if you are white (as in non-aboriginal) that fact doesn't seem to factor into the equation or matter, apparently, a white person born here isn't capable of being indigenous even if they can trace their lineage back many generations as I can as well. You have to have an Aboriginal ancestor in your family to qualify.
As a white man of 4th gen British ancestry i am 100% Australian indigenous. Why, because this country was a British colony and we built 99.9% of everything in this nation, it belongs to us. Aboriginals on the other hand built zero but they killed the Australian pygmy that was here before them. Aboriginal DNA according to the Max Planc institute of Germany says Aboriginals are mostly of Indian descent. So yes, Im an indigenous Australian.
@@matton36 mate you are preaching to the choir. I too can trace my lineage back many generations as my ancestors came to Australia in the early 1800s as free settlers and I am indigenous in every sense of the word, as are my kids. My family have been landholders here for over 100 years.
I'm from a very large Australian family with mixed heritage. Mainly European decent. In our family tree we have an Auntie who is Aboriginal (full blood) and my cousins are too (half blood). One of my first cousins was in the same class as my youngest son. It was fantastic as my son is really pale with blond hair and his cousin, same surname, was Indigenous and no doubt about that at all. That cousin went onto to represent our country in athletics and is , like her many cousins, powering in the world. We as a family couldn't be prouder of all in our family and the four generations who live and breathe on our continent, our home, our country. The fact that there are pretenders claiming aboriginality at the rate you describe is a reason to vote NO. Those pretenders, activists and Canberra/academic elites want to divide us so they can claim special status and the financial rewards that flow (already). My cousins are voting for all Australians first. No special 3+%, no invented unnecessary apartheid divide, just pride that we are all Australian trying to be the best we can be mate. Thankyou for your service.
My great grandmother was a full blooded Aboriginal , Some of my family identify as Aboriginal but i do not, Yes i acknowledge i have some Aboriginal blood in me , But i also make up about 70 percent white so i just call myself Australian. The sooner All Australians identify as Australian only then can we ever really have UNITY and be united as one nation. VOTE NO PLEASE FOR THE SAKE OF UNITY.
@@beepbeep6861 No, Pablo is correct. We are all Australian. As for racial background, (not benefits), it makes sense for a person to see themselves as what their majority bloodline is. That's not racist. That's reality mate.
@@beepbeep6861 Sort of , When growing up my parents taught me not to be racist i thank them for that. But my whole life all i ever heard from Aboriginal's was how much they hated whites, I never understood it because 95 percent of them had white in their blood . So i never identified as Aborigine , Dont get me wrong some actually like whites but the majority detest whites from the day they are born they are told that whites stole their land they detest whites.
@LlywellynOBrien Maybe in theory, but I can't see a government trying to remove something from a constitution. Imagine America removing the right to guns. Or more in line with Australia, Canada, removing the indigenous land rights. Won't happen.
@@tonybloomfield5635 Or, put it in the Constitution so that it isn't vulnerable to being removed by every government, and instead they'll have to convince us that it isn't working?
A Ranga here. Years ago in central Oz I was talking about life, the universe and everything with a gentleman from Arnhem Land. Mid sentence he interrupted and said to me with a big smile, "you know what, you're indigenous". I said, with a smile, "thank you, I'm not but I like the sentiment". 15 or so years later during this debate, the penny dropped. I'm not as far as I'm aware a descendant of any Aboriginal person, but this country is my earthly home. I am indigenous to this country.
I am indigenous , which means native to the land .I do not claim aboriginality,I am a 6th generation Australian from British decent .however I have no connection to Britain and Britain does not accept me .good .I am Australian who has connections with my land .
No you're not indigenous dickhead..aboriginal people are born into our race, we struggled being told growing up we are not on the same level of white people, actually lower then dogs by white society and the government trying to eradicate our blood line since the invasion of this land. Now there a white people and so called coconuts who never claimed to be us jumping on board to take funding set aside for indigenous purposes...that shit pisses me off.
I don't understand why it's the road to apartheid. I have not yet been convinced by the arguments put forward by the "no" campaign, which is to put it lightly. I don't understand how adding a preamble to the constitution and creating an advisory body will divide Australians, I don't think it matters how much it will cost (considering the vast quality of life difference between Aboriginals and white European descendants). I feel like I'm stupid because I just don't get how everything else being said by the "no" campaign is meant to help make a decision. I'm not trying to call you out, I'm hoping you, out someone else can show me what I'm missing
ok how about this . thalidomide was a great idea once, and endorsed by many doctors. what if thalidomide was endorsed by the constitution and could never be removed.@@sadiewopen
@@sadiewopen Just look at how many corporations are advocating the No vote, vs how many for the Yes vote. If you can think for yourself, ask yourself, WHY Albo doesn’t release the FULL scope of the amendment. If you have at least TWO functional brain cells, you will realise you’re about to be SCAMMED !
I am enjoying your discussion very much. I don't know how I came across you, but I thank God I have. I've now watched half a dozen or so of your broadcast. Keep up the great work sir ! God bless you.
Great content, thank you for making this effort to produce this content for people actually interested in the voice proposition. Your lack of bias is honestly refreshing. Cheers.
It doesn't matter who is "Indigenous". It's irrelevant. What is relevant is being Australian. Australians in need should be helped. If Australians put their ethnicity first, and they need help, they can fund it themselves. Besides, "indigenous"" means to have originated in a certain place. In other words, body is indigenous to Australia. We're all migrants of the indigenous of Africa.
Very well said. Wish some of the doubters in the Voice campaign had access to and read the content of this site. I, personally, have found it well balanced and informative, being an immigrant myself from County Durham, no not Irish, North East of England.
Indeed, government funded assistance should go by need rather than race. There's a bit of irony however in your last statement of being migrants of the indigenous of Africa. These groups today have members that do not have shared Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA like people in most other places. This would most likely be due to those groups having a common ancestor even further back with those in Africa today and migrating to Africa in the first instance. The indigenous in Australia have links to Denisovan DNA and given migration patterns from bones and DNA it may well be that the original inhabitants of Australia having bones sitting in what is now caves in the oceans around Australia with no African DNA at all. The extent of assimilation in the current make up of DNA means that at some point very low single digit percents of this group exist today in full-blood native lines. Also, the current DNA seem to strongly indicate different origins from many different migration waves. It is a little sad what a strongly communicated idea can do for a society where it can become just a stated 'fact' and influence opinion so broadly. This is a super active field of research and give it a couple of decades and we'll likely actually know what happened for the first time for people coming to Australia.
@@infiniteloopcounter9444 your response is clearly well considered and ends optimistically but archeologists and anthropologists do have trouble accessing indigenous remains and one wonders if access is denied for sacred or political reasons. Perhaps both.
The oldest denisovan DNA is around 300000 year old discovered in Spain but yet they think we originated Out of Africa 200000 years ago there is still a lot of mystery around our Origin but one thing we do know man has definitely roamed the world
I checked the dictionary "Indigenous" means "Born of that country". That includes me. I am totally white, and way back come from England, but I was born here in Australia amid quite a few generations. Therefore, by definition I am "indigenous". Give me everything I want. Any house I grew up in has sacred value to me therefore I claim Land Rights to them all. Every park I played in, every school I went to. It's all the same thing they want except I don't claim ALL the country. Vote NO.
As a white man of 4th gen British ancestry i am 100% Australian indigenous. Why, because this country was a British colony and we built 99.9% of everything in this nation, it belongs to us. Aboriginals on the other hand built zero but they killed the Australian pygmy that was here before them. Aboriginal DNA according to the Max Planc institute of Germany says Aboriginals are mostly of Indian descent. So yes, Im an indigenous Australian.
If an self identified "Aboriginal" wants remuneration on account of his great grandfather and his sacred attachment to some land, then please oblige, and give him 6 turtle shells, some boomerangs, and some didgeridoos, as these are the only items that are also sacred to the Aboriginal. White mans money is not worth anything to a primitive person who thinks that a block of land is sacred.
@@lowkeyconvert8971 Im pretty acclimatized and i dont burn. However if you were aware of what an indigenous person was according to the dictionary you wouldn't have embarrassed yourself.
As an ex-digger myself the one thing the army taught me it is not the colour of one's skin it is the way you behave. Also, these re-invented indigenous talk endlessly about their aboriginality while ignoring the importance of their European forebears; of course it would have absolutely nothing to with the benefits offered to indigenous people.
Or the jobs., loans, housing, art sales. This resonated with me as I have an Aboriginal grandfather, but I identify as Australian only, no caveat, or if forced into a box i go caucasian as its the majority of my DNA,, my brother is Aboriginal.
We are told the "Voice" is needed because indigenous Australians are a separate, sovereign people who maintain ancient culture and traditions and suffer great disadvantage. Yet the majority of the 3%+ of our population who now are identified as indigenous live modern lives like the rest of us in the suburbs, with little to no connection to that ancient culture and are fully integrated members of modern Australia. We are also told to ignore that they are of mixed indigenous and European heritage and that somehow it is invalid to be brought up in the culture of their European forefathers. (In most traditional cultures, marriage into another clan or tribe would mean the children are brought up in the ways of their fathers' people.) So why are we trying to segregate out a portion of our own people, fellow Australians, who share common culture, heritage, language, accent and world view with the rest of us, and declare them based on blood to be of another alien culture and world view. And how does giving that group the 'voice' help those who really have preserved the old traditions in remote communities or those who suffer disadvantage who still live outside or in disfunction from modern mainstream society? And why can't parliament just commit to consult those remote and other communities more and listen without changing the constitution?
Garbage. This is like saying Australian Irish people (or Irish Irish people for that matter) aren't really Irish because they aren't feudal peasants labouring under the English. You've just picked an arbitrary element of a culture and absolutised it to claim that anyone who doesn't meet your weird criteria is somehow less Indigenous. The proposed Voice has nothing to do with segregation, or seperation. It isn't and shouldn't be arbitrarily focused on only Indigenous Australians who live in rural and remote communities. Also, the statistics are very, very clear that disadvantage is not in any way limited to the small proportion of Indigenous Australians who live in these communities. The huge majority who live in towns and cities still experience a whole range of significant disadvantages when compared to non-Indigenous Australians.
@@fenlander7114 how on earth is anything I said here racist? Edit: also, while I could always do a better job at writing clearly, word salad seems pretty harsh. What was unclear?
Everyone just vote NO,unless you want a divided nation and set racism back 100 years. I’m Australian,born and bred here. My parents migrated to Australia with their parents from Ireland and England.
This is a question I have often asked. It seems to me that some people are able to gain access to programs specified to assist Indigenous Australians despite the unquestionable fact they only have a very small percentage of Indigenous bloodline. Often, they have had an upbringing both culturally and socioeconomically that is typical of non-Indigenous people and as best as I can see are basically abusing funding and opportunities that are intended for those Indigenous people with greater needs.
Color of skin is irrelevant in the argument you present. I can show you Indigenous Men with dark skin who are 6,7 and 8 generations of Urban Living.. some of those great great grandfathers were traitorous dogs who tracked their own people, I can even show you photo's of them in their living room with all the mod cons of turn of the 20th century living. Then I can show you light skin kids, who to the ignorant like yourself would claim are white. Yet they dont speak a lick of english and theyre running around on some community in nothing more than their jocks and have never known any of this privilege you speak of. Bloomfields.. yea I know an Indigenous family of Bloomfields who are many many generation of sucking at the paternal teet of the government
the issue of identification needs to be addressed. dna tells the true story, and should be employed, i bet there would be an amazing drop in the number of so called first nations people {, which in itself is a myth, there never was a cohesive nation}, if penalties were applied for fraudulent claims by those claiming to be aboriginal when they are not..
Probably not because Indigenous Australians (and other Indigenous and Native peoples around the world) are unique in that they specifically didn't supplant or conquer and pre-existing population.
@@LlywellynOBrien wrong , the DNA evidence shows that aus has been repopulated several times . All ridginees are not the same DNA source. First nation just means first colonizer.
@@kokigephart111 Nah that is not true. I studied this stuff and the theory of previous groups being supplanted is long dead. There is evidence for some degree of later arrival, but as visitors who either traded and left or remained in particular regions and became part of those communities. There is no evidence of any kind of (even local) conquest, colonisation or similar. There is some speculation of maybe a very small number of non-Indigenous (likely Indonesian) villages, but only within the last few hundred years which is nothing on a 60,000 thousand year timescale. Beyond that, all contemporary Indigenous people descend from common ancestors who were the first to walk these lands.
We live in a time when anyone can self-identify as anything. As has often been pointed out, if you can change your gender, why can't you change your race? So yes, a lot of people will tick the box if they see money in it. And there may be nothing that can be done about it, as they will say it is their right to be what ever they want to be. That seems to be the law now.
If you are applying for any job, mining eg, always tick the indigenous box, and if you are female ,you have past the first computer scan of your application. Not a merit based system
@@clayauslewis4236 That is absolutely the correct point of view. Everyone is indigenous to the land on which they were born. Counting past generations to see who is "more" indigenous is a fools game.
If Aboriginality is to be more than a trendy self identification, "real Aboriginals" need to get their act together and devise a system to authenticate claims. Allowing anyone and everyone to i.d as such debases the currency, and makes a mockery of the meaning of the word. Not only must this be done, but politicians must get on board and end the self i.d bs.
If people lie about their race, because to claim Aboriginality, provides financial benefit, proves that we already have apartheid. If "the Voice" gets up, it will be the criminal cabal, which was ATSIC, legalised and entrenched into our constitution. A Marxist, Apartheid, Mugabe style of dictatorship, will replace our constitutional rights.
Just amazing how easily a subject matter can be understood by the uninformed when explained in a clear, logical and common sense manner; thank you! (You got Buckley’s of a chance to become a politician with this sort of clear cut talk...)
I was always of the understanding that the word indigenous meant that you were native to your country. I am 5th generation Australian. I was born here. My husband is also 5th generation Australian and our children are 6th. With our ancestors buried in this soil and with us being connected to the land on which we were born, surely we would also be considered "native to the country" or Indigenous? The truth is I do not know any other language apart from English (because if you want to talk about trauma, my family being German were made to not speak their native tongue for fear of being placed in POW camps during both world wars regardless of being born in this country!) In fact I have never been to Germany, Sweden, Poland or Scotland. So I do not know any other country as "home". AUSTRALIA is my home, always has and always will be!
Great video thankyou. It shows the futility of declaring the Aboriginal community could unite to have a voice. Yet, this is what we are supposed to automatically assume in the referendum. The premise on which the Uluru statement of the heart is based, a united Aboriginal opinion, is a false one. Yet many people dare not to contradict it because it is somehow viewed as spiritually sacred to Aboriginal people. I beg to disagree. The other issue is that the 250 delegates could not possibly have spoken to 800,000 or so registered indigenous people to make a true representation. Sorry to be so blunt, but I think we've been presented with a referendum based on the opinions of political activists.
Simple. DNA test. I honestly used to think I was part Aboriginal because of a really old familiy photograph of my great, great grandmother. I did one of those DNA family tree tests. Turns out she was Indian.
Even DNA test results have to be viewed with care as it all depends on how the DNA distributes down the ancestor line, if at all, as it depends on the 'luck' of the 'DNA dice' as there is not enough DNA to go around. in the greater FT. For example, my full-blood brother and I have different DNA results. (We are not aboriginal). I have a much greater majority of one ethnicity compared to my brother and he has a greater majority of another ethnicity to me. I also have three other minor ethnicities and he has none. Blaine Bettinger explains this in his book about genetic DNA and ancestry.
Indigenous is not an aboriginal or islander language name it is from my mother tongue with it's roots in latin. If you are an indigenous Australian it simply means you are born from the land you live in. Around 71% of Australians are indigenous as in they were born here in Oz.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. - Animal Farm You don't get extra power and influence based on what you were born as. That's racism.
Yup.. and after WW2, just as after WW1, Australia had a Homesteading Act where Lands were given out for Service to ones Country.. on offer to everybody but the Indigenous who served of course. After WW2 one of the big fights was to be included in the Homesteading Act and Australian Bigots like yourself raged at the idea and seethed with murder in your baited breathe at the audacity of an Indigenous Man even daring to ask to be a recipient. We won that battle, and now not all Lands owned by Aboriginal People are Native Title.. a lot of it is owned under the Homesteading Act
@@djpodesta i am shocked i am not banned ! we are in a War and the Enemy is well implanted within the Mind emf/emrweaponized since 1987 cofactoring...over
@@djpodesta what does it matter to me who the new masters are? Either way its not in my favor so I couldnt give two flying farks about Chinas intentions. Nothing changes for me, still spat on and treated like shit. You on the other hand, everything changes for you lol. You get to the Indigenous Experience first hand free and on the house. You get to have your own free Reservation with your own free Flour and Salted Meat and attend a free school for the Natives to propagandaize you, oops I meant Integrate you, into your new culture lol. Oh I'll be there too lol, but for all intents and purposes its pretty much just going to be more of the same for me haha
Years ago I had a blond haired, blue eyed friend, he identified as Aboriginal. One day he said to me, "Come to the Elder's council meeting with me tonight. (wink, wink) you might be Aboriginal as well". Yeah, nah. I am not going to pretend to be something I'm not.
Thankyou for that video. Such an important point you make…….”do your research, and know what you’re voting for”. It would seem to me that there are those who are counting on us not taking this advice
I have to be honest, I thought this was going to be another one sided biased video. I totally agree with you on the identification dilemma. Thank you for a balanced and unbiased video.
A large part of the problem is we are being asked for an "Indigenous" voice, and not an "Aboriginal" voice. Am I splitting heirs, definitely not. An Indigenous thing is a thing born to an area. - it could be a plant brought over from South Africa that after many generations is quite at home. Using that definition, that makes me an Indigenous Australian (fully imported 5 generations ago). BUT it does not make me an Aboriginal Australian. There is only one definitive proof the Aboriginality, and that is a DNA test. If the Woke crowd had not changed Aboriginal to Indigenous, and New Australian to Ethnic then we would not be having this conversation about who is in and who is out.
From what I have read there is no DNA test and Aboriginal Australians are very close to white Australians . Forgive for bringing race into it but there are three main races Caucasian, Negroid and Mongoliod and Aboriginals are not the last two.
@@barryford1482 We came here from the Indus Valley Civilization during the Indo-Aryan Migration into what is now India. The Hindi People are the latter, we do not descend from them, but they are the descended from those of our people who remained and married in with them. We walked to Australia mostly across the Indonesian Land Bridge, kayaked some, and left behind small encampments in the Indonesian Island who then married in with successive waves of migrations from the Asiatics and of course the Polynesian expansion. Maori's will tell in their own Lore that a people like the Aboriginal Australians were already in New Zealand before they arrived, they married in with some and fought with others. Dont ask about Papua New Guinea, I dont know.. I just figured those mad fluckers were already there when my Ancestors came through and they sprinted the whole length of the Island.. either that or they paddled around lol. But you are correct that we are more closely related to the Caucasians than we are to the Negroids, thats probably the first intelligent comment from a white man Ive seen in a while
My father grew up in the North West desert region around Wiluna. His family left Wiluna after his father died in a mining accident. He had great skill with Ozzie Rules football on both feet. I have always felt very comfortable in Wiluna on three times we have holidays. I encourage all Australians to regular trips to there
I was brought up in S.Africa under apartheid. Due to the long period of white settlement going back to 1652, if you identified as "white" and your family had been in the country for 3 generations or more it was inevitable that African blood flowed in your veins - to what ever degree. My wife was born in S.Africa of Anglo/Dutch background of northern European appearance. When she could check her ancestry via DNA - we were surprised that although she was mostly northern European decent, she was 10% "sub Saharan origin - meaning Bantu" which was only a matter of interest to her. Because of apartheid, the government had to decide who was white and who was "coloured". Of course nobody on the borderline wanted to be coloured - this caused trauma to families where some were and some were not. Those who were "coloured" were shunned by their families and any who were declassified as coloured kept this shameful fact a secret. In Australia, it is also inevitable that if your family has been here long enough you will also be part Aboriginal to whatever degree - but unlike S.Africa, substantial immigration has diluted this effect. However, unlike S.Africa, everybody wants to be Aboriginal even if to whatever degree possible.
I realy appreciate and respect the speaker on this chanel. He appears to me to be very fair minded and straightforward. While I'm commenting here, I identify as a Royal Albert fine bone china tea pot but no-one will accept me as such,, how do I overcome this trauma???
An excellent and measured contribution to the debate around this issue, thanks. Loved the bit at the end about mistaking the identity of the biscuit. Very clever.
I love it when you turn on the ABC and some freckly redhead drops a "my mob" reference outta nowhere and you genuinely can't tell if you're living in a Monty Python sketch or not.
Thanks for covering this topic. It has been an issue for me ever since I saw the ABC cover a story about a government program to help disadvantaged Indigenous Australians to find an entry point into the nursing profession. Unfortunately the room full of candidates all looked to be of English/Irish or European descent. Of course, I cannot simply assume that these candidates are/were falsely claiming Indigenous heritage, but it just goes to show that there seems to be something amiss within the identification process. Apart from the obvious high profile cases that are continually dismissed, I have noticed middle classed European Australians, an East or South East Asian descent business man and I even heard a case about an South Asian immigrant. All apparently legitimate. I also find it amazing that the one test that can provide conclusive evidence about ones ‘Aboriginality,’ is allowed to be dismissed as racist by the same portion Indigenous claimants who *could* have the most contentious claims. Unfortunately, while I would always stand beside all of my *honest* Indigenous brothers and sisters; - if they would have me of course; or; for that matter, anybody finding themselves in an unjust situation, I have become very skeptical about the copying of politicised Aboriginality that has swept the western world in recent times. I think that all Australians should be lobbying their local MPs to look into this matter and insist upon DNA proof along side any government application. One *tongue in cheek* question; given that I was born in Australia, can I claim Indigenous Heritage status? 😄
@@kimbo99 You know that, I know that and the most of the world knows that. The only problem is that there is a certain cohort who are getting away with their seemingly purposeful misdirection. But I am glad that you brought it up. 👍
There are indigenous people in parliament, the senate, the media, corporate Australia, education, local government, law inforcement, the local post ofice, the list goes on and there is no voice ??? Looks like a voice to me ????
Brilliant brilliant brilliant. I’m voting NO but I would so like to help those in our aboriginal community escape all of the inequalities they currently suffer from. Our governments both federal and state refuse to address those inequalities but rather make loud announcements, political noise and just kick the can down the road. We’ve had Royal Communications into deaths in custody, Bridging the Gap, we’ve had Sorry, we’ve had ATSIC and we’ve got NIAA. Nothing motivates our politicians to actually attempt to fix those inequalities and unfortunately the many millions spent on the Voice won’t help either. I feel guilty but I’m absolutely over phoney political announcements that achieve nothing.
When I was young, being a Blackfulla was not popular, be anything but Aboriginal. It was bloody hard. Today things are so much different. This conversation is needed and you said it well. Also, had no idea until now bickies were connected to the city in France 🙃 Thank you!
@@beepbeep6861 Young people in my family are accepted and many are flourishing. Our old people did it hard and pushed for change, so we could live a better life. For this, I’m extremely grateful.
@@beepbeep6861 Crap. Australians bend over backwards to help disadvantaged Aboriginals, and all the while you keep insulting them. Who is disadvantaged? My son cannot get a university scholarship for his course unless he is female or Aboriginal. And shall we discuss Aboriginal reduced-interest housing loans, free medical care, employment quotas etc? We are all equal in Australia, yes that's right... after Aboriginals, ethnic minorities, LGBTQI, etc. I suppose we've got to make that White AngloCeltic scum suffer, don't we now.
@@beepbeep6861...they don't. The bigotry of low expectations for remote area kids means that these children are missing out on being educated and having their life choices contrained and this was the same with the previous generations many who are now illiterate adults wasting their life on sit down money. Easy welfare imperials the number one driving force of keeping the gap wide.
'Not black or white' That was a brave pun in a woke post sensible world. The question of who is indigenous, in short it's a rort. There is no political stomach to set this matter right, except Pauline Hanson. Much to the disquiet of the mainstream political elite and journalistic left, Pauline is resonating with the electorate. Even the name of her party is starting to resonate…. 'One Nation'.
Indigenous is any person born on a land. So most except for immigrants born overseas are indigenous. The term Aboriginal means original people of a land. The government bodies have the terminology incorrect.
You are correct. I did not come from somewhere else, my ancestors were born in Australia, I was born in Australia, I know no other country, I have a spiritual association with my country, this is MY country, I am a proud indigenous Australian.
‘Indigenous’ in this context simply means Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, I can understand those with encyclopaedic definitions being more precise, but specifically the referendum is not asking for an ‘indigenous’ ‘Voice’ but an “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice” (p.S129(i). Now I disagree that this is necessary and given the proposed wording I think this is a very risky novel amendment to the Australian constitution, and so me and my family are simply voting NO. Having said that, if we are going to have a “race-based” body (or any race-based targeted privileges and entitlements), it is important to be able to determine eligibility of individual persons by the same race-based identity category, we cannot have it both ways. It’s even worse than I thought about the ‘three-part test”, that given part i descent is very contentious and now you say census-wise part iii community recognition is also suspect, we’re left with part ii self-identification - no legally enforced procedure therefore. Practically this regime contributes to the detriment of those who are in need of support (granting for a moment the assumption that such a need is race-based or by virtue of one’s ancestors living in Australia for 50,000+ years). Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council (MLALC) CEO Nathan Moran laments, “the sad and unfortunate reality is that people have used self-identification to receive jobs, housing and scholarships they're not entitled to which are meant for the indigenous. The Indigenous birth rates don't match up with the population increase” (25% from 2011-2016 census as Wesley noted). Moran has now called for a widespread adoption of the Commonwealth Government's three-part identity test to officially confirm who is Indigenous and who is not, in an effort to stop people from rorting the system and he reckons it's time to “end the statutory declaration and apply the laws they're compelled to enforce”. Aboriginal Land Council of Tasmania chair Michael Mansell agrees. He called out those who are falsely identifying as Indigenous and branded them as 'identity seeking': "The people who are ticking the box to say they are Aboriginal when their demographic is poor white people who pretty much are disenfranchised.” Governments do not seem to attribute as much eligibility value to non-Aboriginal poor people so some attach themselves to something that has perceived greater eligibility value which is being Aboriginal. As a side note, Love and Thoms 2020 case tells us that “aboriginality” does not seem to require citizenship, this will be odd when it comes to ‘The Voice’, it needs to be clarified as former Justice Nettle’s (concurring) observations about the possible need for legislation to provide a pathway to citizenship for all who do satisfy the three-part test should be able to apply for and be given citizenship. ‘The Voice’ is even more controversial and risky when the above are carefully considered. Safer to vote NO. Thank you Wesley.
Regardless of how any group including government want to define 'Indigenous' for their own ends or means, especially when stating it in a legal document or Act such as a referendum, the real and true legal meaning shall hold precedence over all others! Therefore....'Indigenous' has always been and will always be (as quoted in Black's Law Dictionary), 'Indigenous' : A person who is a citizen of a particular place, region, or nation by virtue of having been BORN there'. That makes more than 15 million Australians 'Indigenous Australians' and the number is growing daily!
I'm Indiginous as a 5th generation Australian with offspring who are 7th generation, all free settlers, many warriors who lost their lives and protectors of aboriginals and kanaks.
could not agree more, but i have seen assistance available to part aboriginal people up close and the general public will never get those benefits.30 billion dollars a year is going somewhere, i dont think any one knows quite where..
Oh, and just to clarify. I don't mean do away with Indigenous recognition altogether. Factual indigenous history should be retained, taught and passed down. Cultural celebrations etc should remain. I'm just referring to what billions are spent on.
@@beepbeep6861it’s not all of a sudden. It’s just we are sick of being polite and turning a blind eye to separate racist laws and entitlements that only Aboriginals get. Wake up to yourself - we just want equal treatment for all Australians.
Where will all this stand if in a few years there is a voted in Republic , so then there is no Australian constitution ( the act) that I have not read and do not know the full legal meaning of. It will all start over again. If there is a Republic coming in then there is a new constitution which cancels out The Act Constitution which is now asked to be voted on to expand to include a Voice to the Parliament . This confuses me as it should be a Voice for the First Nation People and include each and every one in a way they are not exploited . Who will deliver the services, will this be outsourced to corporations, will it be run like the NDIS .Who knows what this all means.
I am indigenous, I was born here, so does my parents, and their parents before them. In effect, I am 7th generation native. I have no connection to any land other than Australia. Therefore, I am an aboriginal by definition, even tho I am 100% pure Caucasian. This is my land. This is our land. Not yours alone.
I have a Great Grandfather who was Danish, Does thisl make me danish, Give us a break. All this referendum is doing is causing a Racial Divide in the Country. Not solving a problem, but creating one. If the government wants to show true equality in this country, how about offering the benefits now available to Indigenous Australians to the rest of us.
@@unbearableunbearable2740 I’m Irish, German, English and Scottish. It’s not practical to describe me as indigenous to each country. I have indigenous ancestors but I myself do not hold that distinction
And what percentage are they no longer Aboriginal? So if we find a 1/8th out there on the communities who doesnt speak a lick of english what should we do? Send the Aboriginal Protection Board to snatch the lightskin child away? Eject them from the community in which the child grew and the culture to which they have known? Kick them to the kerb in some white mans city and tell them they are not disadvantaged? You people are mentally insane I swear it
Its a clear and valid argument. I also believe such a permanent change should be supported by the large majority of those it supposedly intends to represent. Rather than a 51% majority. Until it's widely accepted as a worthy endeavour by all especially the indigenous, it seems it needs some improvements.
Another great video and no need to pardon your pun, very well said. Also, thank you for your service! You're living high on the hog, two biscuits with a culpa, bloody capitalist! Also did your say between 2021 and 2026 censuses! Could it be 2011 and 2016. Sorry I'm being picky!
I am an indigenous "First Nations" Australian. My earliest ancestors stepped foot in this country way back in the 1840's and had been here nearly 60 years when Australia first became a Nation on 1st January 1901. Several relatives and ancestors have paid the ultimate sacrifice fighting for Australia in either the First, Second or Vietnam Wars. Neither I, nor any members of my Indigenous, First Nations family need to be "welcomed" to our own Indigenous country by anybody's money-gouging "Aunties" or Uncles". Vote NO!
Since learning about how the Indonesians brought the dingo to Australia about 4 thousand years ago, I questioned this myself. We really need more research in indigenous DNA. I believe a university in India is leading us in knowledge of indigenous DNA and different times of migration to Australia.
I was born here as where my parents and grandparents. I am indigenous. It's quite simple. One People and One Nation and that includes all citizens regardless of place of origin
There are no Indigenous Australians. The first inhabitants of this continent (nomadic tribes), came here from somewhere else. All humans (Homo Sapiens) evolved in Africa and migrated across the globe. Anthropology 101.
This is silly. No one meaningfully denies the origin of humans in Africa. Nor there later migration. However Indigenous Australians were the first people who arrived here, and have walked these lands for tens of thousands of years. They are clearly indigenous.
@@LlywellynOBrien Fist pygmies here were eaten by larger invading aboriginals. Eye witness reports from chinese sea captains west coast 200=300 AD. Also witnessed by Dutch sailors both sides of the continent. Modern aborigins are mostly DNA linked to the Indian Dravidian Haplogroup 1500 yrs ago. Something like Java island that is Hindu.
Incorrect. They wandered onto this continent from New Guinea. They are NOT from here. Kangaroos are....they evolved here. I suggest getting an education.@@LlywellynOBrien
@@MrJohndlthis is just semantics. You are redefining the word 'indigenous' in a ridiculously strict way that would mean that very likely no group could accurately be described by the word. At that point it would utterly cease to have meaning as a concept. Why bother having a word that describes no one? Yes Indigenous Australians descend from people who migrated here. That is not disputed. They however became a people here and over tens of thousands of years developed a continent-spanning culture which is indigenous to this place even on your definition. As a people they were born here.
I share the concern regarding fakes. Same thing happens with War veterans having to root out frauds who try to take advantage of the system. Fraud is a serious problem for us all irrespective of our race, it devalues the cause and creates huge issues financially.
We are all Australians, this referendum will only attempt to divide Australians, but Australia will vote NO to the Voice, and YES for a united Australia, Im voting NO to the Voice, because I am a proud Australian, born in Australia, and I’m no less an Australian than anyone else.
Well why have we been treating our first people less, in fact, not so long ago, they were recognised as flora and fauna, that is why most of us disrespectful/disregard them as the first inhabitants.
@@beepbeep6861 No. "flora and fauna" is a myth. Even the GayBC came out and admitted that one. You really are doing yourself a dis-service on this forum
@@marleneholloway7775 I'm sorry for your uncle, you and yours, it saddens me that, this behaviour is still happening, if he was playing up, that's another story.
Simple Solution - REMOVE INDIGENOUS ENTITLEMENTS so we are all treated equally and it won’t matter. Hopefully when the voice fails there will finally be a referendum for that. 🇦🇺
I'm a Third Nations person. Not a First Nations (aboriginal) or Second Nations (descendant of the colonials) but a Third Nations (newcomer). Am I allowed to slaughter and eat dugong in Moreton Bay Marine Park?
Peter Chandler CLP played a major role at the beginning of the VOICE concept in the Northern Territory of Australia. it is a concern that, with such exposure, starting strongly in 2013, he is not part of the debate. It is understood that the pressure the NO to the Constitution is under goes back mostly to these days! An in depth non-partisan analysis would help to seek a truth covered up by propaganda and partisan passion.
I am Indigenous, I am a proud Tasmanian Aboriginal I also have Irish, English and Scottish bloodlines. I love this beautiful country and the wonderful people. I do not want to divide Australia on race so I will be voting no
I'm Celtic, I'm Nordic, I'm Latin, I'm German, I'm part of the convict trash Britain didn't want 200 odd years ago, I'm a descendant of the fisrt boat people, I am AUSTRALIAN.
I'm Australian, I love Australia. I was born here, my family were born here, surely that should be all that matters.
if you are white (as in non-aboriginal) that fact doesn't seem to factor into the equation or matter, apparently, a white person born here isn't capable of being indigenous even if they can trace their lineage back many generations as I can as well. You have to have an Aboriginal ancestor in your family to qualify.
Yes thats right,but the Prime Minister is trying to divide this nation.....VOTE NO.
As a white man of 4th gen British ancestry i am 100% Australian indigenous. Why, because this country was a British colony and we built 99.9% of everything in this nation, it belongs to us. Aboriginals on the other hand built zero but they killed the Australian pygmy that was here before them. Aboriginal DNA according to the Max Planc institute of Germany says Aboriginals are mostly of Indian descent. So yes, Im an indigenous Australian.
@@matton36 mate you are preaching to the choir. I too can trace my lineage back many generations as my ancestors came to Australia in the early 1800s as free settlers and I am indigenous in every sense of the word, as are my kids. My family have been landholders here for over 100 years.
If you were born in Australia you are by definition Indigenous.
I'm from a very large Australian family with mixed heritage. Mainly European decent. In our family tree we have an Auntie who is Aboriginal (full blood) and my cousins are too (half blood). One of my first cousins was in the same class as my youngest son. It was fantastic as my son is really pale with blond hair and his cousin, same surname, was Indigenous and no doubt about that at all. That cousin went onto to represent our country in athletics and is , like her many cousins, powering in the world. We as a family couldn't be prouder of all in our family and the four generations who live and breathe on our continent, our home, our country. The fact that there are pretenders claiming aboriginality at the rate you describe is a reason to vote NO. Those pretenders, activists and Canberra/academic elites want to divide us so they can claim special status and the financial rewards that flow (already). My cousins are voting for all Australians first. No special 3+%, no invented unnecessary apartheid divide, just pride that we are all Australian trying to be the best we can be mate.
Thankyou for your service.
Let your first nations family members, speak for themselves, you don't speak for them.
@@beepbeep6861 they do speak, as Australian first.
@@letstalk3265 Not everyone is the same.
@@beepbeep6861 They weren't "nations". They were tribes
@@dougy6237 They were nations.
My great grandmother was a full blooded Aboriginal , Some of my family identify as Aboriginal but i do not, Yes i acknowledge i have some Aboriginal blood in me , But i also make up about 70 percent white so i just call myself Australian. The sooner All Australians identify as Australian only then can we ever really have UNITY and be united as one nation. VOTE NO PLEASE FOR THE SAKE OF UNITY.
It sounds like you've been taught to dislike your first nations side.
@@beepbeep6861 No, Pablo is correct. We are all Australian.
As for racial background, (not benefits), it makes sense for a person to see themselves as what their majority bloodline is. That's not racist. That's reality mate.
@@unbearableunbearable2740 Let the man, answer for himself, what you're his boyfriend now.
@@beepbeep6861piss off idiot and I'm part aboriginal
@@beepbeep6861 Sort of , When growing up my parents taught me not to be racist i thank them for that. But my whole life all i ever heard from Aboriginal's was how much they hated whites, I never understood it because 95 percent of them had white in their blood . So i never identified as Aborigine , Dont get me wrong some actually like whites but the majority detest whites from the day they are born they are told that whites stole their land they detest whites.
If we vote yes and later find out its a mistake it's too late.
If we vote no and we are wrong it can be changed.
It's too risky.
If it goes badly, it can easily be removed via another referendum?
@LlywellynOBrien Maybe in theory, but I can't see a government trying to remove something from a constitution.
Imagine America removing the right to guns.
Or more in line with Australia, Canada, removing the indigenous land rights.
Won't happen.
Exactly. It should have been legislated and if it worked it would remain.
@@tonybloomfield5635 Or, put it in the Constitution so that it isn't vulnerable to being removed by every government, and instead they'll have to convince us that it isn't working?
U jest? I hope you are not old enough to vote on this. @@LlywellynOBrien
Voting No because l want government to take accountability on Tax Payers funds being spent not some corporate side kicks that we never voted for
A Ranga here. Years ago in central Oz I was talking about life, the universe and everything with a gentleman from Arnhem Land. Mid sentence he interrupted and said to me with a big smile, "you know what, you're indigenous". I said, with a smile, "thank you, I'm not but I like the sentiment". 15 or so years later during this debate, the penny dropped. I'm not as far as I'm aware a descendant of any Aboriginal person, but this country is my earthly home. I am indigenous to this country.
I am indigenous , which means native to the land .I do not claim aboriginality,I am a 6th generation Australian from British decent .however I have no connection to Britain and Britain does not accept me .good .I am Australian who has connections with my land .
No you're not indigenous dickhead..aboriginal people are born into our race, we struggled being told growing up we are not on the same level of white people, actually lower then dogs by white society and the government trying to eradicate our blood line since the invasion of this land. Now there a white people and so called coconuts who never claimed to be us jumping on board to take funding set aside for indigenous purposes...that shit pisses me off.
Surely every Australian has to start somewhere, some time, becoming indigenous, even the earliest settlers1000's of years ago?
@@noiamspartacus8965 just like the Cane Toad huh, must be Indigenous by now
What is your connection to Australia, is it a historical or an ancient connection.
@@JarrabalWarrior How do you know, I'm Australian, ya clown.
Voting NO on the voice is NOT racist.
The voice is a road to apartheid.
Let’s all vote NO together. 👍
I don't understand why it's the road to apartheid. I have not yet been convinced by the arguments put forward by the "no" campaign, which is to put it lightly. I don't understand how adding a preamble to the constitution and creating an advisory body will divide Australians, I don't think it matters how much it will cost (considering the vast quality of life difference between Aboriginals and white European descendants). I feel like I'm stupid because I just don't get how everything else being said by the "no" campaign is meant to help make a decision. I'm not trying to call you out, I'm hoping you, out someone else can show me what I'm missing
ok how about this . thalidomide was a great idea once, and endorsed by many doctors. what if thalidomide was endorsed by the constitution and could never be removed.@@sadiewopen
@@sadiewopen Just look at how many corporations are advocating the No vote, vs how many for the Yes vote.
If you can think for yourself, ask yourself, WHY Albo doesn’t release the FULL scope of the amendment. If you have at least TWO functional brain cells, you will realise you’re about to be SCAMMED !
But that's not right, the point of a referendum is to change the constitution, including removing things. @@petereacott2765
I am enjoying your discussion very much.
I don't know how I came across you, but I thank God I have.
I've now watched half a dozen or so of your broadcast.
Keep up the great work sir !
God bless you.
Great content, thank you for making this effort to produce this content for people actually interested in the voice proposition.
Your lack of bias is honestly refreshing. Cheers.
It doesn't matter who is "Indigenous". It's irrelevant. What is relevant is being Australian. Australians in need should be helped. If Australians put their ethnicity first, and they need help, they can fund it themselves. Besides, "indigenous"" means to have originated in a certain place. In other words, body is indigenous to Australia. We're all migrants of the indigenous of Africa.
Bravo. Well said.
Very well said. Wish some of the doubters in the Voice campaign had access to and read the content of this site. I, personally, have found it well balanced and informative, being an immigrant myself from County Durham, no not Irish, North East of England.
Indeed, government funded assistance should go by need rather than race.
There's a bit of irony however in your last statement of being migrants of the indigenous of Africa. These groups today have members that do not have shared Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA like people in most other places. This would most likely be due to those groups having a common ancestor even further back with those in Africa today and migrating to Africa in the first instance.
The indigenous in Australia have links to Denisovan DNA and given migration patterns from bones and DNA it may well be that the original inhabitants of Australia having bones sitting in what is now caves in the oceans around Australia with no African DNA at all. The extent of assimilation in the current make up of DNA means that at some point very low single digit percents of this group exist today in full-blood native lines. Also, the current DNA seem to strongly indicate different origins from many different migration waves.
It is a little sad what a strongly communicated idea can do for a society where it can become just a stated 'fact' and influence opinion so broadly. This is a super active field of research and give it a couple of decades and we'll likely actually know what happened for the first time for people coming to Australia.
@@infiniteloopcounter9444 your response is clearly well considered and ends optimistically but archeologists and anthropologists do have trouble accessing indigenous remains and one wonders if access is denied for sacred or political reasons. Perhaps both.
The oldest denisovan DNA is around 300000 year old discovered in Spain but yet they think we originated Out of Africa 200000 years ago there is still a lot of mystery around our Origin but one thing we do know man has definitely roamed the world
I checked the dictionary "Indigenous" means "Born of that country". That includes me. I am totally white, and way back come from England, but I was born here in Australia amid quite a few generations. Therefore, by definition I am "indigenous". Give me everything I want. Any house I grew up in has sacred value to me therefore I claim Land Rights to them all. Every park I played in, every school I went to. It's all the same thing they want except I don't claim ALL the country. Vote NO.
As a white man of 4th gen British ancestry i am 100% Australian indigenous. Why, because this country was a British colony and we built 99.9% of everything in this nation, it belongs to us. Aboriginals on the other hand built zero but they killed the Australian pygmy that was here before them. Aboriginal DNA according to the Max Planc institute of Germany says Aboriginals are mostly of Indian descent. So yes, Im an indigenous Australian.
If an self identified "Aboriginal" wants remuneration on account of his great grandfather and his sacred attachment to some land, then please oblige, and give him 6 turtle shells, some boomerangs, and some didgeridoos, as these are the only items that are also sacred to the Aboriginal. White mans money is not worth anything to a primitive person who thinks that a block of land is sacred.
@@matton36 if you were "indigenous", you'd be acclimatised to the climate and not burn like a person who is from a colder region like europe.
@@lowkeyconvert8971 Im pretty acclimatized and i dont burn. However if you were aware of what an indigenous person was according to the dictionary you wouldn't have embarrassed yourself.
As an ex-digger myself the one thing the army taught me it is not the colour of one's skin it is the way you behave. Also, these re-invented indigenous talk endlessly about their aboriginality while ignoring the importance of their European forebears; of course it would have absolutely nothing to with the benefits offered to indigenous people.
All Australia gets benefits of some kind, off the government.
Or the jobs., loans, housing, art sales. This resonated with me as I have an Aboriginal grandfather, but I identify as Australian only, no caveat, or if forced into a box i go caucasian as its the majority of my DNA,, my brother is Aboriginal.
@@beepbeep6861 Yes but some get more benefits than others.
@@coobye Not true, do some research on it.
@@truthaus6840 I bet you'll claim your aboriginal side in a heartbeat, if you had to.
Edit -: You're black, when you want to be.
We are told the "Voice" is needed because indigenous Australians are a separate, sovereign people who maintain ancient culture and traditions and suffer great disadvantage.
Yet the majority of the 3%+ of our population who now are identified as indigenous live modern lives like the rest of us in the suburbs, with little to no connection to that ancient culture and are fully integrated members of modern Australia. We are also told to ignore that they are of mixed indigenous and European heritage and that somehow it is invalid to be brought up in the culture of their European forefathers. (In most traditional cultures, marriage into another clan or tribe would mean the children are brought up in the ways of their fathers' people.)
So why are we trying to segregate out a portion of our own people, fellow Australians, who share common culture, heritage, language, accent and world view with the rest of us, and declare them based on blood to be of another alien culture and world view. And how does giving that group the 'voice' help those who really have preserved the old traditions in remote communities or those who suffer disadvantage who still live outside or in disfunction from modern mainstream society? And why can't parliament just commit to consult those remote and other communities more and listen without changing the constitution?
Well said
Garbage. This is like saying Australian Irish people (or Irish Irish people for that matter) aren't really Irish because they aren't feudal peasants labouring under the English.
You've just picked an arbitrary element of a culture and absolutised it to claim that anyone who doesn't meet your weird criteria is somehow less Indigenous.
The proposed Voice has nothing to do with segregation, or seperation. It isn't and shouldn't be arbitrarily focused on only Indigenous Australians who live in rural and remote communities.
Also, the statistics are very, very clear that disadvantage is not in any way limited to the small proportion of Indigenous Australians who live in these communities. The huge majority who live in towns and cities still experience a whole range of significant disadvantages when compared to non-Indigenous Australians.
@@LlywellynOBrienyour first words aptly sums up the rest of your word salad racism
@@fenlander7114 how on earth is anything I said here racist?
Edit: also, while I could always do a better job at writing clearly, word salad seems pretty harsh. What was unclear?
@@fenlander7114 Enlighten us... Please.
Everyone just vote NO,unless you want a divided nation and set racism back 100 years. I’m Australian,born and bred here. My parents migrated to Australia with their parents from Ireland and England.
Best commentary so far. Fair discussion of issues & pitfalls. Leaves me to judge fir myself. Excellent
Thank you for your intelligent and clear thoughts and explanations on the matter.
This is a question I have often asked. It seems to me that some people are able to gain access to programs specified to assist Indigenous Australians despite the unquestionable fact they only have a very small percentage of Indigenous bloodline. Often, they have had an upbringing both culturally and socioeconomically that is typical of non-Indigenous people and as best as I can see are basically abusing funding and opportunities that are intended for those Indigenous people with greater needs.
Color of skin is irrelevant in the argument you present. I can show you Indigenous Men with dark skin who are 6,7 and 8 generations of Urban Living.. some of those great great grandfathers were traitorous dogs who tracked their own people, I can even show you photo's of them in their living room with all the mod cons of turn of the 20th century living. Then I can show you light skin kids, who to the ignorant like yourself would claim are white. Yet they dont speak a lick of english and theyre running around on some community in nothing more than their jocks and have never known any of this privilege you speak of. Bloomfields.. yea I know an Indigenous family of Bloomfields who are many many generation of sucking at the paternal teet of the government
the issue of identification needs to be addressed. dna tells the true story, and should be employed, i bet there would be an amazing drop in the number of so called first nations people {, which in itself is a myth, there never was a cohesive nation}, if penalties were applied for fraudulent claims by those claiming to be aboriginal when they are not..
@patrickwakefield2297 actually DNA testing for mixed race Aboriginals isn't always that reliable
@@patrickwakefield2297 Please see my comment to bustermorley 8318 regarding DNA analysis.
If there was a subsidy for one- legged Hungarian sailors there would be a sudden increase in numbers
If Africa is the cradle of mankind where we all come from then aren't all people colonizers.
Australia was the first area to develop humans. Please see my comment on 'races'.
@@barnowl. Sure? Just because Dan Andrews has chimp ears is not proof. Every source on goggle says Africa first humans .
Probably not because Indigenous Australians (and other Indigenous and Native peoples around the world) are unique in that they specifically didn't supplant or conquer and pre-existing population.
@@LlywellynOBrien wrong , the DNA evidence shows that aus has been repopulated several times . All ridginees are not the same DNA source. First nation just means first colonizer.
@@kokigephart111 Nah that is not true. I studied this stuff and the theory of previous groups being supplanted is long dead.
There is evidence for some degree of later arrival, but as visitors who either traded and left or remained in particular regions and became part of those communities. There is no evidence of any kind of (even local) conquest, colonisation or similar. There is some speculation of maybe a very small number of non-Indigenous (likely Indonesian) villages, but only within the last few hundred years which is nothing on a 60,000 thousand year timescale.
Beyond that, all contemporary Indigenous people descend from common ancestors who were the first to walk these lands.
We live in a time when anyone can self-identify as anything. As has often been pointed out, if you can change your gender, why can't you change your race? So yes, a lot of people will tick the box if they see money in it. And there may be nothing that can be done about it, as they will say it is their right to be what ever they want to be. That seems to be the law now.
If you are applying for any job, mining eg, always tick the indigenous box, and if you are female ,you have past the first computer scan of your application. Not a merit based system
@@Rustycarr59 I was born in Australia, as well as my parents and two of my grandparents. I reckon that makes me indigenous.
@@clayauslewis4236 That is absolutely the correct point of view. Everyone is indigenous to the land on which they were born. Counting past generations to see who is "more" indigenous is a fools game.
If Aboriginality is to be more than a trendy self identification, "real Aboriginals" need to get their act together and devise a system to authenticate claims. Allowing anyone and everyone to i.d as such debases the currency, and makes a mockery of the meaning of the word. Not only must this be done, but politicians must get on board and end the self i.d bs.
If people lie about their race, because to claim Aboriginality, provides financial benefit, proves that we already have apartheid. If "the Voice" gets up, it will be the criminal cabal, which was ATSIC, legalised and entrenched into our constitution. A Marxist, Apartheid, Mugabe style of dictatorship, will replace our constitutional rights.
Just amazing how easily a subject matter can be understood by the uninformed when explained in a clear, logical and common sense manner; thank you!
(You got Buckley’s of a chance to become a politician with this sort of clear cut talk...)
Thank you for your service. Lest we forget 🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺
Brilliant, thanks for your service in the army
I was always of the understanding that the word indigenous meant that you were native to your country. I am 5th generation Australian. I was born here. My husband is also 5th generation Australian and our children are 6th. With our ancestors buried in this soil and with us being connected to the land on which we were born, surely we would also be considered "native to the country" or Indigenous? The truth is I do not know any other language apart from English (because if you want to talk about trauma, my family being German were made to not speak their native tongue for fear of being placed in POW camps during both world wars regardless of being born in this country!) In fact I have never been to Germany, Sweden, Poland or Scotland. So I do not know any other country as "home". AUSTRALIA is my home, always has and always will be!
Great video thankyou. It shows the futility of declaring the Aboriginal community could unite to have a voice. Yet, this is what we are supposed to automatically assume in the referendum. The premise on which the Uluru statement of the heart is based, a united Aboriginal opinion, is a false one. Yet many people dare not to contradict it because it is somehow viewed as spiritually sacred to Aboriginal people. I beg to disagree. The other issue is that the 250 delegates could not possibly have spoken to 800,000 or so registered indigenous people to make a true representation. Sorry to be so blunt, but I think we've been presented with a referendum based on the opinions of political activists.
Simple. DNA test.
I honestly used to think I was part Aboriginal because of a really old familiy photograph of my great, great grandmother. I did one of those DNA family tree tests. Turns out she was Indian.
Even DNA test results have to be viewed with care as it all depends on how the DNA distributes down the ancestor line, if at all, as it depends on the 'luck' of the 'DNA dice' as there is not enough DNA to go around. in the greater FT. For example, my full-blood brother and I have different DNA results. (We are not aboriginal). I have a much greater majority of one ethnicity compared to my brother and he has a greater majority of another ethnicity to me. I also have three other minor ethnicities and he has none. Blaine Bettinger explains this in his book about genetic DNA and ancestry.
Indigenous is not an aboriginal or islander language name it is from my mother tongue with it's roots in latin. If you are an indigenous Australian it simply means you are born from the land you live in. Around 71% of Australians are indigenous as in they were born here in Oz.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. - Animal Farm
You don't get extra power and influence based on what you were born as. That's racism.
Who gives a rats arse,in WW2 'all' of us were fighting for our lives 'united' !
Yup.. and after WW2, just as after WW1, Australia had a Homesteading Act where Lands were given out for Service to ones Country.. on offer to everybody but the Indigenous who served of course. After WW2 one of the big fights was to be included in the Homesteading Act and Australian Bigots like yourself raged at the idea and seethed with murder in your baited breathe at the audacity of an Indigenous Man even daring to ask to be a recipient. We won that battle, and now not all Lands owned by Aboriginal People are Native Title.. a lot of it is owned under the Homesteading Act
Sometimes I think we need another one just as a reminder.
@@djpodesta Chinas working on it, better start learning Mandarin
@@djpodesta i am shocked i am not banned ! we are in a War and the Enemy is well implanted within the Mind emf/emrweaponized since 1987 cofactoring...over
@@djpodesta what does it matter to me who the new masters are? Either way its not in my favor so I couldnt give two flying farks about Chinas intentions. Nothing changes for me, still spat on and treated like shit. You on the other hand, everything changes for you lol. You get to the Indigenous Experience first hand free and on the house. You get to have your own free Reservation with your own free Flour and Salted Meat and attend a free school for the Natives to propagandaize you, oops I meant Integrate you, into your new culture lol. Oh I'll be there too lol, but for all intents and purposes its pretty much just going to be more of the same for me haha
Years ago I had a blond haired, blue eyed friend, he identified as Aboriginal. One day he said to me, "Come to the Elder's council meeting with me tonight. (wink, wink) you might be Aboriginal as well". Yeah, nah. I am not going to pretend to be something I'm not.
Thankyou for that video. Such an important point you make…….”do your research, and know what you’re voting for”. It would seem to me that there are those who are counting on us not taking this advice
Would we be having these conversations if we now all spoke Japanese?
Damn straight.. many died to protect all our cultures.
How right you are! Same if the Spanish (Mayas etc sth America), Portugese, CHINESE!, Dutch etc., etc.., had settle
I have to be honest, I thought this was going to be another one sided biased video. I totally agree with you on the identification dilemma. Thank you for a balanced and unbiased video.
A large part of the problem is we are being asked for an "Indigenous" voice, and not an "Aboriginal" voice. Am I splitting heirs, definitely not. An Indigenous thing is a thing born to an area. - it could be a plant brought over from South Africa that after many generations is quite at home. Using that definition, that makes me an Indigenous Australian (fully imported 5 generations ago). BUT it does not make me an Aboriginal Australian. There is only one definitive proof the Aboriginality, and that is a DNA test.
If the Woke crowd had not changed Aboriginal to Indigenous, and New Australian to Ethnic then we would not be having this conversation about who is in and who is out.
From what I have read there is no DNA test and Aboriginal Australians are very close to white Australians . Forgive for bringing race into it but there are three main races Caucasian, Negroid and Mongoliod and Aboriginals are not the last two.
@@barryford1482 We came here from the Indus Valley Civilization during the Indo-Aryan Migration into what is now India. The Hindi People are the latter, we do not descend from them, but they are the descended from those of our people who remained and married in with them. We walked to Australia mostly across the Indonesian Land Bridge, kayaked some, and left behind small encampments in the Indonesian Island who then married in with successive waves of migrations from the Asiatics and of course the Polynesian expansion. Maori's will tell in their own Lore that a people like the Aboriginal Australians were already in New Zealand before they arrived, they married in with some and fought with others. Dont ask about Papua New Guinea, I dont know.. I just figured those mad fluckers were already there when my Ancestors came through and they sprinted the whole length of the Island.. either that or they paddled around lol. But you are correct that we are more closely related to the Caucasians than we are to the Negroids, thats probably the first intelligent comment from a white man Ive seen in a while
@@mysty0 You are a racist bigot
@@barryford1482 Please see my comment regarding 'races'.
Please see my comment on the origin of 'races'.
My father grew up in the North West desert region around Wiluna. His family left Wiluna after his father died in a mining accident. He had great skill with Ozzie Rules football on both feet.
I have always felt very comfortable in Wiluna on three times we have holidays.
I encourage all Australians to regular trips to there
I was brought up in S.Africa under apartheid. Due to the long period of white settlement going back to 1652, if you identified as "white" and your family had been in the country for 3 generations or more it was inevitable that African blood flowed in your veins - to what ever degree. My wife was born in S.Africa of Anglo/Dutch background of northern European appearance. When she could check her ancestry via DNA - we were surprised that although she was mostly northern European decent, she was 10% "sub Saharan origin - meaning Bantu" which was only a matter of interest to her. Because of apartheid, the government had to decide who was white and who was "coloured". Of course nobody on the borderline wanted to be coloured - this caused trauma to families where some were and some were not. Those who were "coloured" were shunned by their families and any who were declassified as coloured kept this shameful fact a secret. In Australia, it is also inevitable that if your family has been here long enough you will also be part Aboriginal to whatever degree - but unlike S.Africa, substantial immigration has diluted this effect. However, unlike S.Africa, everybody wants to be Aboriginal even if to whatever degree possible.
Thank you 🙏
Thank you Sir. I appreciate your views and comments... I look forward to viewing all of your teachings.
I realy appreciate and respect the speaker on this chanel. He appears to me to be very fair minded and straightforward. While I'm commenting here, I identify as a Royal Albert fine bone china tea pot but no-one will accept me as such,, how do I overcome this trauma???
Identify as Chinese Blue Willow Pattern, it is far more popular.
I thought, as a Royal Albert I could retain my assigned white colonial oppressor status.@@joneff9713
An excellent and measured contribution to the debate around this issue, thanks. Loved the bit at the end about mistaking the identity of the biscuit. Very clever.
A very informative session👌
I love it when you turn on the ABC and some freckly redhead drops a "my mob" reference outta nowhere and you genuinely can't tell if you're living in a Monty Python sketch or not.
Agree. Whitey- aboriginals/aboriginal-whiteys is what I call them.
Thanks for covering this topic.
It has been an issue for me ever since I saw the ABC cover a story about a government program to help disadvantaged Indigenous Australians to find an entry point into the nursing profession. Unfortunately the room full of candidates all looked to be of English/Irish or European descent.
Of course, I cannot simply assume that these candidates are/were falsely claiming Indigenous heritage, but it just goes to show that there seems to be something amiss within the identification process.
Apart from the obvious high profile cases that are continually dismissed, I have noticed middle classed European Australians, an East or South East Asian descent business man and I even heard a case about an South Asian immigrant. All apparently legitimate.
I also find it amazing that the one test that can provide conclusive evidence about ones ‘Aboriginality,’ is allowed to be dismissed as racist by the same portion Indigenous claimants who *could* have the most contentious claims.
Unfortunately, while I would always stand beside all of my *honest* Indigenous brothers and sisters; - if they would have me of course; or; for that matter, anybody finding themselves in an unjust situation, I have become very skeptical about the copying of politicised Aboriginality that has swept the western world in recent times.
I think that all Australians should be lobbying their local MPs to look into this matter and insist upon DNA proof along side any government application.
One *tongue in cheek* question; given that I was born in Australia, can I claim Indigenous Heritage status? 😄
Cane Toads were born here too, you can be a Cane Toad
@@mysty0 I guess that it takes one to know one.
I identify as a cane toad. 🐸Do I get freebies from the Gov? @@mysty0
Suggestion We all carry 200,000 yrs ancestry.. Its not special
@@kimbo99 You know that, I know that and the most of the world knows that.
The only problem is that there is a certain cohort who are getting away with their seemingly purposeful misdirection.
But I am glad that you brought it up. 👍
An intelligent, well-informed presenter. Thankyou for this excellent piece of work.
There are indigenous people in parliament, the senate, the media, corporate Australia, education, local government, law inforcement, the local post ofice, the list goes on and there is no voice ??? Looks like a voice to me ????
Brilliant brilliant brilliant. I’m voting NO but I would so like to help those in our aboriginal community escape all of the inequalities they currently suffer from. Our governments both federal and state refuse to address those inequalities but rather make loud announcements, political noise and just kick the can down the road. We’ve had Royal Communications into deaths in custody, Bridging the Gap, we’ve had Sorry, we’ve had ATSIC and we’ve got NIAA. Nothing motivates our politicians to actually attempt to fix those inequalities and unfortunately the many millions spent on the Voice won’t help either. I feel guilty but I’m absolutely over phoney political announcements that achieve nothing.
When I was young, being a Blackfulla was not popular, be anything but Aboriginal. It was bloody hard. Today things are so much different. This conversation is needed and you said it well. Also, had no idea until now bickies were connected to the city in France 🙃 Thank you!
It's still hard, why do first nations children have to try a hundred times more harder, to be accepted, in their own country.
@@beepbeep6861 Young people in my family are accepted and many are flourishing. Our old people did it hard and pushed for change, so we could live a better life. For this, I’m extremely grateful.
@@beepbeep6861 Crap. Australians bend over backwards to help disadvantaged Aboriginals, and all the while you keep insulting them. Who is disadvantaged? My son cannot get a university scholarship for his course unless he is female or Aboriginal. And shall we discuss Aboriginal reduced-interest housing loans, free medical care, employment quotas etc? We are all equal in Australia, yes that's right... after Aboriginals, ethnic minorities, LGBTQI, etc. I suppose we've got to make that White AngloCeltic scum suffer, don't we now.
'Nice' is named after the city, Nice.
@@beepbeep6861...they don't. The bigotry of low expectations for remote area kids means that these children are missing out on being educated and having their life choices contrained and this was the same with the previous generations many who are now illiterate adults wasting their life on sit down money. Easy welfare imperials the number one driving force of keeping the gap wide.
Excellent discussion. This is a question that has intrigued me for a number of years. Thank you for posting.
'Not black or white' That was a brave pun in a woke post sensible world. The question of who is indigenous, in short it's a rort. There is no political stomach to set this matter right, except Pauline Hanson. Much to the disquiet of the mainstream political elite and journalistic left, Pauline is resonating with the electorate. Even the name of her party is starting to resonate…. 'One Nation'.
Not WOKE Sensible, Woke Sensitive. There is NOTHING sensible about WOKE.
no one is indigenous in Australia as we all moved here sometime in our family history
Indigenous is any person born on a land. So most except for immigrants born overseas are indigenous. The term Aboriginal means original people of a land. The government bodies have the terminology incorrect.
Finally someone with unbiased common sense approach 👏
If you are born in Australia, I believe that makes you an Indigenous Australian. REGARDLESS of colour
You are correct. I did not come from somewhere else, my ancestors were born in Australia, I was born in Australia, I know no other country, I have a spiritual association with my country, this is MY country, I am a proud indigenous Australian.
The Only thing that should define you as Australian is your commitment to Australia
‘Indigenous’ in this context simply means Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, I can understand those with encyclopaedic definitions being more precise, but specifically the referendum is not asking for an ‘indigenous’ ‘Voice’ but an “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice” (p.S129(i). Now I disagree that this is necessary and given the proposed wording I think this is a very risky novel amendment to the Australian constitution, and so me and my family are simply voting NO. Having said that, if we are going to have a “race-based” body (or any race-based targeted privileges and entitlements), it is important to be able to determine eligibility of individual persons by the same race-based identity category, we cannot have it both ways. It’s even worse than I thought about the ‘three-part test”, that given part i descent is very contentious and now you say census-wise part iii community recognition is also suspect, we’re left with part ii self-identification - no legally enforced procedure therefore. Practically this regime contributes to the detriment of those who are in need of support (granting for a moment the assumption that such a need is race-based or by virtue of one’s ancestors living in Australia for 50,000+ years). Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council (MLALC) CEO Nathan Moran laments, “the sad and unfortunate reality is that people have used self-identification to receive jobs, housing and scholarships they're not entitled to which are meant for the indigenous. The Indigenous birth rates don't match up with the population increase” (25% from 2011-2016 census as Wesley noted). Moran has now called for a widespread adoption of the Commonwealth Government's three-part identity test to officially confirm who is Indigenous and who is not, in an effort to stop people from rorting the system and he reckons it's time to “end the statutory declaration and apply the laws they're compelled to enforce”. Aboriginal Land Council of Tasmania chair Michael Mansell agrees. He called out those who are falsely identifying as Indigenous and branded them as 'identity seeking': "The people who are ticking the box to say they are Aboriginal when their demographic is poor white people who pretty much are disenfranchised.” Governments do not seem to attribute as much eligibility value to non-Aboriginal poor people so some attach themselves to something that has perceived greater eligibility value which is being Aboriginal. As a side note, Love and Thoms 2020 case tells us that “aboriginality” does not seem to require citizenship, this will be odd when it comes to ‘The Voice’, it needs to be clarified as former Justice Nettle’s (concurring) observations about the possible need for legislation to provide a pathway to citizenship for all who do satisfy the three-part test should be able to apply for and be given citizenship. ‘The Voice’ is even more controversial and risky when the above are carefully considered. Safer to vote NO. Thank you Wesley.
I was born here. So were my parents. And their parents. We are of the soil, the air and the water of this country.
Regardless of how any group including government want to define 'Indigenous' for their own ends or means, especially when stating it in a legal document or Act such as a referendum, the real and true legal meaning shall hold precedence over all others!
Therefore....'Indigenous' has always been and will always be (as quoted in Black's Law Dictionary), 'Indigenous' : A person who is a citizen of a particular place, region, or nation by virtue of having been BORN there'. That makes more than 15 million Australians 'Indigenous Australians' and the number is growing daily!
I am Indigenous to Australia. Born here so that’s all that’s required.
Im Very proud of being a True Blue Aussie.
There you go you learn something new every day even if it is just about a biscuit😋
I'm Indiginous as a 5th generation Australian with offspring who are 7th generation, all free settlers, many warriors who lost their lives and protectors of aboriginals and kanaks.
Time to remove race or ancestry from the table, and base all and any assistance, on community and individual need.
Well said
could not agree more, but i have seen assistance available to part aboriginal people up close and the general public will never get those benefits.30 billion dollars a year is going somewhere, i dont think any one knows quite where..
Oh, and just to clarify. I don't mean do away with Indigenous recognition altogether. Factual indigenous history should be retained, taught and passed down. Cultural celebrations etc should remain. I'm just referring to what billions are spent on.
@@Grumpy-sy7wrAll of a sudden people want to remove race from the table, it was all fine and dandy, until the natives became restless hey.
@@beepbeep6861it’s not all of a sudden. It’s just we are sick of being polite and turning a blind eye to separate racist laws and entitlements that only Aboriginals get. Wake up to yourself - we just want equal treatment for all Australians.
I am of mixed aboriginal and European descent. You are correct in everything you say.
Where will all this stand if in a few years there is a voted in Republic , so then there is no Australian constitution ( the act) that I have not read and do not know the full legal meaning of. It will all start over again. If there is a Republic coming in then there is a new constitution which cancels out The Act Constitution which is now asked to be voted on to expand to include a Voice to the Parliament . This confuses me as it should be a Voice for the First Nation People and include each and every one in a way they are not exploited . Who will deliver the services, will this be outsourced to corporations, will it be run like the NDIS .Who knows what this all means.
This is all a first step to breaking the Constitution to make way for a Republic, which requires the Constitution to vanish before it can happen
I am indigenous, I was born here, so does my parents, and their parents before them. In effect, I am 7th generation native. I have no connection to any land other than Australia. Therefore, I am an aboriginal by definition, even tho I am 100% pure Caucasian. This is my land. This is our land. Not yours alone.
What is your connection to Australia, is it a historical or an ancient connection.
@@beepbeep6861 Can't you read and comprehend? jYour cut and paste comment is irrelevant.
@@JarrabalWarrior What is your connection to Australia.
@@JarrabalWarriorbeepbeep is just a pain in the arse, trolling on this gentleman's post, trying to aggravate people. Ignore them.
@@beepbeep6861 👈Yes23 pinko troll.
I have a Great Grandfather who was Danish, Does thisl make me danish, Give us a break. All this referendum is doing is causing a Racial Divide in the Country. Not solving a problem, but creating one. If the government wants to show true equality in this country, how about offering the benefits now available to Indigenous Australians to the rest of us.
WE ARE ALL INDIGENOUS. JUST SOME OF US ARE A GREEDY MINORITY.
Just like the Cane Toad huh, indigenous by now lol
How are you indigenous.
@@JarrabalWarrior No such thing.
@@JarrabalWarrior Like stated before, no such thing.
@@beepbeep6861 ITS MY CONSTITUTION.
ITS BEEN OCCUPIED SINCE 1967.
IM THE NAKED OWNER OF THE CONSTITUTION.
ALL YOUR WHINING MEANS NOTHING AT LAW.
I'm indigenous as I was born in this great country.
Indigenous in PURE aboriginal
That definition will rule out at least 90% of people identifying as indigenous.
@@unbearableunbearable2740 I’m Irish, German, English and Scottish. It’s not practical to describe me as indigenous to each country. I have indigenous ancestors but I myself do not hold that distinction
You are a very logical person.
Just ridiculous....throw the whole racist nonsense out
I'm Aboriginal, and therefore Indig.
"In Australia there is no hierarchy of decent; there must be no privilege of origin" Bob Hawke!
The only way is by DNA analysis, which would actually require courage on the part of the government. Which is not going to happen.
And what percentage are they no longer Aboriginal? So if we find a 1/8th out there on the communities who doesnt speak a lick of english what should we do? Send the Aboriginal Protection Board to snatch the lightskin child away? Eject them from the community in which the child grew and the culture to which they have known? Kick them to the kerb in some white mans city and tell them they are not disadvantaged? You people are mentally insane I swear it
@@mysty0 Yes23 pinko troll.
Please see my comment to bustermorley 8318 regarding DNA tests.
Its a clear and valid argument.
I also believe such a permanent change should be supported by the large majority of those it supposedly intends to represent. Rather than a 51% majority.
Until it's widely accepted as a worthy endeavour by all especially the indigenous, it seems it needs some improvements.
Another great video and no need to pardon your pun, very well said. Also, thank you for your service! You're living high on the hog, two biscuits with a culpa, bloody capitalist! Also did your say between 2021 and 2026 censuses! Could it be 2011 and 2016. Sorry I'm being picky!
I am an indigenous "First Nations" Australian. My earliest ancestors stepped foot in this country way back in the 1840's and had been here nearly 60 years when Australia first became a Nation on 1st January 1901.
Several relatives and ancestors have paid the ultimate sacrifice fighting for Australia in either the First, Second or Vietnam Wars.
Neither I, nor any members of my Indigenous, First Nations family need to be "welcomed" to our own Indigenous country by anybody's money-gouging "Aunties" or Uncles".
Vote NO!
Only blood DNA will tell Bro.
Set the minimum required blood quantum at 25% (as they do in the US) and that would reduce the number of Aboriginals by at least 75% I reckon.
Yeah , Bro. What a knob.
No worries mate.
Not necessarily.ssee my comment to bustermorley8318
Great work mate you make good points. Thankyou .
Just vote no to not introducing race to the constitution
The constitution is not for race it is for running the country and government
I wonder, whatever happened to the white Australia policy.
Race is already mentioned in our constitution, section 51.
@@beepbeep6861 👈Yes23 pinko troll.
Since learning about how the Indonesians brought the dingo to Australia about 4 thousand years ago, I questioned this myself. We really need more research in indigenous DNA.
I believe a university in India is leading us in knowledge of indigenous DNA and different times of migration to Australia.
No
I was born here as where my parents and grandparents. I am indigenous. It's quite simple. One People and One Nation and that includes all citizens regardless of place of origin
Thank you.
There are no Indigenous Australians. The first inhabitants of this continent (nomadic tribes), came here from somewhere else. All humans (Homo Sapiens) evolved in Africa and migrated across the globe. Anthropology 101.
This is silly. No one meaningfully denies the origin of humans in Africa. Nor there later migration. However Indigenous Australians were the first people who arrived here, and have walked these lands for tens of thousands of years. They are clearly indigenous.
FIRST INVADERS have no priority over others. 1788 invaders all came from invaded countries. Where's our compo ?
@@LlywellynOBrien Fist pygmies here were eaten by larger invading aboriginals. Eye witness reports from chinese sea captains west coast 200=300 AD. Also witnessed by Dutch sailors both sides of the continent. Modern aborigins are mostly DNA linked to the Indian Dravidian Haplogroup 1500 yrs ago. Something like Java island that is Hindu.
Incorrect. They wandered onto this continent from New Guinea. They are NOT from here. Kangaroos are....they evolved here. I suggest getting an education.@@LlywellynOBrien
@@MrJohndlthis is just semantics. You are redefining the word 'indigenous' in a ridiculously strict way that would mean that very likely no group could accurately be described by the word. At that point it would utterly cease to have meaning as a concept. Why bother having a word that describes no one?
Yes Indigenous Australians descend from people who migrated here. That is not disputed. They however became a people here and over tens of thousands of years developed a continent-spanning culture which is indigenous to this place even on your definition. As a people they were born here.
I share the concern regarding fakes. Same thing happens with War veterans having to root out frauds who try to take advantage of the system. Fraud is a serious problem for us all irrespective of our race, it devalues the cause and creates huge issues financially.
We are all Australians, this referendum will only attempt to divide Australians, but Australia will vote NO to the Voice, and YES for a united Australia, Im voting NO to the Voice, because I am a proud Australian, born in Australia, and I’m no less an Australian than anyone else.
Well why have we been treating our first people less, in fact, not so long ago, they were recognised as flora and fauna, that is why most of us disrespectful/disregard them as the first inhabitants.
@@beepbeep6861 No. "flora and fauna" is a myth. Even the GayBC came out and admitted that one. You really are doing yourself a dis-service on this forum
@@beepbeep6861 it wasn't that long ago that a uncle of mine was refused entry into a hotel because he had dark skin, in Western Australia..Moora.
@@marleneholloway7775 I'm sorry for your uncle, you and yours, it saddens me that, this behaviour is still happening, if he was playing up, that's another story.
Everyone born in Australia should identify as indigenous.
Simple Solution - REMOVE INDIGENOUS ENTITLEMENTS so we are all treated equally and it won’t matter. Hopefully when the voice fails there will finally be a referendum for that. 🇦🇺
I'm a Third Nations person. Not a First Nations (aboriginal) or Second Nations (descendant of the colonials) but a Third Nations (newcomer). Am I allowed to slaughter and eat dugong in Moreton Bay Marine Park?
Peter Chandler CLP played a major role at the beginning of the VOICE concept in the Northern Territory of Australia. it is a concern that, with such exposure, starting strongly in 2013, he is not part of the debate. It is understood that the pressure the NO to the Constitution is under goes back mostly to these days! An in depth non-partisan analysis would help to seek a truth covered up by propaganda and partisan passion.
thanks for being straight up on this complicated issue. and for being a soldier of the adf. enjoy you cuppa
Good thoughts and very clearly articulated.
Thankyou.
To paraphrase Mr Orwell. All born Australians are indigenous............but some are more indigenous than others!
But we all carry 200,000 yrs of ancestry. Its no big deal
Thanks. Very informative.
I am Indigenous, I am a proud Tasmanian Aboriginal I also have Irish, English and Scottish bloodlines. I love this beautiful country and the wonderful people. I do not want to divide Australia on race so I will be voting no
Same, Irish, English, and German. I'm more European than aboriginal....
Well said.
Thank you for your wisdom.
Great video mate, very thought provoking.
I'm Celtic, I'm Nordic, I'm Latin, I'm German, I'm part of the convict trash Britain didn't want 200 odd years ago, I'm a descendant of the fisrt boat people, I am AUSTRALIAN.