A Voice for Some, but not for All

Article by: Jim Muldoon

Gary Johns came to our town to put forward the “No” case for the upcoming referendum on “The Voice”. Let me say right at the start: Good on him for standing up and saying “No”, and God bless those who turned up to listen and show their support.

The reasons Johns gave for “No” were fair enough. First, we don’t know what we would be saying “Yes” to. The Left are asking us to simply sign the cheque now, and they will fill in the details later. By “The Left” I mean all things Labor, Green, at least half the Liberal party, and a good few Nationals too. I also include the mainstream media, the organisations controlling most of the social media, the legal system, all government departments, all major charities, almost all academics, and all bar a few of our major corporations.

Let’s not waste our time here by trying to work through the various hints and rumours of what The Voice might eventually be. I am sure that the questions on treaties, extra payments, heritage laws, and the rest are valid. How much of that will we be getting? Probably as much as they can get away with.

Let me give you two quotes from the “Yes” case that was in the AEC’s official pamphlet on the referendum:

Quote 1 “Governments from both sides have invested billions in programs that haven’t fixed problems or reached communities.”

Quote 2 “Clearly, the current approach isn’t working.”

Where did this “current approach”, that is everything they’ve done for the past sixty years or more, come from? It came from the activists who have drummed up this latest scheme. Which activists? The activists of the Left, which includes the woke CEOs and celebrities as well as Aboriginal activists, politicians, social workers, academics, etcetera.

And as for “Governments from both sides”, that would include the current lot asking for this change to our Constitution. I also would like to call to your attention “billions”. That’s dollars they are talking about. And, you have “invested” when you put money into something that works. When the scheme fails, it’s called “throwing money away”.

The second reason Johns gave was that it makes the Aboriginal community a “special case”. To paraphrase Orwell, all Australians are equal, but some Australians will be more equal than others if the nation votes “Yes”. This is all true enough, but it is still only dealing with the issue on a surface level.

This became apparent during the rest of the talk Johns gave. From that point on, all he talked about was the Aborigines being a special case. Not special in the sense of deserving extra voting privileges, no. He didn’t contradict himself that badly. But special in the sense that the focus of this debate should be on them, and them alone.

To be fair to Johns he is in a difficult position. There have already been calls in the media to have him cancelled. The claims, predictably, are that he is “racist”. So, he is trying to walk carefully through all the minefields of political correctness in order that he might be able to get his points across. At every step his voice is being drowned out by the woke media as best they can. And, if they are loud enough, there is a good chance he will be thrown under the bus by his own side. Anyone who has paid any attention to the Liberal Party, both state and federal, knows what I mean.

Why do I say a surface level? The “No” campaign are trying to discuss this issue as if everything else in Australia is all going along tickety-boo. There is one problem: the plight of the Aborigines. It is the one wrinkle in the fabric of our paradise. Iron this out, and everything will be smooth.

So, the official “No” campaign is not really a “No”. It’s more of a “Yes, but…” They have a slogan: “Recognise a better way”. It’s the usual drivel that comes from the so-called Conservative side. Instead of taking the Left directly to task, they play this game of finding the “sensible centre”. Rather than divide and conquer, they deflect, out-manoeuvre and make “strategic” compromises. Where has that got us? I again point you to the billions of dollars spent on schemes that did not work.

The logic seems to run something like this:  The “Yes” vote claim they want the Aborigines to be recognised in the Constitution. To do this, they say, the Aborigines need The Voice. If the “No” case says simply “No”, then they will be called racists.

So, instead the “No” people say, “Yes, let’s recognise them. We agree! But, let’s not change the Constitution. We have a better way. We’ll tell you the details after the referendum.”

In other words, the “No” case is really the “Yes” case without the Constitutional change. This leads us back to the questions that the audience at the “No” meeting really wanted answered. They all knew about the billions of dollars. Not the details of every scheme, perhaps, but they see the general trend. Every week, these activists have their latest brain-fart applauded by the mainstream media. Speeches are made, with all the sanctimony they can muster, in local, state, and federal governments. Whatever it is that these activists lack, it is not a voice.

But this doesn’t get to the heart of the matter. There are deeper issues that the audience wanted tackled, even if they didn’t know quite how to articulate them. They had questions about land rights, for example. Not about the historic questions of the Aboriginal activists, but will they be able to keep the property that they currently own? That is, their own homes. Their farms. Do they, in fact, own them? Is there any guarantee?

Whilst they call it Australia Day, their children are being taught “Invasion Day” at our schools. Do they have a say in what is taught in school? Every public gathering, every sports game, every theatre show, has a Welcome to Country. Will there be a Welcome to Country stand at the entrance of every shopping mall in the country? Can they say “No” to any of this.

Does their voice, whether this referendum gets up or not, matter? And I don’t mean, does it matter for this referendum. Simply put, do they, the Australian people, have any real voice at all?

They did not ask for mass immigration, but they got it, and are getting more. They did not ask for the power plants to be shut, but they’re getting that. They didn’t ask for wind farms and solar farms spoiling our countryside, but they are getting plenty of those, and more still to come. The list goes on and on. In other words, they know that no matter how it happens, their voices are going to get smaller, and the activists are going to get more and more power.

What will come of that power? Again, I am not talking about this or that particular change like the Voice. When we look back over our own lifetimes, we see the same things happening again and again. It is all heading in a direction, and is going faster and faster.

First of all, it means more government interference and control over our daily lives. There will be more and more places we can’t go, things we can’t have, things we can’t do, things we can’t say, opinions we can’t have, and the list will keep growing.

Second, the country goes further into astronomical levels of debt. Governments spend money they don’t have to finance these charades. This means, ultimately, higher taxes and higher prices for everyone. In other words, the government spends, but it is us who pay. And our children. And their children. We all keep paying, and they keep running up the bills.

Do the activists pay? Do the politicians pay? In practice, no. Sure, they pay the same prices we pay. Maybe even the same taxes. But they don’t care. The more power they get, the more grants, subsidies and wages they get from the government. For them, the more government the better.

Last, but not least, they don’t make things any better. Sometimes they just make things worse. Sometimes, they make some things slightly better, but other things worse than worse. We are never really better off because of them. Our freedoms become less, and the Social Credit Score system comes ever nearer.

Big Nanny State won’t be just watching you, she’ll be controlling you.

So, again, I want to thank Gary Johns and the “No” vote committee for taking a stand to say “No”. Again, I ask God to bless them all who vote “No”. No matter what reasons people have for saying “No”, it is important that they say “No”. Call them what you like: the Woke, the elites, the Deep State, the Uni-Party, the Left, or whatever. They need to hear “No” loud and clear. The fact is, they don’t get told “No” nearly enough.


Scroll to Top