this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2023
914 points (96.4% liked)

World News

39373 readers
3425 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Seudo@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Entirely depends on how it's to be structured. Which the public didn't vote on. Done correctly I do agree on the optics of an official body though.

[–] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So it'll be good, or ineffective at worst. What's the issue?

[–] Seudo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Either way, some of us whities just don't feel comfortable determining the future of indigenous people.

[–] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's the point of the Voice though, isn't it - to give a body representing indigenous Australians a say in decisions relating to them.

That's contrasted with the current situation, where the government selects an indigenous affairs minister, then optionally cherrypicks the indigenous representative bodies that support their agenda.

[–] Seudo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's nothing in the legislation that prevents the (predominantly white European) government from continuing to cherry pick. We don't need another excuse to be apathetic about indigenous issues.

[–] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As I've said, they'll need to take the optical damage.

So as you've said, you're not comfortable determining indigenous Australians' future, but you'll block the change supported by 80% of indigenous Australians, formed at the Uluru statement from the heart it because it isn't good enough for you - how on earth do you rationalise that obvious, massive contradiction?

[–] Seudo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So every time you buy a coffee you're actively killing a starving child? Struth!

[–] WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I'm going to need you to join the dots on that one, champ. It'd be great if you explained the massive contradiction in your statements while you're at it.