No. The reason it failed, was because whenever people asked how it would work, and more information on certain aspects, we were told that we were some variation of racist dumbass. And that apparently hasn't sunk in yet.
The arguments for the voice were underwhelming compared to those against. Many older voters remember atsic and the widespread corruption that this created . Our constitution should address all of us rather than specific minorities. The ability to change and abolish systems that don’t work is a good thing and hence making things harder to change is fuxking stupid
Yeah I agree. A lot of Australians are racjst, and most have racist biases deep in them, but really it was just people not wanting to look into it. The media was saying "Working people don't have time to find out what it is". What? One search is too much time?
As an indigenous man 50, I agree the yes voters are racists c@nts who didn't ask the one basic question. Which was. What's the legislation going to involve? The government refused to provide the details the average Aussie paying attention voted no. The government provided no facts only feelings that's why it failed. Here's why I voted no & many of my mob did as well. ruclips.net/video/DAhkmFzqugI/видео.htmlsi=o7YEXxEN0lV7ZSju
No. He's speaking the same condescending crap that the mainstream media is, without identifying the various concerns that people had to soothe his overblown ego.
@@ARandomAnna as an indigenous man of 50 the yes campaign was one of the most racially vile political campaigns I've seen in my life. The majority of my mob didn't want the racist communist radical activists controlling what we do & own. We've already enough that from the government. Calling the no voter's dumb fcks, racist, dckheads & you still think you're the righteous one's? You're the racists the bigots the bullies that's all you are...
@@ARandomAnna No you've just proved his point and why 2/3rds of Australia voted no. The majority do not agree with condescending crap that the mainstream media is, they don't agree with the woke marxist ideology that underpins much of the trendy left's thinking, the bs that introduced the idea of the voice, that wants reparations, the repeated calling others racist because they don't agree you, that settlement is invasion, that changing the date or name of Australia day will somehow solve all Aboriginal problems. All the lies, misinformation and misdirection used trying to flog the dead horse was apparent to anyone not inflicted with the woke mind virus.
It's good to see a young bloke having a go, so I'll let you down gently, you haven't got a f**king clue, nor the self awareness to question your own beliefs and understanding. Here's some questions and answers to contemplate. Why did the electorates with the highest numbers of aboriginals have the highest no vote? The majority of Aboriginals see themselves as Australians first and didn't want a distinction to be made on race, separating them from other Australians. The majority of Aboriginals, did not want the voice and do not believe in the voice nor the Aboriginal elites & activists pushing the voice and their white establishment virtue signalling enablers, do not represented their (Aboriginal) interests, not now, not ever. The elites & activists only care about the politics not solving the issues, the issues give them power and status, that's why little has changed in 50 years, for the cohort of Aboriginals mostly in remote areas who face the problems. Whilst the elites and activists have seen significant improvements in their lifestyles and outcomes over the same period. If the voice was only an advisory group with no power, why did it need to be in the constitution? Albo could always have passed legislation at anytime creating an advisory body. The problem was you can't have a treaty with yourself, Aboriginals are Australians, however, if the voice was in the constitution, then the treaty can be made with voice, with the effect of backdating, as if it was made with Aboriginals when the first settlers arrived. Why did the electorates with high number of university educated have the highest Yes vote? It was hilarious watching the woke leftie media trying to spin this as if Yes voters were smarter, couldn't be farther from the truth. Woke marxist ideology entered Australia first via the academic/educational institutions 30 or more years ago, by 20 years ago the infiltration and capture of most faculties was complete. If you have been to university in the past 15 to 20 years, chances are you came out dumber than you went. Taught what to think but not how to think, indoctrinated but not educated. The smug arrogance of the unaware ignorant can be sickening, thinking they are correct and occupy the high moral ground, because dogma tells them so, and lack the intelligence to question otherwise. Then it's off to wave the next flag and virtue signal support for the next thing. Aboriginals are said to have been in Australia for 60,000 years, the longest living culture. Can you tell me when "welcome to country", "smoking ceremony", and dot art was first practised? Must be a while back, right? Welcome to country & the smoking ceremony were invented in 1975 by an entertainer & couple of Aboriginal activists, the concept never existed in Aboriginal culture in all 60,000 years of history. They are race grifts. Dot painting was even later and was invented by a white school teacher who taught it to the Aboriginals, now it's consider stealing/appropriating culture if a white person does it. Lastly, Aboriginals have never considered themselves 1st nations peoples, a stupid made up name and woke concept, like reparations, like BLM, like CRT, like diversity & equity, like intersectionality and identity, like oppressor vs victim, all made up marxist crap designed to implement an agenda, imported in more recent times from the US.
Ah, taking in American conservative talking points like BLM and CRT. When you're not intelligent enough to think for yourself, you borrow from overseas propaganda. The height of conservative anglosphere indoctrination.
If you rule out racism that does not mean there is only possible explanation. There are countless reasons, many good, why people voted against it. For me - I don't think giving a particular group of people special privileges leads to improvement. It often leads to the exact opposite.
He's right. Sadly, most Australians -- probably most people in general -- will believe anything the mainstream media tells them.
No. The reason it failed, was because whenever people asked how it would work, and more information on certain aspects, we were told that we were some variation of racist dumbass. And that apparently hasn't sunk in yet.
Well said
@@Kangaroo-Bob thanks
The arguments for the voice were underwhelming compared to those against. Many older voters remember atsic and the widespread corruption that this created . Our constitution should address all of us rather than specific minorities. The ability to change and abolish systems that don’t work is a good thing and hence making things harder to change is fuxking stupid
@@scottdraffin2798 Yes.
This young man is great!!!!! Thanks.
When you only have one "news" source, the result is inevitable...
Yeah I agree. A lot of Australians are racjst, and most have racist biases deep in them, but really it was just people not wanting to look into it. The media was saying "Working people don't have time to find out what it is". What? One search is too much time?
As an indigenous man 50, I agree the yes voters are racists c@nts who didn't ask the one basic question.
Which was. What's the legislation going to involve? The government refused to provide the details the average Aussie paying attention voted no. The government provided no facts only feelings that's why it failed.
Here's why I voted no & many of my mob did as well.
ruclips.net/video/DAhkmFzqugI/видео.htmlsi=o7YEXxEN0lV7ZSju
give this guy a raise and spread him all over tiktok/instagram
Hmmm, even this young fella got it wrong by trying to say that it would be elected rather than chosen. Therein lies your problem. Nice try, though.
I live with them
It’s so refreshing hearing this from our youth, they, like this young man are our future.
What a legend he is.
I voted yes.
And he’s speaking 💯 facts.
No. He's speaking the same condescending crap that the mainstream media is, without identifying the various concerns that people had to soothe his overblown ego.
@@seedfan8548interesting how you’ve just proven his point 🤷🏻♀️
@@ARandomAnna as an indigenous man of 50 the yes campaign was one of the most racially vile political campaigns I've seen in my life.
The majority of my mob didn't want the racist communist radical activists controlling what we do & own. We've already enough that from the government.
Calling the no voter's dumb fcks, racist, dckheads & you still think you're the righteous one's?
You're the racists the bigots the bullies that's all you are...
@@ARandomAnna No you've just proved his point and why 2/3rds of Australia voted no. The majority do not agree with condescending crap that the mainstream media is, they don't agree with the woke marxist ideology that underpins much of the trendy left's thinking, the bs that introduced the idea of the voice, that wants reparations, the repeated calling others racist because they don't agree you, that settlement is invasion, that changing the date or name of Australia day will somehow solve all Aboriginal problems. All the lies, misinformation and misdirection used trying to flog the dead horse was apparent to anyone not inflicted with the woke mind virus.
Culture reforms would become problimatic for institution of international relations
Its because of united nation
It's good to see a young bloke having a go, so I'll let you down gently, you haven't got a f**king clue, nor the self awareness to question your own beliefs and understanding. Here's some questions and answers to contemplate.
Why did the electorates with the highest numbers of aboriginals have the highest no vote? The majority of Aboriginals see themselves as Australians first and didn't want a distinction to be made on race, separating them from other Australians. The majority of Aboriginals, did not want the voice and do not believe in the voice nor the Aboriginal elites & activists pushing the voice and their white establishment virtue signalling enablers, do not represented their (Aboriginal) interests, not now, not ever. The elites & activists only care about the politics not solving the issues, the issues give them power and status, that's why little has changed in 50 years, for the cohort of Aboriginals mostly in remote areas who face the problems. Whilst the elites and activists have seen significant improvements in their lifestyles and outcomes over the same period.
If the voice was only an advisory group with no power, why did it need to be in the constitution? Albo could always have passed legislation at anytime creating an advisory body. The problem was you can't have a treaty with yourself, Aboriginals are Australians, however, if the voice was in the constitution, then the treaty can be made with voice, with the effect of backdating, as if it was made with Aboriginals when the first settlers arrived.
Why did the electorates with high number of university educated have the highest Yes vote? It was hilarious watching the woke leftie media trying to spin this as if Yes voters were smarter, couldn't be farther from the truth. Woke marxist ideology entered Australia first via the academic/educational institutions 30 or more years ago, by 20 years ago the infiltration and capture of most faculties was complete. If you have been to university in the past 15 to 20 years, chances are you came out dumber than you went. Taught what to think but not how to think, indoctrinated but not educated. The smug arrogance of the unaware ignorant can be sickening, thinking they are correct and occupy the high moral ground, because dogma tells them so, and lack the intelligence to question otherwise. Then it's off to wave the next flag and virtue signal support for the next thing.
Aboriginals are said to have been in Australia for 60,000 years, the longest living culture. Can you tell me when "welcome to country", "smoking ceremony", and dot art was first practised? Must be a while back, right? Welcome to country & the smoking ceremony were invented in 1975 by an entertainer & couple of Aboriginal activists, the concept never existed in Aboriginal culture in all 60,000 years of history. They are race grifts. Dot painting was even later and was invented by a white school teacher who taught it to the Aboriginals, now it's consider stealing/appropriating culture if a white person does it. Lastly, Aboriginals have never considered themselves 1st nations peoples, a stupid made up name and woke concept, like reparations, like BLM, like CRT, like diversity & equity, like intersectionality and identity, like oppressor vs victim, all made up marxist crap designed to implement an agenda, imported in more recent times from the US.
Ah, taking in American conservative talking points like BLM and CRT. When you're not intelligent enough to think for yourself, you borrow from overseas propaganda. The height of conservative anglosphere indoctrination.
If you rule out racism that does not mean there is only possible explanation. There are countless reasons, many good, why people voted against it. For me - I don't think giving a particular group of people special privileges leads to improvement. It often leads to the exact opposite.
"Promo SM"