Voting “yes” or “no” to a specific proposal, such as establishing a voice to parliament for Indigenous peoples, is a complex and nuanced decision that can be influenced by various factors, including political, social, and ethical considerations. Whether voting “yes” to a voice to parliament is considered racist or not depends on the reasoning behind the decision and the perspectives of those involved.
The concept of a “voice to parliament” typically refers to giving Indigenous peoples in a country a formal mechanism to influence the decisions and policies that affect them. Proponents argue that such a voice is important for recognizing the historical and ongoing marginalization of Indigenous communities, addressing their unique needs, and promoting reconciliation.
Opponents, on the other hand, might have concerns related to the potential impact on the existing political structure, questions about the effectiveness of such a mechanism, or different ideas about the best way to address Indigenous issues. Their opposition might not necessarily be rooted in racism but could arise from differing viewpoints on governance, representation, and policy approaches.
It’s important to recognize that discussions around Indigenous rights, representation, and self-determination are deeply complex and often tied to historical injustices. Whether a “yes” vote is considered racist could depend on whether it is perceived as supporting genuine efforts to rectify historical injustices and provide a platform for marginalized voices, or if it’s seen as undermining those efforts.
WHAT IS HISTORICAL INJUSTICES TO ABORIGINAL PEOPLE
Historical injustices faced by Aboriginal people, particularly in countries like Australia and Canada, refer to a long history of mistreatment, dispossession, discrimination, and marginalization. These injustices are rooted in the colonization and subsequent policies implemented by colonial powers, which had devastating and lasting impacts on Indigenous communities. Some of the key historical injustices include:
Land Dispossession: European colonizers often forcibly took Indigenous lands without consent, leading to the displacement of Indigenous communities from their ancestral territories. This had profound cultural, spiritual, and economic impacts, as Indigenous peoples’ connection to land is deeply intertwined with their identities and ways of life.
Violence and Genocide: Indigenous communities experienced violence, massacres, and forced assimilation as part of colonial efforts to control and erase their cultures and traditions. Some regions saw instances that can be characterized as genocide, involving the intentional destruction of Indigenous populations.
Forced Assimilation: Government policies often sought to assimilate Indigenous people into European cultures by separating children from their families and communities through practices like the Canadian and Australian residential school systems. These policies aimed to erase Indigenous languages, cultures, and traditions, leading to immense intergenerational trauma.
Loss of Cultural Identity: The imposition of foreign cultures, languages, and religions often resulted in the erosion of Indigenous languages, traditions, and belief systems. This loss of cultural identity had deep psychological and social consequences for Indigenous communities.
Disruption of Traditional Societies: The introduction of new diseases, weapons, and economic systems disrupted traditional Indigenous ways of life and social structures, causing further hardship and inequality.
Marginalization and Discrimination: Even after colonial times, Indigenous communities have faced systemic racism, discrimination, and unequal access to social services, education, and healthcare.
Denial of Rights: Indigenous peoples’ rights to self-determination, land ownership, and cultural preservation were often ignored or actively suppressed by colonial powers and later governments.
Environmental Degradation: Many Indigenous communities have suffered from environmental degradation due to resource extraction, land development, and pollution, leading to the loss of traditional subsistence practices and sacred sites.
Lack of Recognition: Historically, Indigenous contributions, histories, and perspectives were often omitted from official narratives, education, and media, contributing to a lack of understanding and empathy in wider society.
Efforts to address these historical injustices involve acknowledging past wrongs, providing reparations and support for affected communities, promoting cultural revitalization, and working towards greater Indigenous self-determination and representation in political and social systems. This is often part of larger movements for truth, reconciliation, and social justice.
As per current statistics more than 80% of aboriginals are with mixed genome with White, who are not at all aboriginals nor any historical injustices done with them. All aboriginals are recognised by Australian Constitution in 1901 and again in 1957.
The 1957 Australian referendum was a significant event in the country’s history that aimed to amend the Australian Constitution in relation to Indigenous people. The specific proposals put forward in the referendum related to giving the federal government the power to make laws for Indigenous people and count them in the national census.
The key proposals of the 1957 referendum were:
Power to Make Laws for Indigenous People: The referendum sought to amend the Constitution to give the federal government the power to make laws for Indigenous people. Prior to this, the Constitution had limited the federal government’s authority to make laws specifically targeted at any particular racial or ethnic group.
Inclusion in the Census: The second proposal aimed to amend the Constitution to ensure that Indigenous people were included in the national census, which would provide a more accurate count of the Indigenous population.
The intention behind these proposals was to enable the federal government to have greater authority to create policies and laws that could benefit Indigenous people and address their specific needs. It was also seen as a step towards recognizing Indigenous people as Australian citizens and ensuring they were accurately represented in national statistics.
The referendum took place on May 27, 1957, and both proposals were approved by the Australian public. However, despite the amendments being passed, they did not lead to significant legislative changes or improvements in the lives of Indigenous Australians at that time. Many of the discriminatory policies and practices continued, and it wasn’t until subsequent decades that more comprehensive efforts were made to address the historical injustices faced by Indigenous communities in Australia.
The 1967 Australian referendum, which happened a decade later, is often more well-known and impactful. It sought to address issues related to Indigenous peoples’ inclusion in the census and their constitutional recognition as citizens, leading to a resounding “yes” vote and more significant changes to Indigenous policy and rights in Australia.
Aboriginals in Australia has full working rights, own passport and travel around the world as Australians. They have yearly grants of 40Billion dollars, they have more government sponsored groups and agencies working to empower them. they have more rights than other ordinary people, reservation in many fields like job and education, no tax on them and get concession in everyday life.
out of 3.2% aboriginals only less than 1% are full blooded aboriginals but own 16% of entire land in Australia. above all their customs and practices are glorified without reason. Aboriginals can contest election to represent their community, every aboriginal as right to vote.
So none of the theories like Lack of Recognition, Denial of Rights, Marginalization and Discrimination, Land Dispossession etc are not true.
so voting YES to give aboriginal is just racist. its not aboriginals need a voice, it is other 97% of the population need Voice to fight for their existence, who has no funding, no reservation, NO Voice.
Ultimately, the perception of racism is subjective and can vary based on individual perspectives and the broader context of the debate. It’s essential to engage in informed and respectful discussions that consider a range of viewpoints and seek to understand the underlying motivations behind different positions.
The Voice contradicts the principle of equality of citizenship that enshrines and binds together our nation. The Voice is based on the principle that we have different constitutional rights depending on our ancestry. We need to think about that as a country. And think whether or not we really want that to happen. The Voice contradicts the principle of equality of citizenship that enshrines and binds together our nation.
Funny thing is after all as none of current citizens who made of half of the population born outside of Australia, who has nothing to do with aboriginals or their past, nor responsible for anything happened. Australia may have been occupied by some people, just like any other land, they did not own anything nor built anything or helped, paid tax to build present Australia, any development done then its done by Anglo European not aboriginals.
so Voting YES is racist, if anyone want a Voice then its other 97% not the Aboriginals.