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 thread.
View all comments View context
21 points
*

So the No side’s campaign was one of deliberately not educating people? To me that just says that people educated on the subject are voting Yes.

While that may be an absurdly simple slogan, it is also absurdly stupid.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

The only Territory to vote yes, out of all our States and Territories, was the Australian Capital Territory which is the most educated and most involved with governance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

uni educated people overwhelmingly voted yes. so yep pretty much

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I don’t understand why the media is so desperate to frame the result around cost of living. It was clearly about education.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Also, the Yes slogan eventually became “if you don’t know - find out” and “just Google it”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Just Google it, the advice you always hear when the other person is shutting down any more conversation. What an unfortunate result

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

“Google it” vs “no”. The point of the slogan was to highlight a) how the other side was shutting down the conversation and b) that their premise of ignorance was stupid, in a short pithy way.

It wasn’t saying “go find out”, so much as “you CAN find out if you care, there is no reason to not know”

That said, without question, the Yes campaign’s official messages were pretty poor. Supporters have been far more eloquent.

On the “just google it” topic, this short video was brilliantly well done: https://youtube.com/watch?v=SAqIypjk-5A

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Which isn’t in any way how it works. You’re making the claim, you sell it. I’m not going digging to make someone’s claim on their behalf.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

It is how “it” works, where “it” is “mock reductionist ignorance worshipping”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

So the No side’s campaign was one of deliberately not educating people?

No, but that’s what people are trying to pretend. The “if you don’t know, vote no” slogan is also about when people are trying to find details on what this advisory body would look like and are being told “oh we’re not going to tell you that, don’t worry about it, just trust us”. If you don’t know what the body will look like because they won’t tell you, why would you vote yes?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It sounds like that was something that would need to have been fleshed out in legislation since the amendment only specified that an advisory body would be created. It’s only advisory and has no legislative power. Does it matter much what it might be made up of? From reading it sounds like it would be less than 100 people nationally. Seems a bit ridiculous to vote no on something like that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You are correct on all counts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points
*

The ‘No’ campaign was largely nonexistent. The ‘Yes’ campaign was enough reason to vote ‘No’. And the ‘No’ voters are just as educated as ‘Yes’ voters. It’s just that some people can’t understand why other people would disagree with them.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Didn’t get a single flyer from the yes campaign, the no campaign, however. Just depends on where you live

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Some are educated, some are racist - no reason they can’t be both.

It’s easy to understand ignorance and racism.

(There’s a third option, and that’s for the mining magnates like Clive who want less complaining about digging up sacred sites)

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

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.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

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/

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 17K

    Posts

  • 284K

    Comments