Australia rejects proposal to recognise Aboriginal people in constitution

GreyShuck@feddit.uk to World News@lemmy.world – 952 points –
Australia rejects proposal to recognise Aboriginal people in constitution
theguardian.com

Australians have resoundingly rejected a proposal to recognise Aboriginal people in its constitution and establish a body to advise parliament on Indigenous issues.

Saturday’s voice to parliament referendum failed, with the defeat clear shortly after polls closed.

361

You are viewing a single comment

There was a massive, heavily funded FUD campaign by the "no" proponents. Sadly, it was very effective.

Yeah as soon as I heard the "if you don't know vote no" slogan I knew it was already over.. this one line just forgives people for being racist.

I'm not saying every No vote was racist just that many would have been and this made it so fucking easy for them to feel no guilt.

Yea that’s kinda what I meant. The No campaign here was pretty easy to cook up I think. And for the Liberal party it was a very attractive chance to kick the Labor govt down no matter the cause.

Which means, IMO, if you were going to do this, you had to be ready for all of that and not rely on calls to be “be on the right side of history”. Australia isn’t there and needs convincing, unfortunately.

The mining lobby seems to be behind it too - they stand to lose a lot if Aboriginal rights are given more credence.

Clive Palmer dropped (at least) $2 mill on the No campaign. That says a lot about what it's worth.

Not to mention that the bar for a referendum to pass is very high. For the non-Australians, you need not only a majority of voters nationally to vote yes, but also a majority of states to vote yes (the so-called "double majority"). Only 8 of the last 44 referendums before now have passed and partisan referendums have never passed, so this one was doomed the minute Dutton decided to play politics with it.

The yes campaign did it to itself with its vague and questionable impact.

The mining lobby funded some of the yes campaign and then proceeded to put out those vague and questionable messages. They really played both sides very effectively.

I have no doubt they had vested interests because the cultural sites get in their way (that’s reparations of its own!).

The yes vague campaign started day 1, that was on them entirely. They were proposing changing the constitution with very little detail out of the gate. Conducting and listening to a pole would have helped immensely.

The weight of the media was against them from day 1. It doesn't really matter what your messaging is if it doesn't get reported. What did get reported was whatever Murdoch's news media wanted to be reported, and if they reported the "yes" side only in terms of weak points then that's what people think the "yes" side had to say.

ABC ran non stop opinion pieces and articles on the yes vote. None stop from before the referendum was announced. The guardian same game. Early on the no campaign had no idea where or how they were going to oppose the vote. They just knew they were.

So no I kindly disagree the yes campaign can’t cry fowl here the no campaign didn’t find its feet until the last maybe week or two.

I guess it depends which media you use. My mother watches channel 7 mostly and she seemed puzzled as to why anyone would vote yes. "Apparently even the Aboriginals don't want it." And this was a few weeks ago. I think the mainstream media's been pushing "no" pretty hard throughout.

The only garbage I really found that I thought could swing voters was on TikTok, the “if you don’t vote yes; you’re a racist”. Effective.