There's a lot of pre-polling talk that Australia will vote "No" in the Voice referendum. That makes me worry about what could happen, and about how it will shape how our nearly-entirely-white government will talk with Indigenous people in the future. If Australia votes "No", it will be a wasted opportunity.
What are we really voting on? The screenshot here is from the AEC website, and it shows the full wording change: https://www.aec.gov.au/referendums/learn/the-question.html
The photo next to it is a close-up of the ballot paper with very simplified wording.
Look at the ballot paper. It's worded in a vague way. There's no mention of the actual changes to the constitution. They could have done that, but they chose not to. This was no accident. This was a deliberate decision because Dutton wanted to create uncertainty in people's minds.
You may recall that Albo and Dutton did a lot of haggling over the wording of the changes to the constitution and possibly the voting form. It was not a requirement that Dutton got such a strong say in things; it was more of a conciliatory move by Albo who was new to being PM at the time and wanted to appear even-handed but ended-up being a walkover. It was a mistake to give Dutton that latitude, and Albo should have known him well enough to see he wasn't arguing in good faith.
For the last few months, Dutton's vague and suggestive referendum messaging to the public has been a Rorschach Test where voters can squint at Dutton's verbal inkblot and see their own uncertainties, fears, phobias, resentments, prejudices, and racism, and thus lead themself to the conclusion to vote "No".
#AusPol #VoiceToParliament #VoteYes #Referendum2023 #IndigenousVoiceToParliament #FirstNations #Voice #VoteYesAustralia
Opinion | The Guardian US
Bin Chicken 🗑𓅠
Haru春 || Genna 
Haru春 || Genna
Robert Fairhead