 |
| Bob was a beloved Labor leader. He said above in 1988 |
LETTER TO SCMP:
“Associate Professor" Stephen Minas begins his piece: "Offered an opportunity to do something for Australia’s indigenous people, most Australians have responded with a resounding “no”. ("Australia’s ‘no’ vote a slap in the face for its indigenous people”, 19 October)
Let me try another framing: “Offered the opportunity to entrench an elite of indigenous Australians in charge of already-failed policies, to oversee an inherently racist constitutional amendment, most Australians saw through the con and voted a resounding NO”.
Associate Professor Minas sits in privilege on his eyrie in Shenzhen. Meantime, indigenous Australians on the forefront of the battle to improve the lives of Australian aborigines -- people like Senator Jacinta Nampijimpa Price and activist Warren Mundine -- spoke eloquently for the No campaign. They point out that what’s needed is not more “voice” (for there are already many) but to *Listen*. To Listen to the real problems of aboriginals living in remote outback communities. And then to do something about them. Not to have yet another Canberra-based “Voice” of elite bureaucrats, sucking on an engorged welfare teat.
Price and Mundine spoke at the Australian National Press Club for the “NO”, as did the “Yes” side. All had their say. People all over Australia tuned in and made their judgements. Most voted “No” because they made a better case. A better argument for how to improve things. A better case that the amendment was inherently racist. And that all Australians should be equal under the law.
As for “misinformation”, the most egregious case was that of the “Yes” campaign’s leader, the Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. I’d always thought of him as a “good bloke’. But he stunned me this time. There was clear and credible evidence that the “Uluru Statement from the Heart” – which he had committed to “implement in full” -- was more than just a one pager. The co-writer of the Statement Megan Davis, said it was “a very lengthy document of 18-20 pages”. Co-author Pam Anderson said similar. These pages included demands to carve out a percent of GDP as reparations and extending aboriginal “sovereignty”. One can argue these points. But Albanese denied they were even part of the Voice. This was disingenuous. In short, he lied to the Australian parliament. That was a shock to me. And I’m sure to many Australians following the debates.
Senator Price and Mr Mundine have a better grasp of the issues than a junior academic in Shenzhen. Let us not smear the good people of Australia, indigenous, British settler and immigrant. All are part of the successful multi-cultural polity called Australia.
Peter Forsythe
Discovery Bay
9308 0799
PF, etc.
ADDED: Stephen Minas’ article is full of ad hominem. That is, hitting the player not the ball. Emotional not factual.
Here goes, in order:
“... cannot get to grips...”
“... Violent history...”
“... Slap in the face”
“... mourn”
“... fraught history”
“... by force...”
“... negating...”
“... entrenched disadvantages...”
“... dispossession...”
“... ferociously negative...”
“... populist rabble-rousing”
“... risible claims....”
“... Some simply denied...”
“... Conspiracy theories ran rampant...”
“... Prominent indigenous voices received death threats...”
“... Kicked into the long grass”.
Granted some of these are not really ad hom. But they’re of a kind. Mostly emotional, and there’s nothing in the article that argues forcefully for a Voice, other than that it’d be nice and gracious to have done so. All up, a pretty crappy article IMO. And SCMP ought to be criticised for running this sort of shoddy stuff.
