The ‘No’-Case’s Failure to Offer a ‘Close the Gap’ Solution
The indigenous ‘Voice to Parliament’ arose due to frustration at failing to ‘Close the [Disempowerment] Gap’ between indigenous and non-indigenous-Australia – correct?
That is, since the status quo has failed to ‘Close the Gap’, something else needs trying.
[Note: This contrasts with, for example, the Republic debate in which, apart from the head of state not being an Aussie, the status quo is generally accepted as working well.]
Yet, thus far, the ‘No’-case is only offering more of the same.
On a tactical level, this may be unsuccessful because perpetual defence can’t survive, let alone defeat, perpetual attack.
Regarding the ‘Yes’-advocates and ‘Closing the Gap’, ‘at least they’re having a go’, ‘have a sense of urgency’ and are enthusiastic. They also have first-class-marketing: ‘Uluru Statement from the Heart: Voice, Treaty, Truth’, ‘Voice to Parliament’, ‘an invitation to share wisdom and walk into the future together’, “it’s plain good manners to accept the invitation” etc.
In comparison, aren’t the ‘No’ advocates, at best, ‘a bunch of wowsers’ who are ‘failing to grasp the historical moment’ and, at worst, ‘racists’? After all, isn’t their argument summed-up as, “It won’t ‘Close the Gap’, it will divide the country and it will waste time and resources (i.e. it’s inefficient)”?
Thus, even a ‘No’-leaning voter may decide, ‘I’m sick of hearing about it – it’s better to vote for it and ‘get it off the table’; otherwise, there’ll be no end to it.’
Regarding the ‘Yes’-case, doesn’t it boil down to: ‘We’ve tried everything else to ‘Close the Gap’ and it hasn’t worked so let’s try ‘the Voice’’?
However, we haven’t tried everything – i.e. we’ve only tried indigenous-specific ‘solutions’, which, because they are localised, are Band-Aiding (‘The Voice’ doubles-down on this) – we’ve never tried infrastructural ‘Universal Empowerment’.
‘Whites are like Chameleons but Blacks are Always Black’
At a time when mainstream interest in indigenous-Australia was limited, the author chose to write about the imperative of reconciliation as 1 of 2 self-choice Year 12 English essays then, in 1989/90, seeking a greater understanding of his country particularly indigenous-Australia, starting in Geelong and travelling clockwise, he motorbiked around the continent on a Suzuki 250 eggbeater. [With tent, sleeping bag and backpack, flat-chat on the flat (without headwind) 90ks/hr and 60 up hills.]
In Port Augusta, staying at a pub, there’d been a disco where, for the first-time, he’d experienced, being in a crowd, as the only white-person.
I found it riveting – friendly genuine people and great conversation (I still remember chatting with a rodeo-rider).
Prior to Perth, discovering every outback pub had 2 bars [apparently, no longer the case] – 1 for whites and 1 for blacks – formally, it was via dress-rules and, informally, via mutual self-selection. Usually, the 2 bars had a common centred serving area (then, walled off on 2 sides, each bar had its own outside-door), which meant the 2 patron-areas were partially connected by sight.
Each night (in total, perhaps 20 times), whatever the town, I went to the black bar where, except once when I took a fellow traveller, I was always the only whitey.
In Geraldton, I met an Aboriginal bloke who made a joke along the lines of:
Whites are like chameleons – you fellas are always changing colour – but blacks are always black.
When sick, whites go yellow but blacks are still black;
When sunburnt, whites go red but blacks are still black [A bit later, whites go brown but blacks are still black];
When bruised, whites go blue but blacks are still black;
When slapped they go pink but blacks are still black;
Roll in the mud, whites go black, in the grass they go green but blacks are still black
When dead, whites go even paler like ghosts but blacks … are still black;
[Note: I may have added/doctored a couple of lines.]
I’d never heard of such and thought it was hilarious – we both cackled like a couple of kookaburras.
When it’s one-on-one, like the wet season’s first flush, doesn’t all the caked-on B.S. slide-away?
So, what was funny about it?
The joke takes the pigment-level difference and pretends it’s a massive difference.
Could we be doing similarly regarding ‘Closing the Gap’ – i.e. are we focusing on ‘supposed’ differences when even the ‘Close the Gap’ phrase indicates our targets are exactly the same?
…
January 6, 2023
Hello
The upcoming referendum begs the questions:
- Is indigenous-Australia lacking a Voice?
- Even if there are plenty of indigenous-Australian voices with amplifying platforms, perhaps, assuming indigenous-Australia’s circumstances are unique, another one is needed?
Does Indigenous-Australia Lack a Voice?
First, with 3.8% of Australians indigenous:
- The House of Representatives has 3 of 151 indigenous (2%)
- The Senate has 8 of 76 (10%).
Second, doesn’t the current referendum-prelude demonstrate indigenous-Australia has a strong Voice?
After all, this topic is sucking-up about a quarter of our current affairs media space.
Rather than lacking a Voice, it’s as though it’s being relayed through an Acca Dacca-Concert-Amp with surround-sound speakers both within the parliament and, via TV etc., throughout every home, which is good; however, do we still need to pump-up the volume?
Even without the referendum, there are the constant bombardments of ‘The Acknowledgement of Country’ (including the phrase, ‘Always was; Always will be Aboriginal Land’; hopefully, it will ‘Always be Australian-citizens’ Land’), ‘The Acknowledgement of Elders’ and the ‘Welcome to Country’.
The Welcome & Acknowledgements
In 1990, visiting Louisa Downs, WA (an Aboriginal pastoral station between Fitzroy Crossing & Hall’s Creek) I was invited to attend a formal male-only community meeting as 1 of 2 non-indigenous in which, among other things, they discussed the pros-and-cons of using their profits to buy a Kununurra motorcycle shop so some of their youth could train as mechanics. The people were genuinely welcoming but there was no ‘Welcome to Country’ ceremony (at that time, I had never heard of such).
Regarding the Welcome & Acknowledgements, while for indigenous relevant activities (such as the AFL’s Sir Doug Nicholls round) it can be tremendous, most of the time, they’re artificial patronising/matronising performances, which, often driven by non-indigenous-Australians, do indigenous-Australians an injustice.
Also, perpetually being ‘welcomed’ as one strolls around one’s own country is enough to make one wonder if it’s more contrived to make one feel unwelcome, which is divisive (and racist) – isn’t it?
After all, as an Australian citizen, Australia is my country – right?
And, as it happens, I don’t have another – i.e. while ultimately we’re all Africans, wherever my more recent, at least thrice-removed, ancestors came from, I ain’t a citizen of any of those places, which means it’s not like a Chinese wandering into Tibet who can return to China or a Javanese in West Papua who can return to the rest of the empire.
Yes, indigenous-Australians’ descendants were here first, their cultures are awesome and ought to be celebrated but the rest of Australia doesn’t need their face to be continually rubbed in the mud as if they’re, at best, not real Australians (some sort of tourist) or, at worst, invaders.
The Welcome & Acknowledgements are overdone to the point of being mind-washing mind-atrophying noise-pollution. Moreover, this repetition is immature and divisive, which means it’s a bit like throwing boomerangs then closing your eyes.
If it has made a good-friend of indigenous-Australia feel this way, how is it affecting others who may not have a strong affinity for our indigenous and may never have had first-hand relationships with them?
Regarding the Voice, its opinion on every piece of legislation will become similarly as ubiquitous, distracting and choreographed plus it will be the prelude to yet more distractions such as ‘Treaty’ when what’s needed is a laser focus on broadening ‘Empowerment’.
Same Targets (for both Indigenous & Non-Indigenous-Australians)
As mentioned, ‘Close the Gap’ implicitly recognises indigenous-Australians want the same things as non-indigenous-Australians – i.e. the targets are the same.
The ‘Close the Gap’ targets are:
- Everyone enjoys long and healthy lives
- Children are born healthy and strong
- Children are engaged in high quality, culturally appropriate early childhood education in their early years
- Children thrive in their early years
- Students achieve their full learning potential
- Students reach their full potential through further education pathways
- Youth are engaged in employment or education
- Strong economic participation and development of people and their communities
- People can secure appropriate, affordable housing that is aligned with their priorities and need
- Adults are not overrepresented in the criminal justice system
- Young people are not overrepresented in the criminal justice system
- Children are not overrepresented in the child protection system
- Families and households are safe
- People enjoy high levels of social and emotional wellbeing
- People maintain a distinctive cultural, spiritual, physical and economic relationship with their land and waters
- Cultures and languages are strong, supported and flourishing
- People have access to information and services enabling participation in informed decision-making regarding their own lives.
If we all want the same targets, why would there be different ways of getting there?
Yes, indigenous-Australians suffered the frontier wars (ending 1934) and there should be a Genocide Museum (perhaps in Alice); however, globally, many people have suffered war first-hand and all humanity have near-ancestors who have suffered it, which suggests, particularly in some outback communities, the ‘Gap’ is being driven by something still festering.
Poverty, Unemployment & Alienation
Rather than trying to address each of the 17 specific targets in a bespoke fashion in each separate community, don’t we just need to eradicate:
- Poverty
- Unemployment
- Alienation (including racism)?
Won’t this replace Despair with Hope?
In Kununurra, I met a wonderful soul – a young pregnant indigenous lady who got drunk every night.
I know some will think, ‘how can she have been a wonderful soul and still do that to her unborn child?’ but, though I too found the juxtaposition surreal (and heartbreaking), she was a sensitive person who seemed to lack all hope – i.e. she was lost.
Regarding the ‘Close the Gap’ ambition, why focus on it when the ambition of ‘Universal Empowerment’ is easier and, counterintuitively, delivers a budget-surplus/downward-pressure-on-taxes (detailed in past articles)?
That is, if the percentage of Disempowered non-indigenous is, say, 20% and Disempowered indigenous is, say, 40%, are we happy if they both become 20% or would it be better to infrastructuralise Universal Empowerment so it’s closer to 0% for each?
‘Work smarter, not harder’.
[No need to be flat-out like a lizard drinking.]
The Goal: Not ‘Close the Gap’ but ‘Universal Empowerment’
Universal Empowerment is achieved via the Industrial Revolution inheritance’s 5 ‘universal, unconditional & guaranteed’ RIDEH infrastructure cornerstones:
- [R] Universal Rule of Personal & Property Security Law
- [I] Universal Subsistence Income (USI)
- [D] Universal Liberal Democracy
- [E] Universal Education
- [H] Universal Healthcare.
There is disproportionate indigenous Disempowerment because there are ‘Gaps’ in this Universal Empowerment Infrastructure, which are disproportionately detrimental to indigenous-Australians.
This is reflected in phrases such as, ‘white man’s law’ and ‘white man’s education’, which I’ve only heard in Oz – i.e. never in places such as PNG, East Timor, Indonesia, The Philippines, China or Africa.
However, Disempowered non-indigenous-Australians also have their disenfranchisement-reflecting-phrases such as about police etc.
Thus, rather than being an indigenous problem, it’s an Empowerment problem.
Regarding Universal Empowerment Infrastructure, we already possess robust versions of all except The USI.
However, because we don’t have The USI, we have PUSCHER – i.e.:
- [P] Poverty
- [U] Unemployment (and Underemployment)
- [S] Stigma (‘the dole-bludger’ narrative including its racist and disablist variants)
- [C] Corruption
- [H] Harassment (‘mutual obligations’)
- [E] Paid-worker-Exploitation
- [R] Excessive workplace-Regulation.
In turn, understandably, this detracts from hope and causes alienation, which, disproportionately disaffecting indigenous-Australia, manifests as the Disempowerment ‘Gap’.
‘The USI-Reform’: The Universal Empowerment Facilitator
“I’m now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective — the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed measure: the guaranteed income.”
“It seems to me that the Civil Rights movement must now begin to organize for the guaranteed annual income. Begin to organize people all over our country, and mobilize forces so that we can bring to the attention of our nation this need…”
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
[Like a didgeridoo alarm-clock, isn’t this one heck of a wake-up?]
The USI-Reform requires substituting The Universal Subsistence Income (USI) for:
- Universal Minimum Hourly Wages (UMHoW) system, which causes unemployment
- The income-Welfare system, which because of its targeting causes stigma (‘dole-bludger’ narrative), harassment (‘mutual obligations’) and inefficiency (for example, Centrelink and the obtain-paid-work-lose-income-Welfare distortion).
Every adult citizen receives The USI of $20,000 then any other income earnt is added without ever losing The USI.
This eradicates PUSCHER including Poverty, Unemployment & Alienation.
For example, in an outback community, a young idle adult may decide to peel-off from their peer group and, with the assistance of the unconditional and mobile USI, go to a town or outstation for paid-work, which they can most certainly find because, without UMHoW, there’s zero unemployment.
And, with many of their brightest and most adventurous peers leaving, others will follow. For those who wish to stay, it will probably be because they are needed and, with The USI, without harassment and while exercising their Agency of Choice, they will be able to do so.
It also dispenses with the degrading intrusive bureaucracy, which all despise navigating and which indigenous-Australians tend to despise even more (especially if English is their second-language).
Thus, not only will the Gap, within a generation, without fuss or wastage, be slammed shut, in addition, Australia-wide, infrastructural Disempowerment will be immediately transcended.
Incomism: The Main Source of Racism Toward Indigenous-Australians
Incomism refers to prejudice based on how one receives their income – i.e. if one is in paid-work or business, that’s respected; however, if one is on the dole then one is a ‘dole-bludger’.
Thus, with indigenous-Australians (unlike, for example, East Asian Australians) disproportionately represented in the latter, they are alienated as a group (i.e. there is a racist stereotype), which works as a vicious cycle – i.e. the stereotype contributes to their Disempowerment, which leads to increased unemployment and so on such that racism dovetails with indigenous unemployment & poverty.
In addition, such marginalization and lost-pride breeds escapism, which leads to anti-social behaviour and substance abuse, which then feeds back into both racism and unemployment.
So, will the Voice solve any of this?
The USI-Reform will – i.e. there’s no dole-bludger narrative because everyone receives The USI and there’s no unemployment because there’s no Universal Minimum Hourly Wages (UMHoW).
The USI-Reform makes all society better-off – even, because of enormous efficiency gains, reducing pressure on the government budget.
Lastly, with tremendous good-will toward indigenous-Australia, if indigenous-Australia asks for The USI-Reform then Australia will get it.
Conclusion
The Voice is a divisive distraction, which would never have been conceived if we had ‘Closed the Gap’; however, the ‘No’-case is failing to offer a new solution.
Regarding ‘Closing the Gap’, the best way is via ‘Universal Empowerment’, which only requires ‘The USI-Reform’.
Thank you.
Best regards
Paul Ross
Founder
The Citizens’ Dividend Organisation (CDO) Australia