Indigenous Voice: Australians reject historic Indigenous referendum - BBC News

Ironically, "Yes".

No, it is not just racism. There would have been an element of that, but it's certainly far from the main reason. That idea is contradicted by the facts that a very significant portion of Indigenous people and Indigenous activists voted against it.

Linking to this useful post, explaining why various progressive groups were against it.

We have this same issue in Canada. It seems the average person finds it completely acceptable to dismiss our First Nations peoples as “drunks” and “bums” and less than citizens.

In my opinion a racism is having different laws for people with different genetics/skin color. “Black is not allowed” is racism. The proposed law is actually the one doing exactly the same - it treats people differently according to their genetics. Why people think it is good - is beyond me.

I saw this stance and I still don't know why you wouldn't want a position to give you more of a platform. It's still progress to give minority groups a larger platform than they had before.

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Black Peoples Union interview with ABC

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

Like enshrining the position of head of state as being the next in line for a particular family who are born & live on the other side of the world?

I feel like you say that without the context of anything. In isolation what you say might be true but within context it's just fairly clear to see why you'd get a minority group committee of advisers to be more widely heard. "Different rights to different people" is literally how the world works. If you want to pretend that majority bias doesn't exist then so be it, I can't change your support for systemic racism.

Hard to say that the right to be heard is objectionable imo

That's already occurred. Google it.

The body of the government is supported by the people. Like, think of it this way. If I go to your house, claim it as my own, then sell it to other people. Is it your house or the other people's house? The other people bought the house knowing the unresolved claims against ownership and bought it anyway. Are they complicit in stealing the house? What if the house wasn't yours but technically your great grandparents but you'd still live there if it wasn't for those people who stole or the supporters of the thieves.

Just being given a vote as a minority doesn't mean their voice has been heard. You can see this sort of bias in Australian prisons: "Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander prisoners accounted for 32% of all prisoners." They are disproportionally imprisoned and it's clear that systemic racism has put them in this position. So just getting a vote doesn't matter when there are more people who hate your race of people than the population of your race able to vote. It means you'll never gain anything in the system because racists will keep you down. Don't support systemic racism.

From the perspective of some in the older generations, Indigenous Australians were given a voice and representation in 1962 when they were given the option to enrol and vote in federal elections, the same as every other Australian.

That's just dishonest. The link you posted paints a much more grim picture.

They did not steal from these people, but from their several generations long dead ancestors.

I didn't say anything contrary to this. I said "Feedback from a marginalized group of the land you stole." which is absolutely true. A marginalized group owned the land. The majority group came in and marginalized them.

This law is differentiating people by their genotype.

The law already does that. Systemic racism exists. I encourage those to setup systems to reduce it and not support it.

So we can expect the 10 of millions of dollars that bankrolled the "no" groups will now go directly to "poor people" now?