The savagery of white supremacism in Australia [Content Warning - racism, white supremacism]

Racism and white supremacism in Australia have quite a few manifestations that can be described as savage - including official violence and the deliberate setting aside of human rights (e.g., as I wrote about here), but what I want to write about today is the savagery relating to the upcoming referendum on a Voice to Parliament, and what seem to me to be blatant lies and similar vicious political stunts and manifest racism in the “no” campaign, which I have provided links to previously - and the National Indigenous Times is a good ongoing source of information. 

Another good source in The Guardian (Australia), and I'd like to start with “Life has gotten tougher and politics noisier. Can Australians still find the mindfulness to listen?”, by Katharine  Murphy. 

The sub-title of that article is “Since I’ve been away, the PM has developed a clearer pitch on the Indigenous voice. But Peter Dutton is flooding the zone with shit as a means of obscuring the truth”, and I consider that an excellent summary comment (on social media, the article was praised as being a case of Katharine Murphy dropping “truth bombs”).

The article sets out the issues, challenges, arguments, and social attitudes extremely well, and should, in my opinion, be read by all with an interest in the Voice - no matter which side, and the following should be particularly noted by those inclined towards “no”:

“Public support for the voice started to wane after the Liberal leader declined to back the proposal. Indigenous Australians asked through the Uluru statement for a constitutionally enshrined structure – a voice – to end a couple of centuries of silencing. Dutton chose intraday politics. He coddled his base rather than reaching for the moment of national unity. After electing to stage the referendum as a partisan death match, Dutton now decries this “divisive” voice. (As if the current division wasn’t a core function of his political strategy. As if he’s a bystander.)”

(The next two paragraphs add to that - and I have written about Peter Dutton elsewhere, for example here and here.)

Something else that should be particularly noted by those inclined towards “no” is “ ‘Serious misinformation’ on the voice has stirred up racist attitudes, elders say”, by Fleur Connick. 

Having lived through the evil of Australia’s Equal Marriage  plebiscite, and other campaigns for human rights, I know the evil that attempts to introduce decency can trigger, so I am not surprised - nor are the many others who have also been warning of this, including First Peoples themselves (see also here).

One of the reasons I chose not to get married after Equal Marriage was achieved was the savagery of the hate shown, which created a powerful association in my mind between being hated and being married - so the haters won, in my case.  

(I also have the same issue with retiring from the corporate world - the overwhelming workload and trauma means I do not want to even remember the technical aspects of it: NOTHING is “worth it”, to use the <expletive deleted> euphemisms used by utterly and completely clueless amathiacs.) 

The question being voted on in the coming Referendum is not just about ensuring Australia finally does more than lip service in the quest for equity, justice, genuinely effective governance/service delivery, and the proverbial “fair go” for the First Peoples of Australia, but also whether Australia wishes to be a decent, fair-minded nation or not ... 

 

PS - for some broader scope on this, consider also "the day the Ku Klux Klan came to my town", from the USA. 

PPS - see also here and here, on the "misinformation", and here, on the lack of alternatives from the "no" campaign. But worse than all this, Dutton's disingenuous proposal for a second  referendum would, in my opinion, cause many to consider him duplicitous - this is, IMO, utterly appalling hypocrisy 

 

Assumptions / basis 

In writing this, I have assumed / started from the following: 

• this blog states quite clearly that it is about political and human rights matters, including lived experience of problems, and thus I will assume readers are reasonable people who have noted the content warning in the post header;

Possible flaws 

Where I can, I will try to highlight possible flaws / issues you should consider:

• there may be flawed logical arguments in the above: to find out more about such flaws and thinking generally, I recommend Brendan  Myers’ free online course “Clear and Present Thinking”; 
  
• I could be wrong - so keep your thinking caps on, and make up your own minds for yourself.
  

 

If they are of any use of interest, the activism information links from my former news posts are available in this post. 

 

If you appreciated this post, please consider promoting it - there are some links below.

Vote Yes for the Voice in Australia.  

Finally, remember: we need to be more human being rather than human doing.