The Hereditary Nature of the Voice

We agree with Warren Mundine’s assessment that the Voice is a bureaucratic power grab, but we would go further and add an additional dimension to the dangers that it represents.

The Voice is not simply an Aboriginal bureaucracy but, because it relies on a membership that must be of Aboriginal ancestry, it will also become hereditary.

By definition, only people with the right DNA and family ancestry can join and be counted as members of the Voice – to wit, Aboriginal and Torres strait Islander people, who are about 3% of Australia’s population.

Once enshrined into the Constitution, these people and their descendants will enjoy a power, privilege and a control over our society’s affairs that the other 97% of Australia’s population will lack. In effect, they will be a new elite, an hereditary Aboriginal Aristocracy, a new Nobility in fact.

If the referendum is successful, Australians will have unwittingly installed within our Constitution, in perpetuity, a new power grouping consisting of an ethnic minority that is defined by genetics – a separate ‘race’ in the old parlance.

This race-based, ethnic minority will be given powers within the Constitution which are granted only to this race, powers which the rest of Australia’s citizens are denied because we were born with a certain characteristic over which we have no control, namely a lack of certain Aboriginal genetic codes or ancestry.

To our mind this really is a new form of Apartheid – in Afrikaans, meaning a separateness, or a state of being apart [literally ‘apart-hood’].

This new Apartheid will have the repugnant consequence that some Australians, through no agency of their own, will be defined within our Constitution as being part of a political power group by the mere fact of their having been born into a particular family – their race at birth will set them apart as forever being different politically and socially from the rest of us Australians.

It should be clearly understood that, unlike all the other power-brokers who have formalised positions within our Constitution – the Members of Parliament, Senators, the High Court judges, the Governor-General, the military and civil servants, who are all elected or appointed for set terms and can be removed by being voted out, sacked or retired, with no expectation that they can pass their position onto a family member or descendant – the Voice members will be different.

They will be ‘chosen’ [that is, appointed; free elections for the Group of 24 are not proposed] based on regional and family (tribal) connections. This will allow powerful Aboriginal families and clans to dominate the membership process and ensure that only their family members are ‘chosen’.

To further entrench these powerful families, there is a ‘Putin Clause’ within the Voice that provides a loop-hole for members to get around the member limit of two 4-year terms. The word ‘consecutive’ has been inserted – ‘There would be a limit of 2 consecutive terms per member’ [See page 108 here].

This means a powerful, family elder, who must resign after two, 4-year terms (8-years total), could have another family member ‘chosen’ to act as his proxy while he only has to sit out 2 or 4 years before the next cycle of members are ‘chosen’. His compliant family member then retires and he (and it will invariably be a he) can be ‘re-chosen’ for another two, 4-year terms. This can be repeated for as many times as required to keep control of the Voice within the hands of a few chosen families and clans.

This technique, which we have nicknamed the ‘Putin Clause’, was masterfully used by Russia’s President Putin to maintain power by circumventing the Russian Constitution’s three-consecutive-term limit for the Presidency. Putin simply installed his trusted ally, Medvedev, while he himself continued to rule Russia through Medvedev, waiting out Medvedev’s term, before returning for his next 3-term Presidency [See the Medvedev–Putin tandemocracy].

So Where is the Evidence For this Coup by ‘Aboriginal Aristocrats’?

We will continue to present our evidence over the coming months as the Voice Referendum process gets underway. At this stage we can offer the following:

Evidence of an Emerging Aboriginal Aristocracy and Nobility

We intend to use the word aristocracy’ in its sense of ‘class’ (Wikipedia) where historically the word was associated with an ‘hereditary’ or ‘ruling’ social class.

We believe that an ‘Aboriginal Nobility’ will also develop over time in Australia. A nobility is a social class found in many societies that have an aristocracy. It is normally ranked immediately below royalty.

The opening paragraphs of our Constitution clearly indicate that we are constituted under the Crown [a royalty],

WHEREAS the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the Constitution hereby established … Be it therefore enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons…, This Act may be cited as the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act…extend to the Queen’s successors…The provisions of this Act referring to the Queen shall extend to Her Majesty’s heirs and successors in the sovereignty of the United Kingdom…(Source)

Thus, the insertion of a new Voice Chapter within our Constitution confirms that this Voice is subservient to the Crown [Royalty]. This lends weight to our argument that the Voice can be viewed as an Aboriginal Aristocracy and Nobility that is being formed, as Noel Pearson has implored, in ‘its rightful place’, under our Constitutional Monarchy.

As Noel Pearson asked (told) us in his seminal 2014 Quarterly Essay,

‘The nation has unfinished business. After more than two centuries, can a rightful place be found for Australia’s original peoples?’

The answer it seems, is yes – and that place will be based on Apartheid – a race-based classification and separation of Australians to be ruled over by an hereditary Aboriginal Aristocracy and Nobility.

Voice to the Australian Parliament or Coup d’état: Part 2 was first published in Dark Emu Exposed

SUGGESTED ARTICLES
Roger Karge BSc (Hons) Melbourne University is A 'Quiet Australian' based in Melbourne Australia, with a background in science and business, who edits the Dark Emu Exposed website. Inspired by thinkers who believe that facts are more reliable than empathy - Thomas Sowell, Douglas Murray, Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Keith Windschuttle, Melanie Phillips, Frank Furedi, Jordan Peterson, et al. Currently working with a diverse network of people to get Australian politics and discourse back on track to its historical direction - that of a progressive, egalitarian, free-enterprise and aspirational society, dominated by working and middle classes, who believe in a fair-go for all in an open, democratic, sovereign Australia with freedom of expression and association.