Australia
A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.
Before you post:
If you're posting anything related to:
- The Environment, post it to Aussie Environment
- Politics, post it to Australian Politics
- World News/Events, post it to World News
- A question to Australians (from outside) post it to Ask an Australian
If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News
Rules
This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:
- When posting news articles use the source headline and place your commentary in a separate comment
Banner Photo
Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition
Recommended and Related Communities
Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:
- Australian News
- World News (from an Australian Perspective)
- Australian Politics
- Aussie Environment
- Ask an Australian
- AusFinance
- Pictures
- AusLegal
- Aussie Frugal Living
- Cars (Australia)
- Coffee
- Chat
- Aussie Zone Meta
- bapcsalesaustralia
- Food Australia
- Aussie Memes
Plus other communities for sport and major cities.
https://aussie.zone/communities
Moderation
Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.
Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]
This such a good ad
Yeah I agree. Maybe a little confusing in parts for some people but the overall message of unity and national pride really cuts through well. I think that message has kind of been lost in all the noise up until now, but it has always been a major driving force behind Indigenous activism. Conservatives push that racist "angry black (wo)man" trope to create division, but the reality is that the goal is overwhelmingly about uniting modern Australia so we can feel proud about our shared history instead of ashamed.
I'm quite a cynical person but I'll admit it gave me goosebumps and I'm definitely feeling this vibe.
Interesting history of the 1967 referendum too.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Already, however, the public debate around those 92 words has grown like an invasive weed, generating ill-will and dispute over issues that are far removed from the question at hand.
"Prior to 1967, census asked a question about Aboriginal race to establish numbers of 'half-castes' and 'full-bloods'," reports this very handy research brief from the excellent folk at the Parliamentary Library.
So the failure to count Indigenous people in these calculations skewed all sorts of things, with particular ramifications for states and territories with larger First Nations populations.
If the Yes campaign in 1967 had been "Vote Yes To Remove The Ban On Making Discriminatory Laws For Aboriginal People and Also To Fix A Nagging Administrative Matter In The Calculation Of Federal Payments And Electoral Boundaries" – how do you think it would have fared?
You'll see that the proposed Voice "may make representations" to the parliament and to federal departments "on matter relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples".
That's how constitutional law works; the High Court chucks out legislation that doesn't accord with the spirit of what the Australian voting population has agreed to have enshrined in our national document.
The original article contains 1,564 words, the summary contains 192 words. Saved 88%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Hey, just a little nudge, if you’re keen to chat about the Voice to Parliament, we’ve got this corker of a megathread where we can all have a good chinwag in one spot. But if you’re not up for that, no worries, it’s business as usual. Gotta keep things fair dinkum!