Australians vote No in referendum that promised change for First Nations people but couldn't deliver | CNN
www.cnn.com
With a two-letter word, Australians have struck down the first attempt at constitutional change in 24 years, major media outlets reported, a move experts say will inflict lasting damage on First Nations people and suspend any hopes of modernizing the nation’s founding document.

With a two-letter word, Australians have struck down the first attempt at constitutional change in 24 years, major media outlets reported, a move experts say will inflict lasting damage on First Nations people and suspend any hopes of modernizing the nation’s founding document.

Early results from the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) suggested that most of the country’s 17.6 million registered voters had written No on their ballots, and CNN affiliates 9 News, Sky News and SBS all projected no path forward for the Yes campaign.

The proposal, to recognize Indigenous people in the constitution and create an Indigenous body to advise government on policies that affect them, needed a majority nationally and in four of six states to pass.

    • batmangrundies@lemmy.worldEnglish
      3·
      1 year ago

      80% indigenous support polled prior to the campaigns starting. After a relentless campaign of misinformation courtesy of Murdoch. The actual number that voted yes was 63%.

      In regional Aus, there is a popular, free-to-air, 24/7 Murdoch-run news outlet, Sky News Australia, not to be confused with Sky News. It is right of Fox News, closer to OAN.

    • vantlem@lemmy.worldEnglish
      21·
      1 year ago

      63% voted for it after one of the strongest, most targeted disinformation campaigns that Australia had ever seen. The right-wing parties have made this issue so incredibly divisive and inflammatory. Anecdotally, some Indigenous people, who did not want to be the target of further abuse from racist Australians, were convinced that the Voice would make the abuse even worse because of the ongoing hate and outrage they have experienced during this entire debate. I can understand why they wouldn’t want that experience to solidify constitutionally.

      • TheOriginalGregToo@lemmy.worldEnglish
        14·
        1 year ago

        Sounds to me like you’re being rather racist with your assumptions. You’re characterizing a group of people as having monolithic values based on a shared heritage. They’re individual people with individual beliefs and motivations. You’re also suggesting that they’re easily coerced, or perhaps simple minded. This too is racist and demeaning.

        Edit: Fixing an autocorrected word.

        • batmangrundies@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          1 year ago

          It doesn’t matter. 63% support among indigenous folks is still a landslide.

          You’re not arguing in good faith though. Accusing someone of racism like that. So you can go fuck yourself for all I care.