Australians have voted against constitutional amendments that would have allowed Indigenous people to create an advisory body that could discuss issues of concern to them with government and Parliament, Australia’s National Tally Room reports.
WE WELCOME READERS’ COMMENTS ON OUR STORIES
Is apartheid (separation of the race) good or bad? The referendum took place in Australia on October 14. Voters had to answer whether they approved changes to the Basic Law that would give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people such rights, the Australian government says on its website. The national majority (60%) voted against the amendments to the Basic Law, as did the majority of voters in each of the six states.
In Australia, a referendum is valid if the proposed change is approved by a national majority of voters, as well as a majority of voters in at least four of the six states. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced a referendum on approval of changes to the Constitution on March 23, 2023.
A reader in Perth writes: The vote was for Aboriginals to have their own unique body to advise parliament to do what they want, a right to be denied all other Australians, who would only have a single vote to form a government, whilst Aboriginal Australians would have that same right, plus the right to elect an advisory board for the government, plus the right to have that advisory board direct and advise the government that is denied to all others.
Beyond this, proponents of this constitutional amendment were very clear that it was to be seen as a first step toward further discriminatory rights being bestowed on Aboriginal Australians, such as their receiving separate land rights and payments to come from broader Australia, which would be denied to other Australians on the basis of their race.
So essentially Australians voted against the formation of an apartheid state, where Whites were to be the bottom class, and Aboriginals the top. That they would even attempt to go with such a process and have White leftists support it so vigorously, shows their eventual aims for Australia, and the degree to which they thought they had already deeply shamed, pummelled down, and guilted White Australians. Luckily, they were wrong. Essentially Australia voted not to begin a process to turn Australia into the modern anti-White South African apartheid state.
PLEASE SHARE OUR STORIES ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
Share this:
Categories: Current Events
Europe Renaissance 
The vote was for Aboriginals to have their own unique body to advise parliament to do what they want, a right to be denied all other Australians, who would only have a single vote to form government, whilst Aboriginal Australians would have that same right, plus the right to elect an advisory board for the government, plus the right to have that advisory board direct and advise the government that is denied to all others.
Beyond this proponents of this constitutional amendment were very clear that it was to be seen as a first step toward further discriminatory rights being bestowed on Aboriginal Australians, such as their receiving separate land rights and payments to come from broader Australia, that would be denied to other Australians on the basis of their race.
So essentially Australians voted against the formation of an apartheid state, where Whites were to be the bottom class, and Aboriginals the top. That they would even attempt to go with such a process, and have White leftists support it so vigorously, shows their eventual aims for Australia, and the degree to which they thought they had already deeply shamed, pummelled down, and guilted White Australians. Luckily they were wrong.
Essentially Australia voted not to begin a process to turn Australia into the modern anti-White South African apartheid state.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank you for the additional clarification: Very useful. Good wishes. BTW: I added your comment to the news story.
LikeLike
Actually, this was a UN/WEF ploy to open up the floodgates to what they plan to implement anyway. It had nothing to do with Aborigines OR Australians for that matter. And it is far from over. The Yes pamphlets talked about a ‘better future together’ and (you’re a racist) if you don’t want Aborigines to have better health, education etc. Global (non-Australian) corporations donated millions to the Yes campaign that Warren Mundine rightly pointed out could have been donated to programmes delivering better health, education etc for Aborigines. Aborigines won’t have any say about military bases on their (our) land or who the ‘government’ sends troops and weapons to kill civilians in the Middle East, Ukraine and other places.
Stephen Reason provides a good post-NO wrap up …
• YES! It’s a NO! The Voice has been Defeated! – STEPHEN REASON
• The Silent Majority have Found their Voice!
https://stephenreason.substack.com/p/yes-its-a-no-the-voice-has-been-defeated
LikeLike