tazz.
oz.
+1,338|6197|Sydney | ♥

So, ALP won. Thoughts?
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX
Albanese will devote his time to stupid unproductive stuff like the indigenous voice, rewarding his factional cronies and wasting money.

In three years we'll have forgotten how dismal the liberals were and vote them back in.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3475
why is 'indigenous voice' a stupid cause? surely it can't take up much of the federal government's time and resources.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX
Because its meaningless posturing?
It will take up a lot of time which will be completely wasted.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3475
i don't think it's for you to decide what is meaningless or not w/r/t aboriginal politics? no?

a lot of time? really? how many civil servants do you think will be tasked on that one?

time better spent expanding your fossil fuel programme maybe?
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6794|PNW

I'm thinking dilbert just means that it'll be a lot of empty gestures and lip service?
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+636|3742
Stop bullying Dilbert.

Dilbert, I have solution, a final solution to the bullying problem here. First you will need to get your guns together and buy a black outfit. Next, find Uzique.

Parody
Parody
Parody
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6794|PNW

Dilbert is probably a generous step above Jay in that department. Has he ever threatened to come to someone's house to beat them up? All he wants is to target shoot and gaze longingly at his Cats pinups. Harmless.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Stop bullying Dilbert.

Dilbert, I have solution, a final solution to the bullying problem here. First you will need to get your guns together and buy a black outfit. Next, find Uzique.

Parody
Parody
Parody
I'm going to let Jay handle this from here.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+636|3742
You have the power to end this. The power is in your hands.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX
I also have the power to do nothing.

Maybe this is my actual superpower.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX
That was about six months of stupid.

"Vote for the voice, it will be, ah, it'll be great because, er, you should vote for it anyway"
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-67110193
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6794|PNW

the "don't know vote no" thing was critically bankrupt. catchy slogans are probably important and realistic, but like, tell people what the thing is and why they should vote no if it's bad legislation. very low regard for australian cognition leaning on ignorance like that. doesn't say much for the target audience that it worked.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX
Never actually saw that slogan until after the event.

All it would really have taken would have been for someone to explain clearly what it was and what effect it would have.

Instead we got "Ah its um recognition, shouldn't the indigenous be ah recognised? I mean come on it'll be great"

Really the fact that no-one would set out clearly anything at all made it seemed like a trojan horse for whatever they actually had in mind.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6794|PNW

It's an argument I see a lot of in politics and other issues here, influencing based on ignorance rather than deconstruction. "The vaccines could be a trojan horse. Health care reform is a trojan horse. I don't know what's in those voting machines, do you? Civil rights are a pandora's box. THIS FOOD MAY HAVE CHEMICALS!" Blah blah blah.

The burden is of course more on the people pushing for legislation to communicate why it improves society, but man what a low-effort, low-energy counter. "Statement against, 'no, i dunno.'"
tazz.
oz.
+1,338|6197|Sydney | ♥

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

It's an argument I see a lot of in politics and other issues here, influencing based on ignorance rather than deconstruction.
The irony in this sentence is palpable. "influencing based on ignorance rather than deconstruction" sounds like the urban dictionary definition of a politician's answer.

I can't remember the last time I saw a politician answer directly, honestly, and simply.
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6794|PNW

Point.

It's just funny to me when an opposition against legislation is nearly or more vague than the legislation they're accusing of vagueness. Granted, it probably gets a better result (politically) in some cases creating a scary unknown rather than detailing why you think something should be scrapped. I suppose agencies like Fox and Sky will tell people what to think anyway.

Doesn't make for very exciting for/against dialog though.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

It's an argument I see a lot of in politics and other issues here, influencing based on ignorance rather than deconstruction. "The vaccines could be a trojan horse. Health care reform is a trojan horse. I don't know what's in those voting machines, do you? Civil rights are a pandora's box. THIS FOOD MAY HAVE CHEMICALS!" Blah blah blah.

The burden is of course more on the people pushing for legislation to communicate why it improves society, but man what a low-effort, low-energy counter. "Statement against, 'no, i dunno.'"
No, the issue was the statement for was "Yeah, dunno"

Once again, if the proposal had been for America to have a third house -> Senate, House of Representatives, Black House of Representatives would you have voted for on the basis of:

"Yeah, uh, it'll be fine, we'll work out the detail later, just vote for it OK"
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Adams_BJ
Russian warship, go fuck yourself
+2,053|6645|Little Bentcock

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Point.

It's just funny to me when an opposition against legislation is nearly or more vague than the legislation they're accusing of vagueness. Granted, it probably gets a better result (politically) in some cases creating a scary unknown rather than detailing why you think something should be scrapped. I suppose agencies like Fox and Sky will tell people what to think anyway.

Doesn't make for very exciting for/against dialog though.
It wasn't legislation, it was a change to our Constitution, the legislation was going to be figure out "later". On the surface it seems like a great thing to do, the trouble wasn't so much in the details, it's that there wasn't any details. There was hundreds of millions spent on campaigning and conducting the referendum, and countless opportunities to answer the many questions asked around the point. And the polling before the question was worded was very positive to the point that it was almost unthinkable that it wouldn't pass. It was putting an advisory body to the government with nothing really detailing the who what and how behind the whole thing, and because it would have been part of the Constitution you'd need another referendum to remove it if the Voice didn't work or wasn't suitable.

Yes vote relied on "it's the vibe of the thing", the no vote wasnt convinced that was enough. I can see both sides but I'm not surprised by the results and the plummeting polls as the vote drew nearer.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX
The problem was it was a lot more than an "advisory body"

Advisory bodies can be tacked onto anything without legislation, to change the constitution to insert an "advisory body" was colossal overkill which really suggested it wasn't an advisory body at all.

Try this:

"Lets change the American constitution so congress must consult with a native american advisory body on all matters."

What would that mean in practice? Any idea? This is what we asked to vote for with no detail beyond that.

"Trust us, we'll tell you the detail later, it'll be fine, if you don't you're a racist"

60% said No.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2023-10-16 01:29:25)

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX
Got to admit this was some neat thinking

https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.net.au/a57ab74fe39c3cf981c15c5f20d614bf?impolicy=wcms_crop_resize&cropH=2813&cropW=5000&xPos=0&yPos=166&width=862&height=485
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice would be an independent and permanent advisory body.

It would give advice to the Australian Parliament and Government on matters that affect the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

This includes issues such as education, health, housing, justice and other policies with a practical impact on First Nations people.

If the referendum passes, there would be a process with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, the Parliament and the broader public to settle the Voice design.

Legislation to establish the Voice would go through parliamentary processes to ensure adequate scrutiny by elected representatives in both houses of Parliament.

This would ensure the Voice can evolve and adapt as circumstances change, while upholding the authority of Parliament to legislate the Voice.

https://voice.gov.au/about-voice

So - Vote Yes, then we'll decide what it is.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6794|PNW

Adams_BJ wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

[…]
It wasn't legislation, it was a change to our Constitution, the legislation was going to be figure out "later".
Whatever, point still stands though.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6794|PNW

Dilbert_X wrote:

Try this:

"Lets change the American constitution so congress must consult with a native american advisory body on all matters."

What would that mean in practice? Any idea? This is what we asked to vote for with no detail beyond that.

"Trust us, we'll tell you the detail later, it'll be fine, if you don't you're a racist"

60% said No.
What are the chances of that after the backlash against CRT?

I wonder why people would think that native americans would need an extra apparatus in the first place. It could call back to attention historical genocide and ongoing discrimination and exclusion by the United States. Of course, that would be just to make white people Feel Bad.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6129|eXtreme to the maX

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I wonder why people would think that native americans would need an extra apparatus in the first place.
OK, so you're racist.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard