• yistdaj
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    30 days ago

    To clarify, Lidia claimed that both the racist no campaign and the yes campaign drowned out the progressive no campaign.

      • goodthanks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        29 days ago

        Then why didn’t you do some research to inform your position? I don’t understand people who form political opinions without backing them up with research. A lot of people in Australia are borderline illiterate, and are at the mercy of the media. But the educated ones should at least exercise their privilege and read before making decisions. My dad is a lawyer, but wouldn’t even read the uluru statement from the heart. Voted no based on spite, which is shameful. Couldn’t even justify his own position intelligently.

        • yistdaj
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          28 days ago

          As someone who voted yes in a very no place, I was actually a bit frustrated by how poorly the yes campaign communicated with people - right up until those pamphlets came out, most of the people I was talking to had never heard of the referendum, and only after that most people started looking up what it was about.

          I would argue the no campaign had a huge head start on the yes campaign, there was negative speculation going on a year before the referendum, and it gradually snowballed into misinformation before the yes campaign even started. So the stuff people found was all negative. For the people I was talking to, I was the only person they knew who thought a voice was a good idea.

          One of the people I was talking to mentioned how they hadn’t even encountered a single ad promoting a voice to parliament until a week before, and it didn’t bother talking about how it would work or why it’s a good idea. They did eventually vote yes, but only after I talked to them about what I understood about it. In fact, my experience is that most people leaning no were willing to vote yes after hearing enough about it.

          I think a huge issue is that the yes campaign either failed to reach here somehow, or just relied on the media and self-research for informing people. And the media was very insistent on platforming no campaigners while almost never platforming yes.

          One of the most confusing things to hear was how people in the capital cities had heard so much about it when people here had barely heard of it. Some people missed the referendum date entirely.

          • goodthanks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            28 days ago

            I agree the yes campaign was a poor one. Also, there were 2 opposing messages being put forward simultaneously:

            1. The voice is a big leap forward and will improve the lives of indigenous people.

            2. The voice is just an advisory body with no real power.

            I voted yes, but didn’t think the voice was an impressive proposal. I just thought the outcome of a no vote would be worse. The fact that so many people didn’t understand what was proposed is partly a media issue, and partly a government incompetence issue. But it also raises the question of why so many people will feel passionately about a position they haven’t even fucking bothered to research. We can’t have democracy unless citizens put in a bit of fucking effort to understand the society they live in, which includes political proposals.

        • metaStatic@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          28 days ago

          that’s pretty fucking bad but anyone voting yes after reading the legislation was even worse.

          it’s sad to think without bigots like your dad we might have passed that nonsense.