'Judas betrayal': Indigenous Australians denounce opposition for rejecting referendum

No surprises here. Did the Aborigines really imagine the Liberal Party would ever be anything but mean-spirited and nasty?

If you are talking about the democratic process and putting the proposed changes to our constitution through due process, then I'm not quite sure what is mean-spirited and nasty exactly. The debate has just begun, everyone is watching, so proponents for the bill may wanna check your emotions and moral superiority at the door if you want the 'voice' to be taken seriously. We wanna know what this can do for our nation and shared interests. You don't wanna come out punching and swinging at anyone who dares question it. We've seen the disastrous results of that mindset play out overseas. "Judas betrayal" for example seems a bit much to start. Are they Jesus incarnate?

Keep your heads on Ozzies. Be dignified and lets have the conversation to find the right voice if it is to be!

'Judas betrayal'? Don't they have their own "indigenous" religion?

Judas betrayal'? Don't they have their own "indigenous" religion?

Yeah, I mean why do they even use English? Don’t they have their own language or something? Muppet.

@ Moonraker

So, they are not allowed to have a different viewpoint? Get a grip man.

It took the Labor party to finally apologize to the first nations people, and the Liberals were against that. Now it is no surprise that the Liberal Party is against giving the first nations a voice, (no power) just a voice to give advice at the highest level and be recognized in the constitution. Just once I wish the Liberal party dumped its superiority complex and support Indigenous people in the way they would like, rather than doing what the "Liberals determine" is best for them, without input and agreement from the first nations people themselves.

'Judas betrayal': Indigenous Australians denounce opposition for rejecting referendum

Why is this a 'Judas betrayal' and not just a betrayal? What is a 'Judas betrayal'? わけわからない Is it because Easter is coming up and he's adding subliminal messages?

What is a 'Judas betrayal'? 

It's when a friend is very pleasant with you while you're there... and betrays you as soon as you turn your back.

So, is it the case the Liberal Party went to tell the Indigenous groups they were supporting a referendum (maybe while they were fishing for votes ) ? And then...

Route no. 1 to indigenous status in Australia is being of Aboriginal or Torres Islander descent. That is what is expected. Route no. 2? Identifying as Aboriginal. And 3? Living in an indigenous community. (https://aiatsis.gov.au/proof-aboriginality)

This Voice is just more tokenism from non-indigenous Australia that fails to address the real issues or give anything substantive to the indigenous. And it raises the question no-one in Australia dare ask. How many political climbers will use the Voice and route 2 as a quick lift for their ambitions? I see the real suffering of the indigenous being exploited once again for some cheap political capital.

The black on black violence and sexual abuse in indigenous communities in Australia is completely off the charts. Money and effort needs to be directed to address this crime rate - as well as constitutional recognition.

I hope things improve.

Yeah, I mean why do they even use English? Don’t they have their own language or something? Muppet.

"In Australia there are more than 250 Indigenous languages including around 800 dialects."

If they spoke in their native language you would have no idea what they were saying, neither would the press. English is the recognized national language in Australia. There should be no issue with any citizen of Australia speaking in English. As for Aboriginal religion they have the "dream time" as the equivalent of a religion, but many are also Christian or Catholic as well.

We know the Liberal party's point of view, at least in its more recent incarnations, especially with Dutton and Morrison. It dog whistles racism and vileness so that some of the people who are not being helped with the measures to keep property prices rising will still vote for it. This is the go-to strategy of rightist parties in Australia, the UK and others. It's cynical as hell. And yet, there may even be some true-believers in racism and general meanness and I think Peter Voldemort Dutton is one. My point originally was that it is too obvious Dutton was going to say, "No can do, I can't go for that." Maybe there is a dispassionate debate to be had - I think there is - but that is not what the Liberal Party will produce. It will throw red meat around.

The black on black violence and sexual abuse in indigenous communities in Australia is completely off the charts.

Is it? The indigenous people are a peaceful people by nature. That changes because they consume alcohol which their bodies do not tolerate and when under the influence they become a different person completely. Aboriginal life evolved without alcohol until meeting with White culture which has had alcohol for thousands of years, allowing a higher tolerance and higher ability to control behavior up to a point.

There is no mystery. What is difficult is restricting freely available drinks from one section of the population based on race, because of its damaging effects on that race. This has plagued authorities for generations as much as it has plagued first nations people and their families and communities. There is no easy answer to this issue and others centered around protecting an ancient culture and traditions while living with modern technology and a culture based around money that Aboriginal culture never invented or needed to survive and thrive.

Precisely why First nations need to have an avenue to advise and discuss directly with the Federal government at the highest level to find answers and solutions that protect and improve the lives of the people who have followed traditional ways of life for millennia in harmony with the land they inhabit.

People need to get some perspective and empathy. Your house of 50,000 years - a house to which you were totally spiritually connected and intimately knowledgeable about - was invaded and devastated; your culture on which was built your longstanding identity (much more intense than mere patriotism) was forbidden or undermined; your people were hunted and killed; your women raped; your children often stolen; your land and waterholes were overrun by cattle and you were dispossessed by people who regarded land as something to buy and sell; some of you ended up working as slaves on the huge ranches/stations; while in many parts of your home, the only evidence of your past existence are town names in your language; otherwise you were simply wiped out, sometimes even as sport. I mean to say, how would you react? It's no surprise there is a lot of dejection and loss of hope. And since then, the invaders have promised this and that, but there are always mean ones who try to thwart these promises, and say nasty things about you behind your back. I have heard them all in Australia and it is a national shame, except such people don't feel shame.

It's a can of worms that needs to be opened in a progressive society. I live in Canada, my best friend is aboriginal, and we're very aware of the issues facing the Canadian government with regards to recognizing First Nations. Sometimes we argue, but that's what it's all about - expressing opinions that are based on valid investigation, not emotion.

Aussies who really care about the issue should do some research. It isn't pretty, sometimes, but there are two sides to every societal challenge.

This Voice is just more tokenism from non-indigenous Australia that fails to address the real issues or give anything substantive to the indigenous. And it raises the question no-one in Australia dare ask. How many political climbers will use the Voice and route 2 as a quick lift for their ambitions? I see the real suffering of the indigenous being exploited once again for some cheap political capital.

Exactly. The bottom line is the “progressives” want the aborigines kept in their place. Meanwhile they hide behind pretty words and big talk.

The bottom line is the “progressives” want the aborigines kept in their place.

Well, in that case, they are on the same page as the rightists then. I guess you will want better than either for the Aborigines.

 I guess you will want better than either for the Aborigines.

You guess correctly.

Peter14

Today 06:09 pm JST

The blame alcohol and white people for bringing it is a common theme in my country Canada and the USA.

Thing is alcohol would have eventually made it as contact with the rest of the world was inevitable.

But far too often the indigenous peoples blame everyone but themselves.

My father's family has a long long bad history of alcoholism, so do we blame others? No my grandfather made the decision to not drink his brother went the path of alcoholism and all the bad that followed.

My father doesn't drink my brothers and sister don't drink I did and it became obvious at one point I either stopped or I would head down the same path my great uncle and the rest did, So I don't drink anymore.

My 2 adult children were explained this and seeing the difference between the past drinking generations and today's family that don't drink they chose not to drink.

So the decision is up to the indigenous people to chose not to drink if it is a problem not blame others for their bad choices.

TrevorPeace

Today 07:28 pm JST

Not sure what you are talking about, the situation with the first Nations in Canada is a mess and a mess not being fixed mostly due to first Nations themselves.

They ask for money for housing, their leaders get it , then no housing is built their leaders used it on themselves.

So the situation is now worse, so ask for more money the government says yes but with oversight and audit, the bleeding hearts and first Nations says, NO! we don't need white man telling us what to do so the government give the money under pressure and today still no water no housing and no money and blaming white government.

They want money and jobs but refuse any development on their land then complain no jobs nearby.

This vicious circle is repeated in just about every first Nations community and as long as they don't realise the world is not going to just keep giving and personal responsibility is part of living on the planet.

The Australian, North America etc... First Nations need to understand that sooner or later contact with the outside world was going to happen and eventually they would need to join that world but up to now they still reject it.

Like the First Nations of every other country, they suffered hundreds of years of racism and discrimination. Their cultures experienced genocide. Their children were taken away from them. High rates of unemployment. Low-quality housing. Alcoholism and drug abuse.

Victim blaming is never an answer and even less of a solution.

wallaceToday  11:00 pm JST

Like the First Nations of every other country, they suffered hundreds of years of racism and discrimination. Their cultures experienced genocide. Their children were taken away from them. High rates of unemployment. Low-quality housing. Alcoholism and drug abuse.

Victim blaming is never an answer and even less of a solution.

Once again, another kick in the groin. Australia, NZ, North and South America, Lapland, Philippines, and even Japan (Ainu) - it's all the same old sad story. Steal, rob, rape, overthrow, shove into reservations, destroy their cultures/languages/religions/etc. in the name of 'civilizing' them.

We can't change history but we need to face it and start healing.

starpunk

We can't change history but we need to face it and start healing.

You are 100% right.

starpunk

Today 11:26 pm JST

You know the difference between those you mentioned and every other group?

They are more recent so we talk about it.

Remember the Romans did it all over Europe, the large organized civilizationd in central and south america like the Mayan, Aztec, Toltec, Inca all did the same to every group they encountered as they expanded, the Zulu in Africa did the same, north Africa, west Africa, the Mongols, the Multitude of Chinese dynasties did it to Vietnam, Korea, etc... The focus on only what the more recent European generations did is a narrative because we have a short memory and the vast majority have little or no knowledge of history.

There are 476 million Indigenous people around the world and spread across more than 90 countries. They belong to more than 5,000 different Indigenous peoples and speak more than 4,000 languages. Indigenous people represent about 5% of the world’s population. The vast majority of them – 70% – live in Asia.

Discrimination is the reason why Indigenous peoples make up 15% of the world’s extreme poor. Globally, they also suffer higher rates of landlessness, malnutrition and internal displacement than other groups.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/what-we-do/indigenous-peoples/

So how do we define indigenous?

Are the original inhabitants of Britain and Ireland that can trace their roots pre Roman invasion not indigenous?

What about Mongolians in Mongolia are they not indigenous or is that title only for ethic mongolians in Inner Mongolia china and parts of Russia?

Ethnic Koreans in China and Russia are they not considered indigenous but not those in Korea proper!

We seem to only view indigenous as we fell not by actually reality.

If a British person claims indigenous rights and as we know the DNA shows many white British are native to the country we call them racist.

If a Frenchman in Savoie says they are indigenous we again call them racist but if they are from Bretagne, suddenly they are indigenous.

This is the odd arbitrary way we see things, a majority not indigenous they same ethnic group is a minority in another region suddenly they are indigenous.

Does the current Australian constitution exclude people by race? Does the current Australian constitution make any reference to race at all?

Why should a constitution make any reference to anything other than "citizens"?

This article does nothing to explain what a constitution is, what is in the current constitution nor the idea behind what is the purpose of a constitution.

A constitution is first and foremost a legal document to which all other laws must show deference. The constitution and the legal precedence from many years of supreme court rulings and interpretations are the bedrock of a society. The constitution protects citizens from the state and defines the proper role of government.

The author of this article and nearly every commenter have never spent a single solitary isolated second thinking about the role and purpose of constitutions, or even law in general. To many people, apparently, society progresses through whatever whim and feeling seems to be upper most in their short term, historically ignorant, un-reflective and unimaginative child-like demands.

It is a trite and facile argument to say that because rape, pillage and dispossession has been a feature of human history we cannot transcend it and make ourselves better. Maybe people who think like that are part of the problem, not the solution.