THE GREAT LEAP FORWARD

Change can be scary. Especially when the change hasn’t been explained very well.

So far, throughout The Voice Yes campaign, the government has been rubbish at explaining what is, and more importantly what it is not.

The Voice is an opportunity for recognising the perspectives of Aboriginal people on issues that affect them. That’s it! Just the ability for Aboriginal people to say, “that’s sounds like a good idea, but have you thought of…..”

The lack of a strong, clear message from the government has left a vacuum, and as that Greek guy said, “nature hates a vacuum.”

When there’s a vacuum in political messaging, when one side is silent, the other side will fill it. Unfortunately, the other side in this case is very much personally invested in the referendum failing.

The other side I’m talking about are those old, white conservatives that long for the good old 19th century days when people knew their place, and anyone getting uppity would be slapped down faster than a street urchin could scurry up a chimney.

Those conservative elites who believe that improving the lives of others will diminish their own. Especially as they see those lives as undeserving or getting above themselves.

The same conservatives, reading from the same handbook they have for generations. 
Look at some other progressive changes which happened despite them. Progress which would have happened earlier and easier, if it hadn’t been for these jerks making things harder than they needed to be.

Women's suffrage, civil rights for black Americans, marriage equality. In each of these instances, the no-to-change side spouted the same untruths, fabricated the same moral panics, and made the same dishonest calls for unity. All to try and retain the status quo. That being them having all the power.

In the early 20th century, the campaign against women's right to vote and stand for parliament was rife with misinformation and fearmongering. Posters appeared stating that women didn’t want the vote, there were warnings that empowered women would destroy societal harmony.

Struggle to right the wrong

That men would be emasculated and reduced to second class citizens. And they thought that these lies would silence the calls for change.

It was, of course, all bollox!

At the 1909 Epsom Derby, the English suffragette Emily Davison gave her life for women’s voting rights when she ran onto the racetrack and was trampled by a horse owned by king George V.

Emily died not long after., and as a political gesture, the horse, named Anmer, was banished to Canada.

Emily, like her fellow suffragettes, had been imprisoned, force fed with tubes, bullied, humiliated, and hounded in society. Her enemies said she was an outlier, the exception that made the rule.

They were very, very wrong.

Emily’s funeral parade stopped central London. Thousands marched, and there were ten brass bands. Her coffin was draped with purple silk banners which proudly showed Joan of Arc’s last words: ‘Fight On and God Will Give the Victory’.

And they did get the victory, eventually.

Women were not allowed to vote in general elections until 1918, and then only those over the age of 30. They won the same voting rights as men, only in 1928.

No one today would seriously advocate preventing women from voting, even if they do think it.

Just like back then, the opposition to The Voice uses rhetoric that implies upheaval and division within the nation, trying their hardest to stoke fear among the voters.

Andrew Bolt, a second-rate journalist, first-rate shit-stirrer, and convicted racist, bemoans division, trying to make us believe that he wants us all to be one, together.

Bolt’s record of anti-Aboriginal commentary couldn’t be clearer that unity is the farthest thing from his mind. Yet he knows that he can't just come out and say it.

Bolt’s message is parroted by radio thing, Alan Jones, a poisonous goblin creature who should have been jailed for stoking anti-Muslim violence in Cronulla in 2005. And, sadly, that is the only message that many are hearing.

Now I'm not saying that all those who will vote No, are racists, but all racists will vote No. And this fake call for unity gives them the cover they need to scupper The Voice and pretend it's out of good will.

During the civil rights movement in the United States, the No campaign used lies and exaggerations to spread fear about racial integration and equality.
Opponents argued that desegregation and equal rights would lead to violence and chaos, manipulating public sentiment to halt progress.

The No case for The Voice echoes these tactics, misrepresenting the proposed changes as a threat to stability and national unity.

More recently, the campaign against marriage equality here in Australia, peddled nonsense about traditional marriage and alleged that allowing same-sex couples the same rights as straight couples would end society as we know it.

Barnaby Joyce, our one-time deputy Prime Minister, and the enemy of celebrity dogs, pleaded with the public not to jeopardise the sanctity of marriage, while carrying on an affair with one of his staffers. When he got her pregnant, he dumped his wife and children like a hot brick, but not before questioning whether the child was his, implying that it could have been anyone’s, as his girlfriend was a bit of a slag.

The government called a sham, non-binding vote on marriage equality, which they thought would keep the status quo. They badly misread the room.

The vote carried, and showed without a fragment of doubt that the people were all for change.

Even so, when it came to the actual vote in parliament, some conservative politicians ignored their constituents wishes and voted against it anyway.

And it really was a massive win. If it had been an election, the Yes campaign would have won all but a handful of seats across the country, as well as every state and territory.

The opposition to The Voice uses the same strategy, bullshitting concern for national unity and traditional fair dinkum (Christ, I hate that saying) Aussie values while reinforcing division, and dismissing the unique needs and perspectives of Aboriginal people.

They also push the line, “why should one group have this direct line to government when no one else does?” I call BS on that! The lobbyists all have it: the miners, the property developers, the newspaper tycoons. The difference is they pay for it, and usually get what they want.

Historical and contemporary campaigns against social reforms, whether women's suffrage, civil rights, marriage equality, or The Voice, share common threads. They weaponise the distortion of truth, they fabricate moral panic, and deceitfully call for unity which they do not really want. Or more accurately, they really do not want.

These tactics are aimed at upholding existing power structures and stalling progress towards a more just and equitable society.

When you realise that this is their game, you'll see that they don't really care about anything but clinging on to power. They’ll lose in the end. Their time is running out. Even if they win now, they will lose eventually. In the end, they cannot halt the great leap forward.