft spot for you, while i dont agree with you on the whole Covid/freedom thing, i did like the fact you could think for yourself and not just go, hey my political/.social ideology is this and atomically take this set view on Covid or lockdowns etc, so you earnt respect from me there. (not that you care, im just saying)

And while i still don't think you were totally correct, with the beauty of hindsight i do think you and others had some decent points, i do think we went to far, i guess i also just wanted to get back to Indo :D (basically get your jab karnts so we can get this shit over with)

Plus after seeing your facebook profile last year or whatever i saw you were just a normal surfer, real profile pic, feed not full of political garbage, basically someone that in real life id most likely get along with and just disagree on politics/social issues that i rarely talk about in real life anyway.

Oh and i notice you are one of the rare people here that can apologies or admit they are wrong sometimes ( i recal us making peace after it got heated one day), basically i think your a good guy, we just dont agree on a lot of shit, while many other people here that i disagree with i think are just complete tossers.

Ha ha sorry for the honest compliments, just telling it how i see it, you can still bag the shit out of me, im cool with that no offence taken :D

Maybe in the future id be up for doing it all again, but not now, heart just wouldn't be in it.

southernraw Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 5:33pm

indo-dreaming wrote:
southernraw wrote:
iGeez Indo. How can i possibly be mean to you now!!!!! Bastard!!
Nah was thinking the samendo-dreaming wrote:
blackers wrote:
seeds wrote:
It needs to be in the constitution so it can’t be scrapped. If it isn’t working it has to be fixed no matter who’s in power.

Yup.

, don't wanna get into a heated tit for tat, but thought i may have raised some valid points to answer your question about the referendum. But you're right, we'll never see eye to eye on it, so will have to just agree to disagree and i'll try not to take that personally.
Yeah no doubt about it, you're a goer. And i respect that.
Can't always agree on everything but no doubt could sit down and have a beer and accept the differences that we do have.
Cheers for your honest response and kind words.
Thats a great trait and i respect that.
Now if only we could get you over to barrack for the Bombers instead of bloody Collingwood!

Ha ha classic the typical arrogance of progressives .

So much for proper discussion, i guess there really is no reason other than i dont want my thing changed cause im right, i have to be right, so i dont want anybody changing it.

At least your honest i guess.

Hey Indo.
I listed some pretty damn good reasons a few posts above based around the last 200 years of politics in Australia primarily being based in the Western way of thinking and also around the topic of trauma and asked for your thoughts on it and how it relates to why this is one of the fundamental reasons that the constitution should be changed...yet...you completely dismissed it and keep carrying on about how nobody can tell you why it should go ahead.
I'm challenging you to address the issue of trauma, inter-generational trauma in Indigenous Australian history, and how it may possibly contribute to todays issues as well as the opportunity for indigenous Australians to finally establish a permanent place in what has been a Westernized, colonizers politics and parliament.
What are your thoughts on this trauma and how it plays out to the current day?

@southernraw

Do you honestly want to go over that whole issue again???

I honestly dont think it's going to do anyone any good rehashing that old ground as we both know we strongly disagree with each other in these areas, i disagree strongly about your views and also believe they are extremely damaging to Indigenous people who believe them, and i know the views that i hold you dont agree with at all and probably feel they are damaging to Indigenous people, so unless we can really bring something new to the discussion(which i highly doubt) is it really worth it?

We both know it's just going to end up getting heated and a little ugly, just seems a little pointless to do it again when its all been said before, maybe if i had read a book on it recently i might have motivation to do it again, but i kind of lack the motivation at the moment..

Also i think it would get pretty old very quick for everyone who has read it all before.

Plus to be honest while there isn't much i agree with you on, as strange as it must sound i actually have a soft spot for you, while i dont agree with you on the whole Covid/freedom thing, i did like the fact you could think for yourself and not just go, hey my political/.social ideology is this and atomically take this set view on Covid or lockdowns etc, so you earnt respect from me there. (not that you care, im just saying)

And while i still don't think you were totally correct, with the beauty of hindsight i do think you and others had some decent points, i do think we went to far, i guess i also just wanted to get back to Indo :D (basically get your jab karnts so we can get this shit over with)

Plus after seeing your facebook profile last year or whatever i saw you were just a normal surfer, real profile pic, feed not full of political garbage, basically someone that in real life id most likely get along with and just disagree on politics/social issues that i rarely talk about in real life anyway.

Oh and i notice you are one of the rare people here that can apologies or admit they are wrong sometimes ( i recal us making peace after it got heated one day), basically i think your a good guy, we just dont agree on a lot of shit, while many other people here that i disagree with i think are just complete tossers.

Ha ha sorry for the honest compliments, just telling it how i see it, you can still bag the shit out of me, im cool with that no offence taken :D

Maybe in the future id be up for doing it all again, but not now, heart just wouldn't be in it.

Geez Indo. How can i possibly be mean to you now!!!!! Bastard!!
Nah was thinking the same, don't wanna get into a heated tit for tat, but thought i may have raised some valid points to answer your question about the referendum. But you're right, we'll never see eye to eye on it, so will have to just agree to disagree and i'll try not to take that personally.
Yeah no doubt about it, you're a goer. And i respect that.
Can't always agree on everything but no doubt could sit down and have a beer and accept the differences that we do have.
Cheers for your honest response and kind words.
Thats a great trait and i respect that.
Now if only we could get you over to barrack for the Bombers instead of bloody Collingwood!

southernraw Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 6:17pm

Up the Mighty Bombers!
A microcosm into the referendum? hehe.
https://www.sen.com.au/news/2022/11/11/essendon-hopes-key-appointment-wi...

AndyM Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 6:38pm

And we're off and racing.

"South Australia becomes first state to enact Indigenous voice to parliament."

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/26/south-australia-b...

seeds Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 6:58pm

indo-dreaming wrote:
blackers wrote:
seeds wrote:
It needs to be in the constitution so it can’t be scrapped. If it isn’t working it has to be fixed no matter who’s in power.

Yup.

Ha ha classic the typical arrogance of progressives .

So much for proper discussion, i guess there really is no reason other than i dont want my thing changed cause im right, i have to be right, so i dont want anybody changing it.

At least your honest i guess.

It has nothing to do with our arrogance and I’m no progressive.
It is actually the reason!
I didn’t come up with it even though I agree with it. I also would be pleased that constitutionally First Nations are recognised as such. As Supa said, I don’t gain or lose anything if it gets up. Same goes for you Indo so it begs the question why some are so vehemently against it.

southernraw Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 6:58pm

AndyM wrote:
And we're off and racing.

"South Australia becomes first state to enact Indigenous voice to parliament."

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/26/south-australia-b...

Bloody ripper Andy M.
Momentum is growing.
I can only see good things coming out of this movement if it goes' all the way.

AndyM Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 7:09pm

Yep, there's momentum building.
And once again, it makes you wonder why people would be so strongly against it.
Maybe some would just prefer more milk in the coffee, so to speak.

southernraw Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 7:21pm

I think the good thing is, as this referendum gets closer, we'll see all the racists come out of the closet.
I think the bad thing is, as this referendum gets closer we'll see all the racists come out of the closet.
And just to be clear, that has nothing to do with any of the posters on here. I think it's a fair and robust conversation.
But i've already been bailed up 3 times by rich, white property owners (in the millions) who have felt that they need to tell me about how bad aboriginal people are and how they'll definitely be voting no in the referendum. Without provocation. Like i'm some kind of sounding board for their outright racism because i'm friendly..and white?
To the person i put my views straight back in their faces and now they all avoid me. haha.
Watch this as it unfolds because this topic is going to make alot of people very uncomfortable.
And i think it's a good question posed by Seeds on why you would oppose it as well if it doesn't affect you either way.

indo-dreaming Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 7:42pm

seeds wrote:
indo-dreaming wrote:
blackers wrote:
seeds wrote:
It needs to be in the constitution so it can’t be scrapped. If it isn’t working it has to be fixed no matter who’s in power.

Yup.

Ha ha classic the typical arrogance of progressives .

So much for proper discussion, i guess there really is no reason other than i dont want my thing changed cause im right, i have to be right, so i dont want anybody changing it.

At least your honest i guess.

It has nothing to do with our arrogance and I’m no progressive.
It is actually the reason!
I didn’t come up with it even though I agree with it. I also would be pleased that constitutionally First Nations are recognised as such. As Supa said, I don’t gain or lose anything if it gets up. Same goes for you Indo so it begs the question why some are so vehemently against it.

With all respect thats not at all a reason, it makes no sense and if you see below legal experts seem to suggest it's not possible to "amended or improve" once in the constitution as you suggest.

This is possibly the best information i can find on the issue around the question and it's from a very good source "WA law society journal" but is re published here, unfortunately it doesn't allow you to copy and paste so I took a screen shot of the bit about the constitution aspect, the rest of the article is also a real good read, one of the best reads ive read on the issue. (funny enough these experts in law also see ATSIC as an advisory body too)

https://www.businessnews.com.au/article/Seven-questions-before-the-Voice...

Here is the credentials of the author, as you can see it seems to be his area of expertise.

BTW. Im not opposed to a voice as such, only opposed to things being cemented in the constitution without any real reason other than playing politics.

PS. Cheers Southernraw

southernraw Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 7:34pm

Cheers Indo.

adam12 Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 7:57pm

You could refer to an article written by Bert DeVilliers in the WA Law Society Journal, an academic, or you could refer to two former Chief Justices of the High Court of Australia, Murray Gleeson, a Howard appointment and Robert French, also former President of the Australian Association of Constitutional Law, a Gillard appointment.
"On July 18, the former chief justice of the High Court of Australia, Murray Gleeson, delivered a powerful endorsement of the proposal for constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples through a First Nations Voice, describing it as a “worthwhile project”.

Two weeks later, another former chief justice, Robert French, wrote an essay in The Australian explaining that the constitutional entrenchment of a First Nations Voice would be part of Australians’ journey to know “who we are as a nation”. "
https://theconversation.com/a-worthwhile-project-why-two-chief-justices-...
I wonder who's opinions would carry more weight?

adam12 Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 8:38pm

Further to my comment above, if you read what De Villiers has written, you will see the fundamental misunderstanding he has in how The Voice proposal works, The principle of the existence of a Voice is what is proposed in the referendum, not it's operation, that is a matter of passing legislation. So if the body becomes flawed it does not require another referendum, but more legislation. He doesn't understand what is being proposed and frankly, as someone with a Law Degree, I can say I'm glad he wasn't my Con.Law lecturer.

Supafreak Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 9:08pm

@adam 12 , don’t think your link is working, is this what you were posting ? https://theconversation.com/a-worthwhile-project-why-two-chief-justices-...

seeds Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 9:45pm

Adam12 said
‘The principle of the existence of a Voice is what is proposed in the referendum, not it's operation, that is a matter of passing legislation. So if the body becomes flawed it does not require another referendum, but more legislation.’
What I said but a hell of a lot better.
I’ve understood this from early on by reading rather briefly on the proposal. Blackers seems to be onto it. Missed by Indo and ilk? I don’t think so. You’re conservative overlord Spud and his subordinates will have a hand in the legislative side of things if the Voice passes. Spud knows this but he’s certainly not been forthcoming with the Australian people.

adam12 Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 10:07pm

seeds wrote:
Adam12 said
‘The principle of the existence of a Voice is what is proposed in the referendum, not it's operation, that is a matter of passing legislation. So if the body becomes flawed it does not require another referendum, but more legislation.’
What I said but a hell of a lot better.
I’ve understood this from early on by reading rather briefly on the proposal. Blackers seems to be onto it. Missed by Indo and ilk? I don’t think so. You’re conservative overlord Spud and his subordinates will have a hand in the legislative side of things if the Voice passes. Spud knows this but he’s certainly not been forthcoming with the Australian people.

Yep, Indo's academic doesn't know what he's talking about. Here's one who does;
"What does constitutional enshrinement mean?

To say the Voice is “constitutionally enshrined” does not mean all of the detail of its design is put into the Constitution. It also does not mean it can only be changed with a referendum.

Rather, it means the core function of the Voice should be included in the Constitution, alongside a power enabling the Commonwealth parliament to determine its composition, powers and procedures in legislation.

As former Chief Justice of Australia Murray Gleeson explained, the Voice would be “constitutionally entrenched but legislatively controlled”.

This establishes a balance between a constitutional protection of the Voice while allowing it to be adapted to future circumstances." By Gabrielle Appleby from UNSW
https://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/general/indigenous-voice-must-be-enshr...

adam12 Sunday, 26 Mar 2023 at 10:45pm

Supa, here's the link again
https://theconversation.com/a-worthwhile-project-why-two-chief-justices-...
(a-worthwhile-project-why-two-chief-justices-support-the-voice-to-parliament-and-why-that-matters-12097)
Yeah, it keeps linking to a footy article so I have included the title of the article above, although it just worked when I tried it again.

first
previous
…
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
…
next
last

The Necessity of Reparation for Historic Injustices

Quick Links

About

User