It's OK to be White and other dogwhistles - the Australian politics thread

Never Mind the B*ll*cks Political Bollocks
7092

I would have thought that a key reason people outside of the more affluent areas (that did vote yes) would have voted no would be the coverage of the referendum costing upward of $450m when they are struggling with a harsh cost of living crisis.

Albanese could’ve kept his powder dry for an additional 12 months, addressed the cost of living/housing crisis and then called the referendum when the country was in a better economic state. I would have thought many would’ve been more concerned about their own wellbeing at the moment - I think that makes them more selfish than racist.

1 Like
7093

What if they genuinely believe what they’re saying is the truth?
Stats above show that the lower the education level of the person the more likely they were to vote no.
Providing they put their point across respectfully then it is up to the more educated to respectfully provide the information to correct their position rather than attack them.

This is where the yes campaign went wrong.

7094

This isn’t the scenario we’re discussing, if they genuinely believe it, they still need to be corrected tho.

7095

Even if you argue that average joe genuinely believes it, they pretty much do that because they’ve heard it from somewhere else. The majority of the No campaign know that they were lying and obfuscating on many points, they’re called dog-whistles for a reason. This (mainly the campaign, if you like?) really should be allowed to be called out for what it is, there is far too much allowance of treating ‘opinion’ as ‘fact’ in what is laughably called debate these days. It’s like suggesting it would be balanced for a news outlet or any other stage to hold a discussion tomorrow where they provide equal weight to the positions that the sky is either blue or green (which we literally saw happen to laughable levels during the climate ‘debate’

1 Like
7096

I do not subscribe to the “each side gets equal time” argument for broadcasting. Once ignorance and racism is removed from the debate there was no factual No argument. None at all.

2 Likes
7097

a.k.a The Costanza Defense

3 Likes
7098

That I can sort of appreciate, but then the money has been spent. Voting no won’t bring the money back, in fact it wastes the money even further. That logic is fairly vindictive and serves almost no purpose. Vote against Labor maybe for “wasting” the money, but the referendum was always going to go ahead while called.

7099

I get the money was going to be spent (whether that is the best use of that money in these times is another conversation) but I understood, probably incorrectly, that it could have been delayed or even scheduled for a later date in 2024, to placate the yes campaign, while addressing the cost of living and housing crisis.

Also, the conflict in the middle east taking priority in almost all major news outlets in the final week of campaigning cannot have had a positive impact on the undecided voters.

7100

1 in 7 didn’t vote (2.6m people)…

7101

I saw this being raised as an argument, but the fact of the matter is that there are endless measures in place, and being implemented re: the cost of living crisis.
There are always going to be budget pressures - it’s not an excuse to not act on worthwhile and necessary projects.

A friend of mine (who voted Yes afaik) was very much spruiking this talking point. To give you an idea of how hard hit he is by the cost of living crisis, he just spent close to $1m on landscaping his backyard.

1 Like
7102

But that’s my point, the affluent areas that could drop $1m on their gardens did vote yes… those that are impacted in a tangible way would have that as their priority - not the voice.

I live in Leichhardt and we were overwhelmingly pro voice, which highlights the division between affluent/educated areas and those that are struggling and, perhaps, haven’t taken further education courses.

It’s not a logical excuse, but it is a very real reason that people will adopt. And the affluent few pounding them for being racist when they have other priorities doesn’t help.

1 Like
7103

Wow, what’s the fine? Might even be able to turn a profit!

7104

$20 apparently. So only $58M if they can re-coup all funds (unlikely).

7105

So much for those state treaty paths. The right has their messaging now.

“Pursuing a path to treaty will lead to greater division, not reconciliation, and I cannot support that.”

1 Like
7106

Ahh, so that’s what happens when the “Voice doesn’t go far enough” types side with the racists.

3 Likes
7107
7108

So I posted the below back in June:

(extract)

Regarding the voice, it hasnt been explained to the masses at all.

But at the moment the entire argument for the voice seems to be “vote yes or you are racist”. Or maybe a warm & fuzzy tv ad with soft music that gives you no information whatsoever.

That is simply not good enough. If you are proposing a change to the constitution you better explain it better.

As we got closer to the referendum not much changed until the final 1 or 2 weeks when the Yes campaign panicked & realised the No campaign was ahead & belatedly tried to explain details, but it was too little too late. And I didn’t see much effort made in the mainstream media either, mostly in left-wing echo chambers like the ABC where those viewers/listeners were all voting Yes anyway.

At this point, whether the Voice was the right thing or not is actually moot. The problem is that the Yes campaign was atrocious. An absolute masterclass on how to lose a referendum.

With the majority of past referendums in Australia’s history losing, no one should have been under ANY illusion that the referendum could be won with little to no effort explaining what people are voting for. How stupid were these people running the Yes campaign?

Australians do want reconciliation and do want to better the lives of Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders. But there was never a connection demonstrated by the Yes campaign to show how the Voice was going to do that.

There are already billions dollars spent on indigenous issues. There are already multitudes of advisory bodies. How was the Voice going to bee any different? Was it going to become an extra layer of Govt? Why did the constitution need to be amended? These are the simple questions that were never really addressed properly. Immigrant/non-English speaking communities were especially in the dark about the details.

Some people here and in the media keep doubling down on racism and saying that everyone voted no because they are racist. Or that they are stupid and/or uneducated. Such a lazy & immature viewpoint and it’s damaging to the overall cause of reconciliation.

What a great way to win an undecided voter over! Call them racist & stupid, yeah that will work for sure!

The fact is the Yes campaign should take a fucking long hard look in the mirror and hang their heads in shame at the atrocious job they did. They fucked it up. No one else.

In simple terms, the Voice never passed the pub test. We’ve heard this a multitude of times when Governments or opposition fail to convince the electorate and this was just another example. It’s just a tragedy the Yes campaigned fucked up on such an important issue.

8 Likes
7109

Yep agree 100%

7110

The Yes campaign certainly had plenty of problems, but it had close to zero chance of success when it kicked off without bipartisan support. Given that, the error was going ahead, or not getting the LNP on board. But getting the LNP on board with its current leadership would have again close to zero percent chance of success.

I’ll also object to your characterisation of ABC as a left wing echo chamber. Sure, one that was often happy to run opposition bullshit unchallenged in the essence of “balance”.

1 Like
7111

I never once saw / heard / read anyone do that,