The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Okay, so they’re going to run the last couple of dozen runs slowly.
Nearly there now, though going by your record today there could still be a surprise. I have to say, I'd organised my day around this match and it's been a huge one-sided disappointment. Shame.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Now! Please, don't do that. Posters' children and grandchildrten are off limits.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
Sounds like Pidgin. Not a tongue for prissy circumlocution.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
No.
HYUFD no more speaks for Australians than he speaks for Red Wallers.
He projects his own racism onto others quite routinely.
Sorry but I don’t agree HYUFD is racist, he might not have more modern sensibilities but I have never seen him post anything that’s actually racist so a bit of a harsh slur. If he has posted anything that’s clearly “racist” then I take it back but labelling someone a racist is quite wrong if not true.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
I don’t know what her views on cultural and similar matters are. She attends a rather exclusive school in Bangkok so she may not share my generally liberal outlook. Her father supports Chelsea, which is a matter of concern.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke - just respect for First Nation peoples just as Christ would have said
You parade your Christianity but it is not the Christianity I recognise but a bigoted view that has no place in Christinity
He ended the press conference with a quote from former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, “Success is not final - failure is not fatal - it is the courage to continue that counts.”
“We intend is a government to continue to do what we can to close the gap, to do what we can, to advance reconciliation, to do what we can to listen to the first Australians,” Albanese said.* (Corrected for transcription error)
Not sure what's gone on in Australia... Didn't even know they were having a referendum until I saw the result earlier, so can't comment other than to say surely Albanese and the Labor government have just blown themselves up?
Only have a referendum is you're certain of winning it... As Mr Cameron found out...
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Mr Pitt has six digits on one hand ... but overall I was no better than random.
Godsdammit, I didn't spot that!
TBF hexadactyly is not unknown, and not only in Norfolk. Robert Chambers the editor and writer was a Scottish example. As I am not familiar with Mr Pitt's oeuvre, I could have been quite unfair to the gent!
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
I never once heard the term 'blackfella' while over there. And the term used that I knew while there was Aboriginals, which is a proper noun so has a capital letter. Saying aborigines is derogatory and not used.
May seem like an odd distinction, but consider it like the difference between saying Nigerians (entirely legitimate and fine) versus n***** (not remotely ok).
Having said that there was one term routinely used there when I lived there which is deemed not OK here in the UK. "Wog" is a common term for those of a Greek ethnic background. There was a comedy show called Wogarama when I lived there put on by a Greek Australian comedian. Wog here is concerned very offensive, but its not there.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
I never once heard the term 'blackfella' while over there. And the term used that I knew while there was Aboriginals, which is a proper noun so has a capital letter. Saying aborigines is derogatory and not used.
May seem like an odd distinction, but consider it like the difference between saying Nigerians (entirely legitimate and fine) versus n***** (not remotely ok).
Having said that there was one term routinely used there when I lived there which is deemed not OK there. "Wog" is a common term for those of a Greek ethnic background. There was a comedy show called Wogarama when I lived there put on by a Greek Australian comedian. Wog here is concerned very offensive, but its not there.
Thanks - hadn't realised the -ne vs nal distinction.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Her father supports Chelsea, which is a matter of concern.
I'm sure you did everything you could, don't blame yourself.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke
I'm not so sure - I suspect theres a bit of de haute en bas going on with an elite attempting to impose their views on a "lumpen proletariate" they'd rather not ask if they could get away with it.
Like the republic campaign it was a cobbled together mishmash which evaded decisions and allowed their opponents to drive a coach and horses through it.
The challenges of First Australians are many and complex, I'm sure this is the start, not the end of a debate.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
A bit chippy today HY. You won didn't you? And in New Zealand.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke - just respect for First Nation peoples just as Christ would have said
You parade your Christianity but it is not the Christianity I recognise but a bigoted view that has no place in Christinity
It wasn't me who rejected a voice for 'First Nations' peoples in the Australian parliament, it was nearly 60% of Australian voters today
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke - just respect for First Nation peoples just as Christ would have said
You parade your Christianity but it is not the Christianity I recognise but a bigoted view that has no place in Christinity
It wasn't me who rejected a voice for 'First Nations' peoples in the Australian parliament, it was nearly 60% of Australian voters today
Digging a bigger hole. You trying to get to Darwin for the weekend?
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
I never once heard the term 'blackfella' while over there. And the term used that I knew while there was Aboriginals, which is a proper noun so has a capital letter. Saying aborigines is derogatory and not used.
May seem like an odd distinction, but consider it like the difference between saying Nigerians (entirely legitimate and fine) versus n***** (not remotely ok).
Having said that there was one term routinely used there when I lived there which is deemed not OK here in the UK. "Wog" is a common term for those of a Greek ethnic background. There was a comedy show called Wogarama when I lived there put on by a Greek Australian comedian. Wog here is concerned very offensive, but its not there.
You're wrong, it's quite common now
"Offer my humble apologies to all #FNPeoples here. I have addressd my personal shame about outcome. Pple were misled by deliberate deceit & disinformation. It wasnt a repudiation of #blackfellas.Am so,so sorry. My heart & that of all folk i know,is broken. We remain allies.#auspol"
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke
I'm not so sure - I suspect theres a bit of de haute en bas going on with an elite attempting to impose their views on a "lumpen proletariate" they'd rather not ask if they could get away with it.
Like the republic campaign it was a cobbled together mishmash which evaded decisions and allowed their opponents to drive a coach and horses through it.
The challenges of First Australians are many and complex, I'm sure this is the start, not the end of a debate.
I am a long way from being an expert on this topic but it does rather seem to me that it is the City dwellers of Australia which would not be affected by it that have voted for the Voice and those who might have to make actual sacrifices to reflect the rights given that have voted against. No doubt and over simplification but one does rather remember those who valued cheap au pairs compared with those who valued market value to their employment.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke - just respect for First Nation peoples just as Christ would have said
You parade your Christianity but it is not the Christianity I recognise but a bigoted view that has no place in Christinity
It wasn't me who rejected a voice for 'First Nations' peoples in the Australian parliament, it was nearly 60% of Australian voters today
Yes, but you took that as an excuse to use a derogatory term that has been antiquated in Australia since about the 1960s.
First Australians, Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders are all proper nouns so have capital letters and legitimate to use.
The word aborigines is not, it is a colonial relic and been deemed derogatory for about 60 years.
If you didn't realise that you were using a derogatory term, then you can just apologise for the misunderstanding, not double-down or take an unrelated referendum as a justification for doing so.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
I never once heard the term 'blackfella' while over there. And the term used that I knew while there was Aboriginals, which is a proper noun so has a capital letter. Saying aborigines is derogatory and not used.
May seem like an odd distinction, but consider it like the difference between saying Nigerians (entirely legitimate and fine) versus n***** (not remotely ok).
Having said that there was one term routinely used there when I lived there which is deemed not OK here in the UK. "Wog" is a common term for those of a Greek ethnic background. There was a comedy show called Wogarama when I lived there put on by a Greek Australian comedian. Wog here is concerned very offensive, but its not there.
I have heard Blackfella used there, but only by Aboringines themselves.
Like a lot of words context is key to knowing whether it is being meant as an insult. Boong is the derogatory word used for Aborigines by white people.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke - just respect for First Nation peoples just as Christ would have said
You parade your Christianity but it is not the Christianity I recognise but a bigoted view that has no place in Christinity
It wasn't me who rejected a voice for 'First Nations' peoples in the Australian parliament, it was nearly 60% of Australian voters today
Digging a bigger hole. You trying to get to Darwin for the weekend?
No bigger hole, just the usual rubbish of pile on on Remain voting HYUFD who is apparently a Nazi (including the Brexit and Farage voting hypocrite Bart and of course you yourself are a Nationalist, just a Scottish one).
As I said it wasn't me who rejected the Voice it was the majority of Australians or who even voted for Brexit. But given the Voice rejection, the continued rise of Trump, Le Pen, Meloni, the AfD etc if you really think I am beyond the pale heaven help those who actually do vote for the former.
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke
I'm not so sure - I suspect theres a bit of de haute en bas going on with an elite attempting to impose their views on a "lumpen proletariate" they'd rather not ask if they could get away with it.
Like the republic campaign it was a cobbled together mishmash which evaded decisions and allowed their opponents to drive a coach and horses through it.
The challenges of First Australians are many and complex, I'm sure this is the start, not the end of a debate.
I am a long way from being an expert on this topic but it does rather seem to me that it is the City dwellers of Australia which would not be affected by it that have voted for the Voice and those who might have to make actual sacrifices to reflect the rights given that have voted against. No doubt and over simplification but one does rather remember those who valued cheap au pairs compared with those who valued market value to their employment.
True, but not only that, there is evidence the indigenous vote itself might have gone NO, or at least been much more evenly divided than was expected. It is hard to say for sure (because, rightly, no one sits at the booths checking skin colour) but the results (eg in NT) imply this
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
There’s a lot of disquiet about Ursula von der Leyen acting like the president of Europe.
Former French Minister for European Affairs: "I do not understand what the president of the Commission has to do with the foreign policy of Europe, for which she is not responsible".
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
I never once heard the term 'blackfella' while over there. And the term used that I knew while there was Aboriginals, which is a proper noun so has a capital letter. Saying aborigines is derogatory and not used.
May seem like an odd distinction, but consider it like the difference between saying Nigerians (entirely legitimate and fine) versus n***** (not remotely ok).
Having said that there was one term routinely used there when I lived there which is deemed not OK here in the UK. "Wog" is a common term for those of a Greek ethnic background. There was a comedy show called Wogarama when I lived there put on by a Greek Australian comedian. Wog here is concerned very offensive, but its not there.
Your example is mince , who has ever called Nigerians , n****rs.
Just to wrap up the NZ election - the final vote totals have National at 39% (50 seats), Labour 27% (34 seats), Greens 11% (14 seats), ACT 9% (12 seats), NZ First 6.5% (8 seats), Maori 2.6% (4 seats).
Some of the early predictions of 70+ seats for National/ACT didn't happen and indeed National slipped back from their earlier stronger numbers but the fact is National/ACT will be able to form a Government with 62 seats (63 when National win the Port Waikato seat, delayed because of the death of the ACT candidate).
The opposition has 60 seats (the new Parliament will be 123 and that speaks to the strength of the minor parties) who won nearly as many votes as Labour and will take 38 of the 123 seats in the new Parliament.
Luxon also has the additional cushion of NZ First but I imagine he's happy not to have NZF in the Government. ACT will be pressing strongly for tax cuts (think a Trussite agenda). Luxon has been more circumspect in the campaign and he knows the global economic headwinds may not give him the room he would like. The other big issue has been crime - whether perceived or actual.
National, as you might expect, is the "law and order" party but it's going to have to deliver on that while it's coalition partner argues for spending and tax cuts so it's far from plain sailing.
Labour will be in disarray having lost nearly half their caucus. Hipkins is finished but it'll be interesting to see where the successor comes from.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke - just respect for First Nation peoples just as Christ would have said
You parade your Christianity but it is not the Christianity I recognise but a bigoted view that has no place in Christinity
It wasn't me who rejected a voice for 'First Nations' peoples in the Australian parliament, it was nearly 60% of Australian voters today
Yes, but you took that as an excuse to use a derogatory term that has been antiquated in Australia since about the 1960s.
First Australians, Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders are all proper nouns so have capital letters and legitimate to use.
The word aborigines is not, it is a colonial relic and been deemed derogatory for about 60 years.
If you didn't realise that you were using a derogatory term, then you can just apologise for the misunderstanding, not double-down or take an unrelated referendum as a justification for doing so.
You didn't realise "blackfella" is an acceptable and quite widely used term in Australia, used by all sides, including Aboriginal Aussies
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Not Australian but I did grow up there so have some insight. Its a shame there was no betting market for this as I tipped a No result when the polls reached 50/50 and the media was still taking a Yes for granted - not due to a specific insight into this particular subject but because of the way Australian referenda work.
No has won almost every referendum ever. Indeed had Yes won today it would have been the first time ever a referendum went through without bipartisan support.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke
I'm not so sure - I suspect theres a bit of de haute en bas going on with an elite attempting to impose their views on a "lumpen proletariate" they'd rather not ask if they could get away with it.
Like the republic campaign it was a cobbled together mishmash which evaded decisions and allowed their opponents to drive a coach and horses through it.
The challenges of First Australians are many and complex, I'm sure this is the start, not the end of a debate.
I am a long way from being an expert on this topic but it does rather seem to me that it is the City dwellers of Australia which would not be affected by it that have voted for the Voice and those who might have to make actual sacrifices to reflect the rights given that have voted against. No doubt and over simplification but one does rather remember those who valued cheap au pairs compared with those who valued market value to their employment.
Scotland voted strongly against Brexit, presumably it is knee deep in au pairs up there.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
No.
HYUFD no more speaks for Australians than he speaks for Red Wallers.
He projects his own racism onto others quite routinely.
I didn't vote for Farage or Brexit, you did.
This is what Indigenous leaders themselves have said about the referendum result:
'Indigenous Leaders across the country see no hope for reconciliation after tonight’s “tragic outcome”. An official mourning period begins now. Total media black out. Flags at half mast.
“To our people we say: do not shed tears.
This rejection was never for others to issue. The truth is that rejection was always ours to determine
The truth is that we offered this recognition and it has been refused.
Hopefully another way can be found to give indigenous Australians a greater voice without Australians as a whole feeling they are getting extra votes in Parliament
Thisis where I get confused. (Genuinely, not a dig at you).
The leaders of the two main lobby groups leading the No campaign are themselves Indigenous Australians - Warren Mundine and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price. There are plenty of other Indigenous politicians and celebrities who campaigned for No.
This is why I was so confused about the whole thing (my view being that the proposition sounded reasonable and I would probably have voted for it)
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke
I'm not so sure - I suspect theres a bit of de haute en bas going on with an elite attempting to impose their views on a "lumpen proletariate" they'd rather not ask if they could get away with it.
Like the republic campaign it was a cobbled together mishmash which evaded decisions and allowed their opponents to drive a coach and horses through it.
The challenges of First Australians are many and complex, I'm sure this is the start, not the end of a debate.
I am a long way from being an expert on this topic but it does rather seem to me that it is the City dwellers of Australia which would not be affected by it that have voted for the Voice and those who might have to make actual sacrifices to reflect the rights given that have voted against. No doubt and over simplification but one does rather remember those who valued cheap au pairs compared with those who valued market value to their employment.
On one had, you're probably right. And the huge problems of a numerically small group of people are often blooming difficult to solve, because they simply can't amass the votes to be politically interesting.
And those, often precariously, on the next step above, are perfectly justified in thinking that they have to hold on tight to what little they have.
But some of the campaigns that tell X to vote for/against Y in order to protect themselves from Z are mendacious rubbish. But plausible mendacious rubbish.
The more you and your fellow travellers retweet and share this outrageous s****, the more these obnoxious winkers feel emboldened.
In what fucking universe am I a "fellow traveller" for posting unpleasant news of anti-Semitism?? You think I am also an anti-Semite? Or secretly encouraging Islamist violence?
FFS. Go fuck yourself. Whatever you are implying, it is fucking ludicrous, as are you
After a woman was raped in a British hospital in 2021, staff there claimed no such crime was possible because the alleged perpetrator was not male but transgender. “They forgot that there was cctv, nurses and observers,” Lady Emma Nicholson told the House of Lords in March 2022. Lady Emma was calling for an end to a policy of allowing trans hospital patients to be placed with the gender with which they identify rather than their biological sex. The hospital later apologised to the woman, who did not pursue the case in court. And Lady Emma’s call is set to be heeded.
In 2019 the National Health Service introduced guidance advising hospitals to accommodate trans patients “according to their presentation: the way they dress, and the name and pronouns they currently use”. They need not have had surgery or a gender recognition certificate (grc), which recognises that a person has transitioned. Anecdotal evidence suggests that while hospitals do accommodate trans women (biological men) on women’s wards, trans men tend not to ask to be placed with men.
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Don't they have the vote?
Not being sarcastic. Know nothing about this referendum.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke
I'm not so sure - I suspect theres a bit of de haute en bas going on with an elite attempting to impose their views on a "lumpen proletariate" they'd rather not ask if they could get away with it.
Like the republic campaign it was a cobbled together mishmash which evaded decisions and allowed their opponents to drive a coach and horses through it.
The challenges of First Australians are many and complex, I'm sure this is the start, not the end of a debate.
I am a long way from being an expert on this topic but it does rather seem to me that it is the City dwellers of Australia which would not be affected by it that have voted for the Voice and those who might have to make actual sacrifices to reflect the rights given that have voted against. No doubt and over simplification but one does rather remember those who valued cheap au pairs compared with those who valued market value to their employment.
Scotland voted strongly against Brexit, presumably it is knee deep in au pairs up there.
Turnout was a lot lower than staying in the Union - which is why the Nats always quote percentages rather than votes:
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
No.
HYUFD no more speaks for Australians than he speaks for Red Wallers.
He projects his own racism onto others quite routinely.
I didn't vote for Farage or Brexit, you did.
This is what Indigenous leaders themselves have said about the referendum result:
'Indigenous Leaders across the country see no hope for reconciliation after tonight’s “tragic outcome”. An official mourning period begins now. Total media black out. Flags at half mast.
“To our people we say: do not shed tears.
This rejection was never for others to issue. The truth is that rejection was always ours to determine
The truth is that we offered this recognition and it has been refused.
Hopefully another way can be found to give indigenous Australians a greater voice without Australians as a whole feeling they are getting extra votes in Parliament
Thisis where I get confused. (Genuinely, not a dig at you).
The leaders of the two main lobby groups leading the No campaign are themselves Indigenous Australians - Warren Mundine and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price. There are plenty of other Indigenous politicians and celebrities who campaigned for No.
This is why I was so confused about the whole thing (my view being that the proposition sounded reasonable and I would probably have voted for it)
It’s the trap/surprise of expecting ethnic groups to all see things the same way. People being surprised at Suella or Rishi not being in favour of immigration, people thinking all Hindus will vote Tory because of Rishi, surely all black people in the USA would be voting for Obama.
People are complicated with different interests and interpretations of ideas, rules, politics and some Aboriginals will have thought the law was good, some thought it was bad for them, some might have not voted in protest at it not going far enough.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
I never once heard the term 'blackfella' while over there. And the term used that I knew while there was Aboriginals, which is a proper noun so has a capital letter. Saying aborigines is derogatory and not used.
May seem like an odd distinction, but consider it like the difference between saying Nigerians (entirely legitimate and fine) versus n***** (not remotely ok).
Having said that there was one term routinely used there when I lived there which is deemed not OK here in the UK. "Wog" is a common term for those of a Greek ethnic background. There was a comedy show called Wogarama when I lived there put on by a Greek Australian comedian. Wog here is concerned very offensive, but its not there.
You're wrong, it's quite common now
"Offer my humble apologies to all #FNPeoples here. I have addressd my personal shame about outcome. Pple were misled by deliberate deceit & disinformation. It wasnt a repudiation of #blackfellas.Am so,so sorry. My heart & that of all folk i know,is broken. We remain allies.#auspol"
Looking into it, it seems to have gained popularity this century, which is after I returned back to the UK. Its growth seems similar to what happened to the term wogs in the 90s while I was there - a term first reclaimed and then reaching acceptance.
The same has not happened with 'aborigines' which remains offensive.
The more you and your fellow travellers retweet and share this outrageous s****, the more these obnoxious winkers feel emboldened.
In what fucking universe am I a "fellow traveller" for posting unpleasant news of anti-Semitism?? You think I am also an anti-Semite? Or secretly encouraging Islamist violence?
FFS. Go fuck yourself. Whatever you are implying, it is fucking ludicrous, as are you
There’s too much of this now. Accusing people, who aren’t, of being anti semitic or just racist or bigoted.
I doubt anyone here is a raging bigot.
People should dial back and think before dispensing insults.
After a woman was raped in a British hospital in 2021, staff there claimed no such crime was possible because the alleged perpetrator was not male but transgender. “They forgot that there was cctv, nurses and observers,” Lady Emma Nicholson told the House of Lords in March 2022. Lady Emma was calling for an end to a policy of allowing trans hospital patients to be placed with the gender with which they identify rather than their biological sex. The hospital later apologised to the woman, who did not pursue the case in court. And Lady Emma’s call is set to be heeded.
In 2019 the National Health Service introduced guidance advising hospitals to accommodate trans patients “according to their presentation: the way they dress, and the name and pronouns they currently use”. They need not have had surgery or a gender recognition certificate (grc), which recognises that a person has transitioned. Anecdotal evidence suggests that while hospitals do accommodate trans women (biological men) on women’s wards, trans men tend not to ask to be placed with men.
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Do New Zealand have anything in place to ensure representation for the Indigenous peoples there?
Again- sorry I have to keep saying this but it is easy to be misconstrued on here - this is not a dig or anything but a genuine question as you are from there.
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Don't they have the vote?
Not being sarcastic. Know nothing about this referendum.
They do, but at 3% I assume “they” are usually outvoted under Australia’s STV because they are spread reasonably thin through the population.
Of course you could counter that it not meaningful to consider the voting influence of one particular slice of the demographic.
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Do New Zealand have anything in place to ensure representation for the Indigenous peoples there?
Again- sorry I have to keep saying this but it is easy to be misconstrued on here - this is not a dig or anything but a genuine question as you are from there.
From wiki:
Māori have had reserved seats in the New Zealand Parliament since 1868. Māori received universal suffrage with other New Zealand citizens in 1893. Currently, Māori reserved electorates account for seven of the 120 seats in New Zealand's unicameral parliament, and consideration of and consultation with Māori have become routine requirements for councils and government organisations. The contesting of these seats was the first opportunity for many Māori to participate in New Zealand elections, although the elected Māori representatives initially struggled to assert significant influence. Sir Āpirana Ngata has often been described as the foremost Māori politician to have served in Parliament in the mid-20th century.
Debate occurs frequently as to the relevance and legitimacy of the separate electoral roll and the reserved seats. The National Party announced in 2008 it would abolish the seats when all historic Treaty settlements have been resolved, which it aimed to complete by 2014. However, after the election National reached an agreement with the Māori Party not to abolish the seats until Māori give their approval.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Australians often use the term
They also use words like “blackfella” which is apparently fine
I never once heard the term 'blackfella' while over there. And the term used that I knew while there was Aboriginals, which is a proper noun so has a capital letter. Saying aborigines is derogatory and not used.
May seem like an odd distinction, but consider it like the difference between saying Nigerians (entirely legitimate and fine) versus n***** (not remotely ok).
Having said that there was one term routinely used there when I lived there which is deemed not OK here in the UK. "Wog" is a common term for those of a Greek ethnic background. There was a comedy show called Wogarama when I lived there put on by a Greek Australian comedian. Wog here is concerned very offensive, but its not there.
You're wrong, it's quite common now
"Offer my humble apologies to all #FNPeoples here. I have addressd my personal shame about outcome. Pple were misled by deliberate deceit & disinformation. It wasnt a repudiation of #blackfellas.Am so,so sorry. My heart & that of all folk i know,is broken. We remain allies.#auspol"
Looking into it, it seems to have gained popularity this century, which is after I returned back to the UK. Its growth seems similar to what happened to the term wogs in the 90s while I was there - a term first reclaimed and then reaching acceptance.
The same has not happened with 'aborigines' which remains offensive.
Fair enough
For a while I found the term so surprising - it seems insulting to me - I presumed it was being used in the way the N word is sometimes used in America. Partly acceptable from black people but wholly unacceptable from white people
But no. It’s used across the spectrum. I still feel a bit uneasy about it, but it’s their culture, their choice
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
No.
HYUFD no more speaks for Australians than he speaks for Red Wallers.
He projects his own racism onto others quite routinely.
I didn't vote for Farage or Brexit, you did.
This is what Indigenous leaders themselves have said about the referendum result:
'Indigenous Leaders across the country see no hope for reconciliation after tonight’s “tragic outcome”. An official mourning period begins now. Total media black out. Flags at half mast.
“To our people we say: do not shed tears.
This rejection was never for others to issue. The truth is that rejection was always ours to determine
The truth is that we offered this recognition and it has been refused.
Hopefully another way can be found to give indigenous Australians a greater voice without Australians as a whole feeling they are getting extra votes in Parliament
Thisis where I get confused. (Genuinely, not a dig at you).
The leaders of the two main lobby groups leading the No campaign are themselves Indigenous Australians - Warren Mundine and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price. There are plenty of other Indigenous politicians and celebrities who campaigned for No.
This is why I was so confused about the whole thing (my view being that the proposition sounded reasonable and I would probably have voted for it)
It’s the trap/surprise of expecting ethnic groups to all see things the same way. People being surprised at Suella or Rishi not being in favour of immigration, people thinking all Hindus will vote Tory because of Rishi, surely all black people in the USA would be voting for Obama.
People are complicated with different interests and interpretations of ideas, rules, politics and some Aboriginals will have thought the law was good, some thought it was bad for them, some might have not voted in protest at it not going far enough.
No I get that but, with all due respect, this isn't the same as immigrants in the UK not wanting more immigrants, nor the simplistic idea that people will vote based on colour. This directly affected the ability of the indigenous peoples to influence policy in Australia so I had, probably naively, assumed it would be suported by all the main indigenous politicians.
Moreover, that was not actually the point of my posting. It was more in answer to HYUFD's apparent claim that there was uniform support for Yes from the Indigenous peoples. Which, surprisingly for me, there wasn't.
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Do New Zealand have anything in place to ensure representation for the Indigenous peoples there?
Again- sorry I have to keep saying this but it is easy to be misconstrued on here - this is not a dig or anything but a genuine question as you are from there.
From wiki:
Māori have had reserved seats in the New Zealand Parliament since 1868. Māori received universal suffrage with other New Zealand citizens in 1893. Currently, Māori reserved electorates account for seven of the 120 seats in New Zealand's unicameral parliament, and consideration of and consultation with Māori have become routine requirements for councils and government organisations. The contesting of these seats was the first opportunity for many Māori to participate in New Zealand elections, although the elected Māori representatives initially struggled to assert significant influence. Sir Āpirana Ngata has often been described as the foremost Māori politician to have served in Parliament in the mid-20th century.
Debate occurs frequently as to the relevance and legitimacy of the separate electoral roll and the reserved seats. The National Party announced in 2008 it would abolish the seats when all historic Treaty settlements have been resolved, which it aimed to complete by 2014. However, after the election National reached an agreement with the Māori Party not to abolish the seats until Māori give their approval.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
No.
HYUFD no more speaks for Australians than he speaks for Red Wallers.
He projects his own racism onto others quite routinely.
I didn't vote for Farage or Brexit, you did.
This is what Indigenous leaders themselves have said about the referendum result:
'Indigenous Leaders across the country see no hope for reconciliation after tonight’s “tragic outcome”. An official mourning period begins now. Total media black out. Flags at half mast.
“To our people we say: do not shed tears.
This rejection was never for others to issue. The truth is that rejection was always ours to determine
The truth is that we offered this recognition and it has been refused.
Hopefully another way can be found to give indigenous Australians a greater voice without Australians as a whole feeling they are getting extra votes in Parliament
Thisis where I get confused. (Genuinely, not a dig at you).
The leaders of the two main lobby groups leading the No campaign are themselves Indigenous Australians - Warren Mundine and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price. There are plenty of other Indigenous politicians and celebrities who campaigned for No.
This is why I was so confused about the whole thing (my view being that the proposition sounded reasonable and I would probably have voted for it)
It’s the trap/surprise of expecting ethnic groups to all see things the same way. People being surprised at Suella or Rishi not being in favour of immigration, people thinking all Hindus will vote Tory because of Rishi, surely all black people in the USA would be voting for Obama.
People are complicated with different interests and interpretations of ideas, rules, politics and some Aboriginals will have thought the law was good, some thought it was bad for them, some might have not voted in protest at it not going far enough.
No I get that but, with all due respect, this isn't the same as immigrants in the UK not wanting more immigrants, nor the simplistic idea that people will vote based on colour. This directly affected the ability of the indigenous peoples to influence policy in Australia so I had, probably naively, assumed it would be suported by all the main indigenous politicians.
Moreover, that was not actually the point of my posting. It was more in answer to HYUFD's apparent claim that there was uniform support for Yes from the Indigenous peoples. Which, surprisingly for me, there wasn't.
Sorry, I wasn’t having a dig or making a definitive argument or anything, was just musing on how people we assume will be political bedfellows often aren’t. The written equivalent of thinking out loud!
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Do New Zealand have anything in place to ensure representation for the Indigenous peoples there?
Again- sorry I have to keep saying this but it is easy to be misconstrued on here - this is not a dig or anything but a genuine question as you are from there.
Yes.
Because the 19th century franchise was based on land ownership, and Māori land was typically held in common, NZ provided for 4 specific Māori seats in 1867.
These remain somewhat controversial, and in fact the Electoral Inquiry which considered NZ’s move to PR recommended their abolition and replacement with a special vote threshold exemption for Māori designated political parties. That didn’t happen, and there are now 7 (out of 120) Māori seats.
Only 50% of Māori choose to go on the Māori electoral roll, though (you self-designate). Māori make up 16% of the population today.
Māori identifying (in part or whole) MPs made up 20% of the outgoing parliament.
The more you and your fellow travellers retweet and share this outrageous s****, the more these obnoxious winkers feel emboldened.
In what fucking universe am I a "fellow traveller" for posting unpleasant news of anti-Semitism?? You think I am also an anti-Semite? Or secretly encouraging Islamist violence?
FFS. Go fuck yourself. Whatever you are implying, it is fucking ludicrous, as are you
My point was stop sharing offensive material. I have no idea or understand as to why you or anyone else feel the need to do so.
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Do New Zealand have anything in place to ensure representation for the Indigenous peoples there?
Again- sorry I have to keep saying this but it is easy to be misconstrued on here - this is not a dig or anything but a genuine question as you are from there.
I have a cousin who emigrated to New Zealand and was for some years employed as a business consultant by one of the Maori groups to advise their young people on setting up businesses. AFAIR we came across several Maori run businesses.
"Referendum mental health toll on First Nations communities won’t ‘miraculously’ ease on Saturday
Racism, trauma and an expectation First Nations peoples should educate others on the Voice referendum have led to increased psychological stress, an expert says."
The more you and your fellow travellers retweet and share this outrageous s****, the more these obnoxious winkers feel emboldened.
In what fucking universe am I a "fellow traveller" for posting unpleasant news of anti-Semitism?? You think I am also an anti-Semite? Or secretly encouraging Islamist violence?
FFS. Go fuck yourself. Whatever you are implying, it is fucking ludicrous, as are you
My point was stop sharing offensive material. I have no idea or understand as to why you or anyone else feel the need to do so.
That's fine. I'm not going to pay attention to you, not for a moment, I will post what I like within the Rules of Moderation, but you are free to criticise me for it. That's PB
What you do NOT get to do is call me a "fellow traveller" on this subject, with the clear if lunatic implication that I am some kind of anti-Semite, or pro-Islamist, or, what, a rabid Zionist settler type cheering on Gazan deaths??
"Referendum mental health toll on First Nations communities won’t ‘miraculously’ ease on Saturday
Racism, trauma and an expectation First Nations peoples should educate others on the Voice referendum have led to increased psychological stress, an expert says."
That sounds unfortunate, though cynically it could be said if everyone is supposed to listen to first nation voices, wouldn't that naturally follow there is an expectation for them to educate others about it? Who would be doing the educating, white knights?
The Welsh Kit man is going home after this match with the Pumas by the look of things. Haven’t seen numbers fall off like this since Liz’s budget.
Argentina looking every bit as poor as against England.
The Pumas are the weakest team left in the tournament. England will get a much stiffer game
I wonder if the All Blacks have one stand-out performance in them, to snuff out the Irish. Who knows. Probably not
France v Boks is also really hard to call. But I think France will edge it at home
It’s all very confusing. Argentina were shit because England beat them then they have been vastly improving apparently according to fans of not England in the lead up to this match.
So if Argentina pull off a win are Wales shit? Are Argentina amazing? Can a team transform from being absolutly crap to brilliant in a few weeks? If Wales win are Argentina not shit so Wales are really good or did Wales have a really easy match because Argentina are shit.
One thing it can’t be is that England were really good to beat Argentina whilst down to 14 men of course.
The more you and your fellow travellers retweet and share this outrageous s****, the more these obnoxious winkers feel emboldened.
In what fucking universe am I a "fellow traveller" for posting unpleasant news of anti-Semitism?? You think I am also an anti-Semite? Or secretly encouraging Islamist violence?
FFS. Go fuck yourself. Whatever you are implying, it is fucking ludicrous, as are you
My point was stop sharing offensive material. I have no idea or understand as to why you or anyone else feel the need to do so.
That's fine. I'm not going to pay attention to you, not for a moment, I will post what I like within the Rules of Moderation, but you are free to criticise me for it. That's PB
What you do NOT get to do is call me a "fellow traveller" on this subject, with the clear if lunatic implication that I am some kind of anti-Semite, or pro-Islamist, or, what, a rabid Zionist settler type cheering on Gazan deaths??
That you do NOT get to say, so kindly fuck off
And I didn't say or imply anti-Semitism. I reiterate it's the terror-porn, description and images of which you have been posting all week, of which I consider offensive. That photograph fits that frame, Anyway , whatever you accuse me of calling you, I didn't, but if you feel the cap fits, whatever that cap might be, you are entitled to wear it.
The more you and your fellow travellers retweet and share this outrageous s****, the more these obnoxious winkers feel emboldened.
In what fucking universe am I a "fellow traveller" for posting unpleasant news of anti-Semitism?? You think I am also an anti-Semite? Or secretly encouraging Islamist violence?
FFS. Go fuck yourself. Whatever you are implying, it is fucking ludicrous, as are you
My point was stop sharing offensive material. I have no idea or understand as to why you or anyone else feel the need to do so.
That's fine. I'm not going to pay attention to you, not for a moment, I will post what I like within the Rules of Moderation, but you are free to criticise me for it. That's PB
What you do NOT get to do is call me a "fellow traveller" on this subject, with the clear if lunatic implication that I am some kind of anti-Semite, or pro-Islamist, or, what, a rabid Zionist settler type cheering on Gazan deaths??
That you do NOT get to say, so kindly fuck off
And I didn't say or imply anti-Semitism. I reiterate it's the terror-porn, description and images of which you have been posting all week, of which I consider offensive. That photograph fits that frame, Anyway , whatever you accuse me of calling you, I didn't, but if you feel the cap fits, whatever that cap might be, you are entitled to wear it.
I am quite content to oblige your final request.
Then don't go round chucking provocative terms like "fellow traveller", esp not re this incediary subject
Otherwise, you have agreed to fuck off, so we are all good
The Welsh Kit man is going home after this match with the Pumas by the look of things. Haven’t seen numbers fall off like this since Liz’s budget.
Argentina looking every bit as poor as against England.
The Pumas are the weakest team left in the tournament. England will get a much stiffer game
I wonder if the All Blacks have one stand-out performance in them, to snuff out the Irish. Who knows. Probably not
France v Boks is also really hard to call. But I think France will edge it at home
I think the all blacks have a great chance against Ireland. They have been very very good since the opening loss, they will score tries, and it’s up to Ireland to show that they deserve the tag as No 1 in the world, that every bloody commentator feels they have to say every two minutes… If it was my life savings on the line I’d say Ireland, but think it could be a close run thing.
"Referendum mental health toll on First Nations communities won’t ‘miraculously’ ease on Saturday
Racism, trauma and an expectation First Nations peoples should educate others on the Voice referendum have led to increased psychological stress, an expert says."
That sounds unfortunate, though cynically it could be said if everyone is supposed to listen to first nation voices, wouldn't that naturally follow there is an expectation for them to educate others about it? Who would be doing the educating, white knights?
Referendums seem to be bad ideas in general, because of the divisiveness they encourage. Maybe it's better to allow decisions to be taken by elected politicians.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
Melbourne voted over 70% Yes, so your 'progressive' and I assume 'woke' grandchild should be OK there
Nothing to do with woke - just respect for First Nation peoples just as Christ would have said
You parade your Christianity but it is not the Christianity I recognise but a bigoted view that has no place in Christinity
It wasn't me who rejected a voice for 'First Nations' peoples in the Australian parliament, it was nearly 60% of Australian voters today
Not only would I have voted No had I been an Australian today, I'd have campaigned for it as well.
Andrew Sullivans's Weekly Dish just landed in my email:
"The second thing to note is how many in the West instantly celebrated the pogrom. This, I have to say, shocked even me, and I’ve been closely watching the “social justice” left for years. It wasn’t the usual support of Hamas, nor the familiar condemnation of Israel’s settlements. That I anticipated. What shocked me was the vivid and genuine expressions of solidarity with the mass murderers — even as their atrocities were in front of our eyes. That requires real ideological commitment, to repress every human impulse of empathy to uphold your priors.
Yet dozens of Harvard student groups did indeed cheer Hamas. Various chapters of BLM did the same. Ditto the Democratic Socialists of America. "
"This is Judith Butler, a campus goddess, and the critical gender theorist behind much of the madness of the alphabet cult, speaking at an “Anti-War Teach-In” at Berkeley in 2006:
Understanding Hamas and Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the left, that are part of a global left, is extremely important. That does not stop us from being critical of certain dimensions of both movements. It doesn’t stop those of us who are interested in non-violent politics from raising the question of whether there are other options besides violence."
The Welsh Kit man is going home after this match with the Pumas by the look of things. Haven’t seen numbers fall off like this since Liz’s budget.
Argentina looking every bit as poor as against England.
The Pumas are the weakest team left in the tournament. England will get a much stiffer game
I wonder if the All Blacks have one stand-out performance in them, to snuff out the Irish. Who knows. Probably not
France v Boks is also really hard to call. But I think France will edge it at home
I think the all blacks have a great chance against Ireland. They have been very very good since the opening loss, they will score tries, and it’s up to Ireland to show that they deserve the tag as No 1 in the world, that every bloody commentator feels they have to say every two minutes… If it was my life savings on the line I’d say Ireland, but think it could be a close run thing.
The All Blacks have been a bit under the radar this WC, I’m guessing because their only “big game” so far was v France first game of the tournament so they are a little bit of an unknown quantity.
They have the advantage over Ireland in that they are probably less bruised but Ireland would say that they have the advantage by being battle hardened.
One thing that concerns me about Ireland has been the whole bringing their kids on for the lap of honour after the wins v SA and Scotland. Either they are supremely in the zone or it’s a bit of hubris which might come back to bite.
The rejection of the Voice also probably kills off talk of a second Republic referendum in Australia for a generation.
Had Yes won, Albanese would certainly have pushed for another referendum on the monarchy.
The crushing defeat for Yes however means his government cannot risk another referendum anytime soon and first has to go back to the drawing board to find some other way of greater
inclusion of aborigines in Australia
Can we stop using the term ‘aborigines’ please, and either use a capital A or use some more respectful term such as First Australians.
Well clearly most Australians have just decided not to privilege them with a capital A or as 'First Australians' but to just keep them as aborigines with no special voice in Parliament over other Australians given the rejection of the Voice
Just because ‘our colonial cousins’ are ill-mannered doesn’t mean we have to be!
One of my half-Thai grandchildren is heading, she hopes, for Melbourne University. I wonder if I should try to dissuade her?
No.
HYUFD no more speaks for Australians than he speaks for Red Wallers.
He projects his own racism onto others quite routinely.
I didn't vote for Farage or Brexit, you did.
This is what Indigenous leaders themselves have said about the referendum result:
'Indigenous Leaders across the country see no hope for reconciliation after tonight’s “tragic outcome”. An official mourning period begins now. Total media black out. Flags at half mast.
“To our people we say: do not shed tears.
This rejection was never for others to issue. The truth is that rejection was always ours to determine
The truth is that we offered this recognition and it has been refused.
Hopefully another way can be found to give indigenous Australians a greater voice without Australians as a whole feeling they are getting extra votes in Parliament
Thisis where I get confused. (Genuinely, not a dig at you).
The leaders of the two main lobby groups leading the No campaign are themselves Indigenous Australians - Warren Mundine and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price. There are plenty of other Indigenous politicians and celebrities who campaigned for No.
This is why I was so confused about the whole thing (my view being that the proposition sounded reasonable and I would probably have voted for it)
Recruiting of ethnic (fill in this space) minority leaders as high-profile spokes-people for campaigns (esp. "No") on ballot measures & etc. strongly/mostly backed by most ethnic leaders/voters, is very common in USA.
Less for it's impact upon said ethnics, but instead upon more-or-less average White people, in particular swing voters.
Plus the political cover it gives to opponents of such measures (and candidates): "Don't call me a racist (or whatever) because I voting with (or for) ___________."
This strategy has been used with some success(es) in California and Washington State re: state affirmative action votes.
As for candidates, prize examples today include (notwithstanding their own personal positions & perspectives) former Gov. and UN Amb. Nikki Haley, US Sen. Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.
Another is former Jaime US Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington State,who was a leading GOP symbol and standard-bearer UNTIL her opposition to Trump's sedition derailed her congressional career; she was eliminated in 2022 primary by rightwing GOPer, who went on to lose the general election to moderate Democrat Marie Gluesenkamp Perez. (Under WA "Top Two" primary only top primary vote-getters, regardless of party, advance to general election ballot.)
However, JHB recently announced that she's a candidate for WA State Commissioner of Public Lands (which mostly manages state forest lands AND environmental concerns) next year. Meaning she will NOT try to regain her 3rd District (southwest WA) congressional seat.
Note that 2024 race for Lands Commissioner is open-seat because incumbent Democrat Hillary Franz is running for governor, another open-seat race as incumbent Gov. Jay Inslee is not running, after three terms in office.
What remains to be seen, is whether or not a quasi-credible MAGA-maniac contender emerges to challenge Herrera Beutler? My own guess is, no. Meaning that she is likely to make the Top Two for Lands Comm in August 2024, thus setting stage for general election faceoff with an as-yet unknown Democrat.
Her (late but nevertheless) opposition to Trump will hurt her with Republicans, but will help her with Democrats and swing voters in the (mostly) Blue State of WA.
In this context, note that the only WA Republican to win statewide in 2020 was state Secretary of State Kim Wyman, who also came under attack from Trumpsters, and who subsequently took a federal election management job with Biden Administration.
The Welsh Kit man is going home after this match with the Pumas by the look of things. Haven’t seen numbers fall off like this since Liz’s budget.
Argentina looking every bit as poor as against England.
The Pumas are the weakest team left in the tournament. England will get a much stiffer game
I wonder if the All Blacks have one stand-out performance in them, to snuff out the Irish. Who knows. Probably not
France v Boks is also really hard to call. But I think France will edge it at home
I think the all blacks have a great chance against Ireland. They have been very very good since the opening loss, they will score tries, and it’s up to Ireland to show that they deserve the tag as No 1 in the world, that every bloody commentator feels they have to say every two minutes… If it was my life savings on the line I’d say Ireland, but think it could be a close run thing.
The All Blacks have been a bit under the radar this WC, I’m guessing because their only “big game” so far was v France first game of the tournament so they are a little bit of an unknown quantity.
They have the advantage over Ireland in that they are probably less bruised but Ireland would say that they have the advantage by being battle hardened.
One thing that concerns me about Ireland has been the whole bringing their kids on for the lap of honour after the wins v SA and Scotland. Either they are supremely in the zone or it’s a bit of hubris which might come back to bite.
Ireland will lead, lead and lead. Then NZ will come through at the end to win.
NZ are proven winners when it really, really matters and so it will be again.
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Do New Zealand have anything in place to ensure representation for the Indigenous peoples there?
Again- sorry I have to keep saying this but it is easy to be misconstrued on here - this is not a dig or anything but a genuine question as you are from there.
I have a cousin who emigrated to New Zealand and was for some years employed as a business consultant by one of the Maori groups to advise their young people on setting up businesses. AFAIR we came across several Maori run businesses.
Does it make a difference that the Maori are NOT indigenous to NZ and simply arrived a few hundred years earlier than Europeans which is a quite different situation to Australia (And elsewhere) ?
The results in Australia and New Zealand, and what's happening to Trudeau in the polling in Canada right now, show just how fragile left-wing governments in the West can be - even ones that win a massive majority.
"Referendum mental health toll on First Nations communities won’t ‘miraculously’ ease on Saturday
Racism, trauma and an expectation First Nations peoples should educate others on the Voice referendum have led to increased psychological stress, an expert says."
That sounds unfortunate, though cynically it could be said if everyone is supposed to listen to first nation voices, wouldn't that naturally follow there is an expectation for them to educate others about it? Who would be doing the educating, white knights?
Referendums seem to be bad ideas in general, because of the divisiveness they encourage. Maybe it's better to allow decisions to be taken by elected politicians.
What if the political class is out of step with feeling in the country? Ignoring popular feeling on crucial issues with the arrogance that only entitled politicians can feel is much more divisive and dangerous than a referendum campaign.
Incidentally, the Swiss, who hold as many referenda as the rest of the continent put together, are perhaps Europe's most stable country politically.
Weirdly, I haven’t seen any Australian posters on here. Would have been good to have a little insight instead of people spouting forth weird analogies to Brexit.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Do New Zealand have anything in place to ensure representation for the Indigenous peoples there?
Again- sorry I have to keep saying this but it is easy to be misconstrued on here - this is not a dig or anything but a genuine question as you are from there.
I have a cousin who emigrated to New Zealand and was for some years employed as a business consultant by one of the Maori groups to advise their young people on setting up businesses. AFAIR we came across several Maori run businesses.
Does it make a difference that the Maori are NOT indigenous to NZ and simply arrived a few hundred years earlier than Europeans which is a quite different situation to Australia (And elsewhere) ?
In answer to OKC, there are 7 Maori electorates. Those with Maori heritage can register on either the general or Maori roll
Frieze is busy. As busy as I’ve seen it in 15 years, perhaps
A good sign for London
Also it has this, which is about post-colonialism
I can see why. The artist has masterfully placed an empty pair of shoes to symbolise the cynical way in which colonial masters said they would leave the colonies to stand on their own two feet but removed all the essential parts to allow it to work.
The transparent chair is “The seat of Justice” where former colonies believed that they would be treated justly and compensated but it turned out that whilst the framework is there the will is transparently not there.
The quasi-human frame made out of garbage represents how the colonial masters viewed their subjects as garbage. The genius artistic juxtaposition of literal garbage with metaphorical garbage whilst also sending a very clear message that this piece of artwork is garbage.
It reminds me of that Blackadder episode where he has a stag-do at the same time as trying to entertain Lady Whiteadder and ends up facepalming onto the table with a massive feather boa sticking out of his bottom.
The results in Australia and New Zealand, and what's happening to Trudeau in the polling in Canada right now, show just how fragile left-wing governments in the West can be - even ones that win a massive majority.
I mean, Trudeau has been in government for 8 years, Labour in NZ for 6, so wouldn't part of it simply be natural governmental churn?
Albanese has been in office for about 1.5 years, but on recent Aussie PM standards that's about half his expected time as premier!
"Referendum mental health toll on First Nations communities won’t ‘miraculously’ ease on Saturday
Racism, trauma and an expectation First Nations peoples should educate others on the Voice referendum have led to increased psychological stress, an expert says."
That sounds unfortunate, though cynically it could be said if everyone is supposed to listen to first nation voices, wouldn't that naturally follow there is an expectation for them to educate others about it? Who would be doing the educating, white knights?
Referendums seem to be bad ideas in general, because of the divisiveness they encourage. Maybe it's better to allow decisions to be taken by elected politicians.
Well, as Leon suggested perhaps the Swiss are the only ones who seem able to get referendums right.
Though as much as I dislike conflict, division is not always a bad thing - sometimes political ideas are divisive and an issue needs to be settled.
The results in Australia and New Zealand, and what's happening to Trudeau in the polling in Canada right now, show just how fragile left-wing governments in the West can be - even ones that win a massive majority.
Not sure its a left v right issue, more that all governments can end up losing popularity. Which is the entire point of democracy of course.
Labour in New Zealand had been in power for two Parliamentary terms, while Trudeau has previously won three elections in a row.
Speaking of Prime Ministers, we're less than 2 weeks from Rishi marking his anniversary of becoming PM, so I hope there is a celebration planned. Stability is back or something.
Comments
You parade your Christianity but it is not the Christianity I recognise but a bigoted view that has no place in Christinity
He ended the press conference with a quote from former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, “Success is not final - failure is not fatal - it is the courage to continue that counts.”
“We intend is a government to continue to do what we can to close the gap, to do what we can, to advance reconciliation, to do what we can to listen to the first Australians,” Albanese said.* (Corrected for transcription error)
https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/the-voice-referendum-live-updates-australians-head-to-polls-across-the-nation-to-vote-on-indigenous-constitutional-recognition-20231013-p5ec4w.html?post=p55be4#p55be4
Only have a referendum is you're certain of winning it... As Mr Cameron found out...
May seem like an odd distinction, but consider it like the difference between saying Nigerians (entirely legitimate and fine) versus n***** (not remotely ok).
Having said that there was one term routinely used there when I lived there which is deemed not OK here in the UK. "Wog" is a common term for those of a Greek ethnic background. There was a comedy show called Wogarama when I lived there put on by a Greek Australian comedian. Wog here is concerned very offensive, but its not there.
https://x.com/femi_sorry/status/1713113598010990690?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
Like the republic campaign it was a cobbled together mishmash which evaded decisions and allowed their opponents to drive a coach and horses through it.
The challenges of First Australians are many and complex, I'm sure this is the start, not the end of a debate.
"Offer my humble apologies to all #FNPeoples here. I have addressd my personal shame about outcome. Pple were misled by deliberate deceit & disinformation. It wasnt a repudiation of #blackfellas.Am so,so sorry. My heart & that of all folk i know,is broken.
We remain allies.#auspol"
https://x.com/CaraMia200/status/1713128565058011448?s=20
"Warren Mundine slams the PM for saying he will respect the outcome of the vote and not legislate a Voice if the referendum fails.
Mundine often says First Peoples do not need a Voice, because he is "tripping over blackfellas" whenever he goes to Canberra."
https://x.com/rachelrwithers/status/1711207541815095350?s=20
"The YES campaign did not effectively address a key concern of blackfellas; about the concept of 'collective representation'.
From a governance point of view, for 50,000 years, Tribal Elders only Speak for Tribal Lands.
That governance concern was raised but not addressed."
https://x.com/GrDB71/status/1713188422075248813?s=20
Used by all sides, without irony
First Australians, Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders are all proper nouns so have capital letters and legitimate to use.
The word aborigines is not, it is a colonial relic and been deemed derogatory for about 60 years.
If you didn't realise that you were using a derogatory term, then you can just apologise for the misunderstanding, not double-down or take an unrelated referendum as a justification for doing so.
Like a lot of words context is key to knowing whether it is being meant as an insult. Boong is the derogatory word used for Aborigines by white people.
As I said it wasn't me who rejected the Voice it was the majority of Australians or who even voted for Brexit. But given the Voice rejection, the continued rise of Trump, Le Pen, Meloni, the AfD etc if you really think I am beyond the pale heaven help those who actually do vote for the former.
.
The failure of the referendum leaves an unresolved problem in Australian politics, how to ensure representation for a historically marginalised and dispossessed 3% of the population?
Having said that, 8/76 senators identify as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander, and 3/151 MPs.
Former French Minister for European Affairs: "I do not understand what the president of the Commission has to do with the foreign policy of Europe, for which she is not responsible".
https://x.com/nathalieloiseau/status/1713168120221688174
Just to wrap up the NZ election - the final vote totals have National at 39% (50 seats), Labour 27% (34 seats), Greens 11% (14 seats), ACT 9% (12 seats), NZ First 6.5% (8 seats), Maori 2.6% (4 seats).
Some of the early predictions of 70+ seats for National/ACT didn't happen and indeed National slipped back from their earlier stronger numbers but the fact is National/ACT will be able to form a Government with 62 seats (63 when National win the Port Waikato seat, delayed because of the death of the ACT candidate).
The opposition has 60 seats (the new Parliament will be 123 and that speaks to the strength of the minor parties) who won nearly as many votes as Labour and will take 38 of the 123 seats in the new Parliament.
Luxon also has the additional cushion of NZ First but I imagine he's happy not to have NZF in the Government. ACT will be pressing strongly for tax cuts (think a Trussite agenda). Luxon has been more circumspect in the campaign and he knows the global economic headwinds may not give him the room he would like. The other big issue has been crime - whether perceived or actual.
National, as you might expect, is the "law and order" party but it's going to have to deliver on that while it's coalition partner argues for spending and tax cuts so it's far from plain sailing.
Labour will be in disarray having lost nearly half their caucus. Hipkins is finished but it'll be interesting to see where the successor comes from.
So you are in no position to lecture
No has won almost every referendum ever. Indeed had Yes won today it would have been the first time ever a referendum went through without bipartisan support.
The leaders of the two main lobby groups leading the No campaign are themselves Indigenous Australians - Warren Mundine and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price. There are plenty of other Indigenous politicians and celebrities who campaigned for No.
This is why I was so confused about the whole thing (my view being that the proposition sounded reasonable and I would probably have voted for it)
And those, often precariously, on the next step above, are perfectly justified in thinking that they have to hold on tight to what little they have.
But some of the campaigns that tell X to vote for/against Y in order to protect themselves from Z are mendacious rubbish. But plausible mendacious rubbish.
FFS. Go fuck yourself. Whatever you are implying, it is fucking ludicrous, as are you
In 2019 the National Health Service introduced guidance advising hospitals to accommodate trans patients “according to their presentation: the way they dress, and the name and pronouns they currently use”. They need not have had surgery or a gender recognition certificate (grc), which recognises that a person has transitioned. Anecdotal evidence suggests that while hospitals do accommodate trans women (biological men) on women’s wards, trans men tend not to ask to be placed with men.
This guidance now looks set to be reversed.....
https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/10/12/why-british-politicians-are-defending-women-only-spaces
Yes 39.8%
No 60.2%
https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/referendum/2023/results?filter=all&sort=az&state=all&party=all
Not being sarcastic. Know nothing about this referendum.
Remain in EU: 1,661, 191
Remain in UK: 2,101,926
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/who-we-are-and-what-we-do/elections-and-referendums/our-reports-and-data-past-elections-and-referendums/scottish-independence-referendum/report-scottish-independence-referendum
People are complicated with different interests and interpretations of ideas, rules, politics and some Aboriginals will have thought the law was good, some thought it was bad for them, some might have not voted in protest at it not going far enough.
Looking into it, it seems to have gained popularity this century, which is after I returned back to the UK. Its growth seems similar to what happened to the term wogs in the 90s while I was there - a term first reclaimed and then reaching acceptance.
The same has not happened with 'aborigines' which remains offensive.
I doubt anyone here is a raging bigot.
People should dial back and think before dispensing insults.
Again- sorry I have to keep saying this but it is easy to be misconstrued on here - this is not a dig or anything but a genuine question as you are from there.
Of course you could counter that it not meaningful to consider the voting influence of one particular slice of the demographic.
Māori have had reserved seats in the New Zealand Parliament since 1868. Māori received universal suffrage with other New Zealand citizens in 1893. Currently, Māori reserved electorates account for seven of the 120 seats in New Zealand's unicameral parliament, and consideration of and consultation with Māori have become routine requirements for councils and government organisations. The contesting of these seats was the first opportunity for many Māori to participate in New Zealand elections, although the elected Māori representatives initially struggled to assert significant influence. Sir Āpirana Ngata has often been described as the foremost Māori politician to have served in Parliament in the mid-20th century.
Debate occurs frequently as to the relevance and legitimacy of the separate electoral roll and the reserved seats. The National Party announced in 2008 it would abolish the seats when all historic Treaty settlements have been resolved, which it aimed to complete by 2014. However, after the election National reached an agreement with the Māori Party not to abolish the seats until Māori give their approval.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Māori_people#Political_representation
For a while I found the term so surprising - it seems insulting to me - I presumed it was being used in the way the N word is sometimes used in America. Partly acceptable from black people but wholly unacceptable from white people
But no. It’s used across the spectrum. I still feel a bit uneasy about it, but it’s their culture, their choice
Moreover, that was not actually the point of my posting. It was more in answer to HYUFD's apparent claim that there was uniform support for Yes from the Indigenous peoples. Which, surprisingly for me, there wasn't.
Because the 19th century franchise was based on land ownership, and Māori land was typically held in common, NZ provided for 4 specific Māori seats in 1867.
These remain somewhat controversial, and in fact the Electoral Inquiry which considered NZ’s move to PR recommended their abolition and replacement with a special vote threshold exemption for Māori designated political parties. That didn’t happen, and there are now 7 (out of 120) Māori seats.
Only 50% of Māori choose to go on the Māori electoral roll, though (you self-designate). Māori make up 16% of the population today.
Māori identifying (in part or whole) MPs made up 20% of the outgoing parliament.
anyone else feel the need to do so.
I have a cousin who emigrated to New Zealand and was for some years employed as a business consultant by one of the Maori groups to advise their young people on setting up businesses.
AFAIR we came across several Maori run businesses.
Racism, trauma and an expectation First Nations peoples should educate others on the Voice referendum have led to increased psychological stress, an expert says."
https://www.crikey.com.au/2023/10/13/referendum-mental-health-toll-first-nations-community/
The Welsh Kit man is going home after this match with the Pumas by the look of things. Haven’t seen numbers fall off like this since Liz’s budget.
What you do NOT get to do is call me a "fellow traveller" on this subject, with the clear if lunatic implication that I am some kind of anti-Semite, or pro-Islamist, or, what, a rabid Zionist settler type cheering on Gazan deaths??
That you do NOT get to say, so kindly fuck off
Stanford University lecturer then reportedly called them ‘colonisers’ and said Hamas massacre was ‘legitimate’
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/10/13/stanford-university-teacher-jewish-students-israel-hamas/
There should be a study done on how Orwell has been appropriated by increasingly awful people.
I wonder if the All Blacks have one stand-out performance in them, to snuff out the Irish. Who knows. Probably not
France v Boks is also really hard to call. But I think France will edge it at home
So if Argentina pull off a win are Wales shit? Are Argentina amazing? Can a team transform from being absolutly crap to brilliant in a few weeks? If Wales win are Argentina not shit so Wales are really good or did Wales have a really easy match because Argentina are shit.
One thing it can’t be is that England were really good to beat Argentina whilst down to 14 men of course.
I am quite content to oblige your final request.
Otherwise, you have agreed to fuck off, so we are all good
If it was my life savings on the line I’d say Ireland, but think it could be a close run thing.
"Mary Wakefield
I regret not having more children"
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/i-regret-not-having-more-children/
"The tacit assumption was always that children are an obstacle to the noble process of self-actualisation"
"The second thing to note is how many in the West instantly celebrated the pogrom. This, I have to say, shocked even me, and I’ve been closely watching the “social justice” left for years. It wasn’t the usual support of Hamas, nor the familiar condemnation of Israel’s settlements. That I anticipated. What shocked me was the vivid and genuine expressions of solidarity with the mass murderers — even as their atrocities were in front of our eyes. That requires real ideological commitment, to repress every human impulse of empathy to uphold your priors.
Yet dozens of Harvard student groups did indeed cheer Hamas. Various chapters of BLM did the same. Ditto the Democratic Socialists of America. "
"This is Judith Butler, a campus goddess, and the critical gender theorist behind much of the madness of the alphabet cult, speaking at an “Anti-War Teach-In” at Berkeley in 2006:
Understanding Hamas and Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the left, that are part of a global left, is extremely important. That does not stop us from being critical of certain dimensions of both movements. It doesn’t stop those of us who are interested in non-violent politics from raising the question of whether there are other options besides violence."
My bold.
They have the advantage over Ireland in that they are probably less bruised but Ireland would say that they have the advantage by being battle hardened.
One thing that concerns me about Ireland has been the whole bringing their kids on for the lap of honour after the wins v SA and Scotland. Either they are supremely in the zone or it’s a bit of hubris which might come back to bite.
Less for it's impact upon said ethnics, but instead upon more-or-less average White people, in particular swing voters.
Plus the political cover it gives to opponents of such measures (and candidates): "Don't call me a racist (or whatever) because I voting with (or for) ___________."
This strategy has been used with some success(es) in California and Washington State re: state affirmative action votes.
As for candidates, prize examples today include (notwithstanding their own personal positions & perspectives) former Gov. and UN Amb. Nikki Haley, US Sen. Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.
Another is former Jaime US Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler of Washington State,who was a leading GOP symbol and standard-bearer UNTIL her opposition to Trump's sedition derailed her congressional career; she was eliminated in 2022 primary by rightwing GOPer, who went on to lose the general election to moderate Democrat Marie Gluesenkamp Perez. (Under WA "Top Two" primary only top primary vote-getters, regardless of party, advance to general election ballot.)
However, JHB recently announced that she's a candidate for WA State Commissioner of Public Lands (which mostly manages state forest lands AND environmental concerns) next year. Meaning she will NOT try to regain her 3rd District (southwest WA) congressional seat.
Note that 2024 race for Lands Commissioner is open-seat because incumbent Democrat Hillary Franz is running for governor, another open-seat race as incumbent Gov. Jay Inslee is not running, after three terms in office.
What remains to be seen, is whether or not a quasi-credible MAGA-maniac contender emerges to challenge Herrera Beutler? My own guess is, no. Meaning that she is likely to make the Top Two for Lands Comm in August 2024, thus setting stage for general election faceoff with an as-yet unknown Democrat.
Her (late but nevertheless) opposition to Trump will hurt her with Republicans, but will help her with Democrats and swing voters in the (mostly) Blue State of WA.
In this context, note that the only WA Republican to win statewide in 2020 was state Secretary of State Kim Wyman, who also came under attack from Trumpsters, and who subsequently took a federal election management job with Biden Administration.
NZ are proven winners when it really, really matters and so it will be again.
Incidentally, the Swiss, who hold as many referenda as the rest of the continent put together, are perhaps Europe's most stable country politically.
Albanese has been in office for about 1.5 years, but on recent Aussie PM standards that's about half his expected time as premier!
Though as much as I dislike conflict, division is not always a bad thing - sometimes political ideas are divisive and an issue needs to be settled.
Labour in New Zealand had been in power for two Parliamentary terms, while Trudeau has previously won three elections in a row.