BF2S Forums Australian politics thread.

Most of what I've seen out of the country through mainstream is catchphrase focus. Barely any of why people should vote against it outside of that. If detailed "no" articulation was as widespread as the catchphrase, fine. But the catchphrase is still an insult to people's intelligence imo: my point.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2023-10-24 02:08:15)

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Most of what I've seen out of the country through mainstream is catchphrase focus. Barely any of why people should vote against it outside of that. If detailed "no" articulation was as widespread as the catchphrase, fine. But the catchphrase is still an insult to people's intelligence imo: my point.

The if you don't know vote no was used in the australian republcian referendum... another failed one.

Labor couldn't even get all their premiers on side, albo was really by himself in this campaign.

I feel like there's more bullet points to it than that, on both sides of the issue, and people are doing themselves no favor in oversimplification. We like to laugh and grouse at how ill-informed, uneducated, and perpetually hoodwinkable voters are, but the "dumb" facet of campaigns feeds directly into it.

With the sheer amount of bunk and spin out there on stuff, more information is always good. Having a default opens you to manipulation. Innocuous ballots show up in my mailbox sometimes with proposals that are short and obfuscate on the card, with equally uninformative, heartstrings-tugging yes/no/counter argumentation in the pamphlet (especially pronounced locally). That's when you can harness the power of the 📣internet📣 to untangle doublespeak.

side:
IMO voting here is still stuck 30 years ago. Bring on e-voting already. Who feels good about dumping their envelope in a seedy mailbox somewhere to end up in the back of someone's trunk? Do people actually enjoy driving 30 miles to a gerrymandered dropbox monitored by glaring sheriffs? Who in their Right Mind feel nostalgic for standing in line forever in a stinky school gymnasium with a bunch of coughers? Is it just a boomer thing I'll never fully understand? FFS, old people are banking online. If you want to meet up with your old people buddies, go have a bbq or something.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2023-10-25 02:39:10)

Better than a one-liner, but is still quite the (at times impassioned, at times vaguely general) abridgement. "It can't shut the voice up!" comes off a bit acrimonious, but maybe that's just Oz 101. The little blurb about checking your sources at the end, yes more people should be doing that.

This doesn't mean the slogan didn't sound reductive, disconnected, and a bit condescending, though, at least imo.

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Better than a one-liner, but is still quite the (at times impassioned, at times vaguely general) abridgement. "It can't shut the voice up!" comes off a bit acrimonious, but maybe that's just Oz 101. The little blurb about checking your sources at the end, yes more people should be doing that.

This doesn't mean the slogan didn't sound reductive, disconnected, and a bit condescending, though, at least imo.

But what did you take away from the yes argument when considering a change to the constitution.

Adams_BJ wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Better than a one-liner, but is still quite the (at times impassioned, at times vaguely general) abridgement. "It can't shut the voice up!" comes off a bit acrimonious, but maybe that's just Oz 101. The little blurb about checking your sources at the end, yes more people should be doing that.

This doesn't mean the slogan didn't sound reductive, disconnected, and a bit condescending, though, at least imo.

But what did you take away from the yes argument when considering a change to the constitution.

On the pamphlet? Not a whole lot more than I got from the no vote, really. As I said, quite abridged.

Beyond whatever merits of the constitutional change or its rejection, it seems fair for people to want better representation and say in the government, say in its affairs and decisions that will especially affect them. Especially after many years of abuse and neglect by society and said government. This event should light the fire under ongoing conversation for that, but the mood I'm picking up is that it should be swept under the rug again. I wonder if a powerful politician will be willing to put things on the line to pick up that torch any time soon.

Funny thing: for the no camp acting so unsure about what the voice is, it's sure able to fire off a list of all the little risks and threats out there, in allcaps even. "We won't be able to silence them!" "It opens the door for activists!"

"Australia Day will be abolished!" (lmao, how american)

It's a lot of definite to unpack for "we don't know."

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Beyond whatever merits of the constitutional change or its rejection, it seems fair for people to want better representation and say in the government, say in its affairs and decisions that will especially affect them.

They have a vote already, why should they have two votes and a veto?

Cybargs wrote:

its just an advisory commitee... which i mean parliament can already make one.

No need to change the constitution then. So what was it all about?

Scott Morrison is a piece of shit, and either a complete dunce or very shrewd.

The plan to go to have the French convert their nuclear submarine design to diesel-electric was a truly stupid one.

Abandoning the French when it was decided Aus needed nuclear submarines compounded stupidity on stupidity.

Going to the Americans for nuclear submarines when they can't deliver enough to themselves was the third strike.

On top of that to be assured of getting those submarines in 2038 means Aus will have to give full support to the US for that full period.

Maybe that was his plan, the same person who moved the Aus embassy from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem for no reason whatsoever wants Aus to be even more dependent on the US than ever.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-09/ … /103083780

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2023-11-09 01:03:22)

Its in about one small town apparently.