THE VOICE update 15 March 2023 Statements by Senator Pat Dodson

 

 

As argy-bargy (thanks to Julia Gillard for that one) about  THE VOICE becomes more strident I will update this blog as material which I think is relevant becomes available in the public domain.

Today’s noteworthy contribution comes from Senator Pat Dodson, as quoted by Tony Wright in the Sydney Morning Herald of 15 March 2023.

Senator Dodson is quoted as having offered several reasons why people should vote for THE VOICE proposal.

In summary these are:

1. That failing to support THE VOICE would be an act of “partisanship”.

Senator Dodson fails to acknowledge that establishing a separate system of representation for one ethno-political group is the partisan course of action.  He is accusing unbelievers of doing precisely that which he is doing.

2. Next he offered some guidance on woke virtue-signalling.

He said THE VOICE presents the chance for Australians to show to themselves and the world”  that they can establish a new relationship between white and indigenous people.  Let us leave aside for the moment Senator Dodson’s myopic view of Australians as being either “white” or ‘Indigenous” and take note of his main message which is clearly about virtue signalling to impress the neighbours.

3. Next, Senator Dodson offers the bizarre notion that supporting THE VOICE is about hygiene. In his words…..”with clean hearts, clean spirits and potentially clean hands”.   This nonsense comes on top of the PM’s assertion that supporting THE VOICE is just good manners.

4. Now we come to a more pressing issue. Senator Dodson says….’if we..say “yes” it will be one of the most liberating things. It will free everyone from guilt and shame and embarrassment.”

This is in my view the main argument which VOICE supporters put forward to encourage the electorate to support the proposition. It is emotional coercion. If you fail to support THE VOICE you will be a nasty, evil person who punches down on aborigines and wants to destroy them. You will be a racist and an aborigine hater.  You will be responsible for the original sin of your presumed forbears who are supposed to have done terrible things to aborigines even though you yourself have never knowingly harmed a person who identifies  an aborigine and have no idea what your forbears might or might not have done.

This concept of original sin was popularised by the Roman Catholic church and I believe is still part of church doctrine. It is very convenient for the clergy as it automatically makes everybody a sinner in desperate need of whatever expiation the church might decide is required.

We have the same supposition in the current debate about THE VOICE.  All not-aborigines, presumably and irrationally including recent immigrants are burdened with the shame of the original sin of their forebears and must atone for this by agreeing to whatever demand is made by those who identify as aborigines.

The problem with this dark line of discourse is that it falls apart when subjected to the slightest ray of light.

Just have a think:

First:  the vast majority of people who identify as aborigines in Australia today are of mixed part-aborigine and part-something-else-not-aborigine heritage, including most and possibly all VOICE leading proponents.  So those who elect to identify as aborigines are also not-aborigines. They are both.

The notion that we can tell who is and who is not an aborigine or that there is any useful purpose in doing so is revealed as complete nonsense.

The notion that the not-aborigines have inherited the taint of original sin and that aborigines are perpetual victims puts most people who identify as aborigines in the impossible position of blaming one part of their own heritage for the suffering of the other part.

Second: I make no pretence to be any expert on justice, I am a retired psychiatrist. However it is abundantly clear that if my grandfather killed someone (just to be clear, he did not) there is no basis in philosophy or jurisprudence by which my father or myself can be held responsible.  We cannot hold our children responsible for our own misdeeds but VOICE advocated want you to believe just that. The worry is that they have been remarkable successful in their efforts to make ordinary people feel vicarious guilt for unknown past misdeeds by unknown persons. VOICE advocates are preying on the goodwill or ordinary people.

5. Last Senator Dodson said that THE VOICE which he disingenuously mis-characterises as recognising aboriginal people in the Constitution will …..”give them the capacity to make representations to the parliament and the executive government”.

 This line has been repeated over and over and over and over……

There is an old adage which says …if you are going to tell a lie make it a great big one and keep on repeating it …..over and over and over……..

The notion that people who identify as aborigines are somehow unable to make representations to any person or agency they wish is utter and complete nonsense and a deliberate falsehood.  People who identify as aborigines in fact have many more avenues than most not-aborigines by which they can make representations to their state or federal member or state or federal minister for aborigines (no other group  has a special minister) or anybody else anywhere anytime.

What is Senator Dodson NOT saying ?

He has not a single word to say about how he imagines THE VOICE might improve the health, welfare of quality of life of any aboriginal person anywhere.

He has nothing to say about why he imagines people who identify as aborigines might need a specially appointed representative body in addition to the many such bodies already in place.

He makes no case whatsoever for the VOICE being able to confer any benefit on people who identify as aborigines.

Summary

I have chosen to comment on Senator Dodson’s statements because they include the main arguments being put forward in support of THE VOICE proposal.

No attempt is made to define any benefit for any aboriginal person.

The main thrust of the case for THE VOICE rests on making ordinary Australians feel a sense of vicarious guilt about harms done to aborigines and urging them to atone for misdeeds about which they have no knowledge by acceding to the demands of an influential self appointed  group claiming to represent people who identify as aborigines but who are themselves just as much not-aborigines as aborigines.