dagblog - Comments for "Australian Voters Reject Greater Indigenous Rights" http://dagblog.com/link/australian-voters-reject-greater-indigenous-rights-35945 Comments for "Australian Voters Reject Greater Indigenous Rights" en Time to drain the indigenous http://dagblog.com/comment/328764#comment-328764 <a id="comment-328764"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/australian-voters-reject-greater-indigenous-rights-35945">Australian Voters Reject Greater Indigenous Rights</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p> </p><div class="media_embed"> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" height="" width=""> <p dir="ltr" lang="en" xml:lang="en">Time to drain the indigenous swamp | Maurice Newman<br /><br /> Who exactly has benefited from the billions in indigenous welfare? Not Aboriginal people in remote communities, that's for sure.<br /><br /> Australia said "NO" to the Voice and "YES" to an audit of activism.<a href="https://t.co/NFpzETlrbw">https://t.co/NFpzETlrbw</a></p> — The Spectator Australia (@SpectatorOz) <a href="https://twitter.com/SpectatorOz/status/1721718691249942899?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 7, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async="" charset="utf-8" height="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" width=""></script></div> </div></div></div> Tue, 07 Nov 2023 15:06:56 +0000 artappraiser comment 328764 at http://dagblog.com Beginning of article: http://dagblog.com/comment/328357#comment-328357 <a id="comment-328357"></a> <p><em>In reply to <a href="http://dagblog.com/link/australian-voters-reject-greater-indigenous-rights-35945">Australian Voters Reject Greater Indigenous Rights</a></em></p> <div class="field field-name-comment-body field-type-text-long field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><p>Beginning of article:</p> <blockquote> <p>Australians have roundly rejected greater rights for Indigenous citizens, ending plans to amend the country's 122-year-old constitution after a divisive and racially tinged referendum campaign.</p> <div> <p>With 88% of polling places reporting, around 59% of people had voted against a proposal to acknowledge Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders within the 1901 constitution for the first time.</p> </div> <div> <p>The reforms would also have created a consultative body -- a "Voice" to Parliament -- to weigh in on laws that affect Indigenous communities and help address profound social and economic inequality.</p> </div> <div> <p>The often-spiteful campaign exposed the deep racial fault lines still running through the so-called Lucky Country.</p> </div> <div> <p>Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who campaigned for a "yes" vote, urged a divided nation to now come together in a "spirit of unity and healing.”</p> </div> <div> <p>He added that the defeat would be a "heavy weight to carry" and "very hard to bear" for the vast majority of Aboriginal Australians who supported the referendum.</p> </div> <div> <p>"From tomorrow we will continue to write the next chapter in that great Australian story. And we'll write it together. And reconciliation must be a part of that chapter,” Albanese said.</p> </div> <div> <p>Minister for Indigenous Australians Linda Burney, the first Aboriginal woman elected to sit in the House of Representatives, said "Today is a day of sadness."</p> </div> <div> <p>Indigenous Australians expressed anger and anguish that the white majority had rejected calls for a reckoning with the country's bloody colonial past.</p> </div> <div> <p>“This is a difficult result, this is a very hard result,” said Yes23 campaign director Dean Parkin.</p> </div> <div> <p>“We did everything we could and we will come back from this,” he said.</p> </div> <div> <p><strong>Fear and misinformation [....]</strong></p> </div> </blockquote> </div></div></div> Mon, 16 Oct 2023 02:05:20 +0000 artappraiser comment 328357 at http://dagblog.com