Discussion about this post

User's avatar
KP's avatar

Thank you for writing this. I voted 'no'. I'm not even on social media and I copped the dynamics you are talking about here. I also deeply dislike (in my nature unfortunately) being told "Do this or you're a *insert socially ostracizing label here*." I'm not stupid, all I needed to change my mind was ONE actual reason with some serious rationality behind it and I would have voted differently. No one made a compelling argument other than some vague sentiment/vibe/whatever the kids are calling it these days and the Yes campaign UTTERLY screwed the pooch and our good will with it.

First nations people are my fellow citizens and its shameful that they experience ridiculous levels of poverty and social problems. We should do better, we should be taking a subsidiarity approach to these problems and allow the people closest to the problem to take the initiative in solving them. Bureaucrats in Canberra have ZERO idea of what it is like to be in Wadeye, Santa Teresa or even Alice Springs (I only know second hand from former Parish Priests who lived there, and family members who lived there until recently). They should be taking direction from people who actually live there, not the other way around.

I'm just as disappointed (but not surprised) and I'm bracing for the ridiculous wailing and gnashing of teeth about how all of us first or second generation immigrants are ignoramus racists. I wish you did publish that piece you were talking about. Far more shameful than this whole debacle is that a (rare) decent and intelligent academic cannot make a contrarian public statement without having their reputation or their position threatened.

Expand full comment
Emby's avatar

I am so glad you wrote this

I have a very similar background to you - I don't absolutely *know* that my black g-g-g-grandfather was aboriginal rather than some other sort of black ethnicity since nobody put his name on the birth certificate, but racism certainly impacted his visibly black daughter and granddaughter, given what society was like at the time.

Among the many many problems I saw with *this* implementation of recognition is this - if the Voice had been in existence 50 years ago I'm quite certain that my grandmother would have signed up as a person of Indigenous ancestry in order to vote in it, rather than "passing" and forgetting about the inconvenient branches of her family tree, as was quite easy for her to do. And then, what mechanism is there to stop first my mother then my middle class privately educated child-of-two-PhDs self from also being counted as part of the Indigenous community, despite having no disadvantage to overcome?

There is such a strong taboo over putting any bounds on people's membership of an identity group that they wish to claim membership of that I see no way of preventing people like me - of some Indigenous heritage but no actual disadvantage - from overrunning this body which is supposed to help out those with actual cultural difference and actual disadvantage. And there are probably hundreds of thousands of us, and it's a group that is clearly growing much faster than the seriously disadvantaged and culturally distinct groups that we actually want to help.

The handwaving of serious issues like this (or unwillingness to even see that this could be a problem) has been a serious impediment to my having any belief that the Voice could actually acheive progress in the very difficult task which would have been before it.

Expand full comment
32 more comments...

No posts