Why Australians Should Vote "No" in the Voice to Parliament Referendum

Alice Springs was a beautiful town in Central Australia that is suffering from the impact of dysfunctional indigenous Australians and their communities.

Crime has run rampant. The township has been adversely affected by crime for decades, but all towns have some level of crime. Unfortunately, the level of crime during the last couple of years has reached epidemic levels.

Neither government policies nor the under siege Northern Territory Police are able to get the situation under control.

Billions of dollars of taxpayers expenditure over decades, thousands of Aboriginal organisations, private, public and otherwise haven't resolved the problems of regional indigenous people.

Why would we expect a change to the Australian Constitution to provide better solutions?

The short answer is, it won't. What it will do is provide special access to Parliament and Government policies by 3% of the Australian population who are indigenous or part-indigenous.

My short article commenting about why I won't vote Yes in a referendum that will further divide the nation is here: https://tinyurl.com/rchenry

Let me know in the comments what you think.

#Robinoz

Destroying Civilisation - Now Maths is Racist

 Rod Liddle: We’re screeching into a new Dark Age, and bad scientists are leading the charge

The Sunday Times,12 December 2021
 
Stuck fast in a confined space between his mum and dad, Tane Mahuta eventually kicked out, sending his father, Ranginui, up to the sky and his mother, Papatuanuku, down to the earth. And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how the world was formed, according to Maori folklore.

A little later a demigod called Maui went fishing with a jawbone and was lucky enough to catch the north island of New Zealand, which is how it came into being. The south island was Maui’s canoe. A big canoe, then. I don’t know if the Maoris have an explanation for how their country’s prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, was brought into existence. Perhaps one of those demigods put some puppies in a blender.

The Tane Mahuta stuff is a colourful and possibly (your call) delightful explanation of the creation of the world — although not, for me, wholly persuasive. It is not notably more mad than the idea that an all-powerful God, probably masked up and working from home according to guidelines, put in an onerous six-day shift to create everything around us and then took Sunday off to watch the golf on Sky. We create these myths in darkness and hope that they will provide us with a little light until something genuinely illuminating comes along, such as science: evidence-based and empirical.

So, from New Zealand, comes more evidence that what I call the De-Enlightenment really is upon us. There, a government working party has demanded that the story of Tane Mahuta and his various strange relatives should be given equal emphasis when children are taught the origins of the world: equal emphasis, that is, to the stuff we know to be true. To the science.

One very eminent scientist called Garth Cooper, a professor of biochemistry and clinical biochemistry at the University of Auckland, slightly balked at this. He signed an open letter suggesting that, while it was important everybody knew about the interesting Maori take on creation, “In the discovery of empirical, universal truths, it falls far short of what we can define as science itself.”

You might have expected his colleagues to agree. Nope, not a bit of it. Cooper is in the process of being cancelled nationwide, with pretty much only the New Zealand Free Speech Union supporting him. The Royal Society of New Zealand has denounced him and he may be expelled from it. His own vice-chancellor at Auckland, a Brit called Dawn Freshwater, said he had caused “considerable hurt and dismay among our staff, students and alumni”.

A letter attacking him for causing “untold hurt and harm” was got up by two other academics. The first is Siouxsie Wiles, a pink-haired woman whose hobby is playing with Lego, despite her objections to the gender stereotypes inherent within Lego figurines. The other is Shaun Hendy, who is the mathematical modeller behind New Zealand’s policy of remaining within lockdown for ever in case someone dies. The letter was signed by more than 2,000 academics.

This story has not gained much traction in the British press, and when it has, it has been on the undoubtedly important issue of freedom of speech. Our own Richard Dawkins has written to the Royal Society of New Zealand voicing his incredulity.

Yet for once freedom of speech is not the crucial issue for me here. It is instead the burgeoning madness and stupidity, condescension and racism that are propelling us towards the De-Enlightenment. All of those academics, and the Royal Society, know full well that the Maori explanation for the creation of the world is not correct. And yet, hypocritically and patronisingly, they pretend otherwise.

The argument — facile beyond comprehension — is that science has been used by white, western, developed nations to underpin colonialism and is therefore tainted by its association with white supremacy. As Dawkins pointed out, science is not “white”. (The assumption that it is is surely racist.) Nor is it imperialist. It is simply a rather beautiful tool for discerning the truth.

It is not just New Zealand. Science is under attack in America and indeed here. Rochelle Gutierrez, an Illinois professor, has argued that algebra and trigonometry perpetuate white power and that maths is, effectively, racist.

Oxford University has announced that it intends to “decolonise” maths: “This includes steps such as integrating race and gender questions into topics.”

A lunacy has gripped our academics. They would be happy to throw out centuries of learning and brilliance for the sake of being temporarily right-on, and thus signalling their admirable piety to a young, approving audience.

It is an indulgence that, with every fatuous genuflection towards political correctness, is dragging us all backwards.

I always get a laugh ... Leftist stupidity!

Every day I come across something that demonstrates to me just how incredibly stupid some of the so-called "progressives" are.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm all for progress, provided it is sensible, achievable and doesn't destroy Australian values and culture or adversely affect anyone else or any other country.

Here's the latest from the demented Left wing echo bubble:

According to this moron group, we can't possibly describe white sugar as what it is, "white sugar."

Why not? Because anything "white" is supremacist, racist and therefore unacceptable to very small minority groups like this one.

Is it okay to call brown sugar brown? Raw sugar raw? God knows.

Why call anything what it actually is? Perhaps we could call a car a "thing on wheels." A refrigerator, "a cool thingy."

Although I laugh when I initially read something this incredibly stupid, I do wonder whether these people could be doing something about poverty, homelessness, excessive immigration, honour killing, genital mutilation, or reducing the pollution of oceans with plastics. No, it's more important to attack sugar for being called white!

If you aren't dismayed at this stupidity, perhaps you are part of the problem.

What do you think?

RH
#OKBoomer!