Article by: Jim Muldoon
David Horowitz, a former Marxist himself, often makes this point regarding the tactics of the Left, “The issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.” In other words, regardless of what the current claim of outrage seems to be about, the real point is to give the Left, or the Woke if you like, more power. And more power, in the guise of an unelected, Woke, activist, body permanently installed in our government was the aim of the proposed change to our constitution in the referendum of 14th October, 2023 on the so-called Voice.
So, let’s not get bogged down on the Woke propaganda of what last week’s referendum was supposed to be about. The talk of the “gap closing”, of reconcilliation, of healing trauma and righting wrongs were all emotional blackmail to get us to miss the political manoeuvre. Whatever may help those doing it tough, Aboriginal or not, it is clear that giving activists even more billions of dollars is no answer. Indeed, there are many arguments to be made that the activists make things worse, not better.
What this referendum showed, as clear as day, is that there is a stark divide in our nation. The elements driving the rift are aiming towards a kind of totalitarian state. The destination is still vague, its outlines blurred, but the general shape is that of a ruling class of incredible privilege pulling the strings. It is the role of the much larger underclass to pay for it all. And we saw this aristocracy in waiting’s reaction to a very loud, very clear “No” from the plebs: They refused to accept the democratic result.
With the flags at half-mast, cultural leave, and a week, at least, of mourning, there has only been talk of achieving their agenda by other means. This is, they say, because the No campaign was “Racist”, and the No voters were either “Racists” or the dupes of “misinformation”. Their real problem is that the No voters were heard for once. The Woke know, in their heart of hearts, that the same decisive “No” would have been declared on a referendum for mass immigration, transgenderism, drag-queen story hour, cancel culture, welcome to country and a whole host of other very recent trends.
One of the central intentions of our founding fathers who wrote the Constitution was to ensure democracy was protected from such malevolent intentions. Irrespective of the “Yes” campaign’s institutional power and wealth, they were not able to overrule the majority. The principle of the “one person, one vote” rule and a secret ballot were still able to thwart the prospective ruling class from overturning the democratic principle of majority rule. Therefore, the Constitution did its part to ensure the mechanism, and the No campaign and voters did their part to stop the corruption.
But, make no mistake, those who promoted “Yes” will not be slinking away and staying in their corner. Already, the push is on for “misinformation” legislation, which will mean that the next “No” vote will be harassed, with the intention of silencing it. Those who state their disagreement with the Woke agenda will be “fact checked” like never before. For those who can successfully defend themselves in court, the punishment will be the exorbitant legal fees. Those not so fortunate will be fined or jailed or both until they shut up. All under the disguise of ensuring a “fair and honest” debate.
But the next battle won’t be fought on the major stage of a referendum. Instead, as has been going on for a long time now, our democracy will be attacked day after day, bit by bit, through our Federal, State and Local governments and their friends. There won’t be any referendum for the “misinformation” legislation. It might not even come in the one big “Misinformation Act”. Instead, a section inserted here, a paragraph updated there, all in the name of bringing us into the twenty-first century. Then one day, suddenly, the Woke will be legally beyond criticism.
It is worth looking at the two camps in some detail. The “Yes” campaign is the most informative here. The political class begins our list. This was not just the politicians of the Labor and Greens, although they were certainly front and centre. It also includes virtually all of the membership of those parties. Although the membership of the Liberals and Nationals was probably mostly “No”, the politicians have always been a different matter. Many of them were in the playing the “Yes, but” game, even when they, after much handwringing, said “No”. Will they say “No” in the future? It’s unlikely, given past performance.
Then we come to the Deep State, which used to be called the Civil Service. Every government department, at every level, let us know where they stood, and it was all “Yes”. This was not some top-down directive. This was civil servants letting us know that the so-called Voice was, using the language from Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, “doubleplusgood”. The major media outlets, with the notable exception of some Sky News commentators, were all on board. And, you may note, that one of the targets of the “Misinformation” legislation will be the likes of Paul Murray and his colleagues. The civil servants and the media are the ones that keep many politicians in the Liberal and Nationals parties in line.
It is also worth mentioning that the government funded media, Their ABC and SBS were also very clear in their bias. There are two disturbing aspects to this. First of all, being tax-payer funded, it is clear that they are using our money to campaign against the majority of this country. They bite the hand that feeds them because the political class will not call them to account, and they know it. This has bred an arrogance and feelings of entitlement that is juvenile. Add to this the fact that their charters are supposed to ensure even-handed discussion on National topics, and we can see just how corrupt our institutions have become.
Big Business, Big Sport, Big Social Media and Big Charity couldn’t say “Yes” enough. So much so that it was surprising that there weren’t the usual sponsor logos plastered all over the “Yes” posters and billboards. Also, all of the professional institutions, especially those funded by government, were all making their “expert” opinions known. The same went for the so-called Arts community, many of whom are government funded because their “art” is not commercially viable. It’s not often that the Arts community would admit to being in lock-step with the major church leaders of our country, but that’s where they are. And yes, while the “Faith Leaders” said Yes, the majority of the congregations voted No.
Our education system was also in the swing. Academia, of course, was front and centre. Many of the activists promoting this Constitutional change were academics by profession, but there was almost universal approval of activist agenda from Australian academics and their institutions of higher learning. The schools were also onboard, with many children already being indoctrinated into believing that ninety-four souls, some of them boys, turning up on one ship constituted the invasion of an entire continent with hundreds of thousands of inhabitants.
The Yes vote was successful only in inner city electorates and Canberra. And that’s all. Many Yes commentators made some claims about these being the most educated areas of the country. They deliberately left out the fact that these were the wealthiest electorates as well.
This collection can be reasonably described as The Woke. The same people, generally speaking, would also vote “Yes” for Cancel Culture, Transgenderism, Gay Rights, Feminism, Environmentalism, Net Zero, One World Government, Black Lives Matter, etc. And their camp is growing. There are two main reasons why many who sense the totalitarian aims of The Woke are joining this camp. First, some hope to curry favour with them so they can be a part of their ruling class. Secondly, they are afraid of the punishment they will receive if they do not join. No doubt, for many it will be a bit of both.
What is also crystal clear from this referendum is that the Labor Party is the party of Big Business and the rich. As are the Greens.
The No camp is not so easy to define. The vagueness is partly because the No camp has no real leadership, although the Liberals and Nationals on this occasion chose to back the cause. But their backing, apart from a notable few like Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, was pretty tepid. There was always the smell of hedging their bets about them. Perhaps they were afraid of upsetting Big business and Big Media too much.
The smaller parties, One Nation, and the United Australia Party, were more forthright, but they weren’t really putting boots on the ground. Their following is nothing like the 8.6 million who said “No”. The problem with these parties, at least in part, is that they are centred around their respective leaders. Their personalities seem to get in the way of attracting the broader electorate. Whether that is fair, or a result of Woke propaganda, is a question for those parties to sort out.
The No votes came from everywhere except the inner-city suburbs and Canberra. Whether the seat was Labor, Liberal, or Nationals was beside the point. They were all No, with many of them overwhelmingly so. This can’t be overstated. At the referendum, 60% of the voting population were not led by a major political party. In other words, the majority of this country are not represented in our democracy.
Advance’s Fair Australia campaign did most of the heavy lifting and that is where the volunteer efforts were centred. But Advance is just a lobbying group, with links to the Liberals, and whatever the No voters were championing, it wasn’t the Liberal party. Especially the Woke Liberals who dominate at the State level.
And another point which can’t be said enough. When you disagree with the Woke agenda, it often seems that you are on your own. Social Media is telling you that you are wrong. The news is telling you that you are wrong. The lawyers are telling you that you are wrong. The politicians won’t represent you because you are wrong. And, because of the constant public scolding, it is easy to imagine that no one other than a deplorable few agrees with you. But the cat is now out of the bag. If you are against the Woke agenda, you are in the majority.
But the Rest also have differences amongst themselves, which makes them harder for them to rally around anything or anyone. Often, they get caught up in the trap of hoping that “the issue is the issue.” That way they can just make a complaint on Facebook, or put a comment in a mainstream news site article, or sign a petition. If worse comes to worse, they’ll march in the streets, as long as someone else organises it all.
The fundamental point is that the Woke advance, bit by bit, and take our civilisation towards tyranny. It is the destination, the tyranny that matters. It is the tyranny that we must avoid. And we must stop it before it happens, because there will be no more opportunities to say No after.