In a Nutshell - What Dark Emu Was Really About — Dark Emu Exposed

Oct 17

Oct 17 In a Nutshell - What Dark Emu Was Really About

The DEFEAT of the Constitutionally Enshrined Voice Proposal is now complete. Australians will not have to revisit this crazy idea for another generation or two, if ever.

Our Australian Constitution is thus saved.

Our unique Australian Project has survived a body blow, but now the Working Peoples of Australia can dust themselves off and continue on their way as one of the greatest societies in human history.

After the disastrous loss by the Yes-Campaign in the Voice Referendum, the Radical Left Activists and their elite supporters claim that they are undertaking a week of silence to “grieve this outcome and reflect on its meaning and significance”. (file here)

The reality is that they are being anything but silent. Informants to this masthead tell us, on the condition of anonymity, that there is a flurry of de-briefing going on, by meetings, phone and Zoom, on the causes for the massive rejection of their Voice and their grab for power.

A narrative of blame is being agreed upon and a revenge strategy being formulated. Once the code of silence is lifted the battle will return on the new front of Truth-telling.

Summary & score so far: “Australia dodged a bullet” - Aussies 1 : Aboriginal Activists 0

The defeat of this Voice Referendum marks a major milestone achievement in why we started and maintained this Dark Emu Exposed website.

In April 2020, we commissioned a cartoon to reflect our concern that the real reason why Bruce Pascoe wrote the fiction that was Dark Emu, was that the activists would then be able to use its arguments as a battering ram in delegitimising the British settlement of Australia. This would help reinforce the claims being made in the Uluru Statement from the Heart - Voice, Treaty, Truth-telling.

Pascoe would claim that Aboriginal people were farmers - therefore they had ‘sovereignty’ in the land by virtue of their ‘mixing their labour with the soil’, and thus, under International law at the time, the British were wrong not to negotiate a treaty by which the Aborigines could cede their sovereignty.

No Treaty was signed, therefore the activists confidently chant today, “Sovereignty was not ceded. Always was, always will be, Aboriginal Land.”

The Voice body in the Constitution would give them the counter-party that could negotiate, Nation-to-Nation with the Australian State, or so they all dreamed.

The Liberal governments of Australia over the past 20 years have done a pretty good job, despite all the mistakes they did make, in protecting the Australian Project from this onslaught by the crazy Aboriginal activists and their caravan of sycophants - the elites, virtue-signallers and carpet-baggers.

One skill the Liberals appear to have learnt is to recognise the highly effective Marxist technique of the, “Motte and the Bailey”.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton saw through the ruse of the Voice when it was presented as a ‘Motte and Bailey” package - he quickly identified and supported the “Motte” the easily defended position of Constitutional Recognition:

“I do think there is overwhelming support for constitutional recognition, it’s been the policy of the Liberal Party back to John Howard days.” - Peter Dutton, 6 Sept 2023

But Dutton also saw the “Bailey”, the hard to defend position of dividing Australian citizens by race, and he was smart enough to separate it out so the voters would see it too:

“Voters just did not support Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's Voice proposal because they do not want it in the constitution, the Opposition Leader said.” - Peter Dutton, 6 Sept 2023

This Bailey, was the real danger - the mechanism by which the radicals would get their own race-means-tested Chapter within our Constitution and thus a huge new power in the way the country was governed.

By conflating the easy to accept and defend, ‘Aboriginal Constitutional Recognition’ idea, with the totally unacceptable and hard to defend addition of a, ‘New Chapter of a raced-based body of activists’ into the Constitution, PM Albanese thought he could slip it through as one question.

Top marks to Peter Dutton for seeing this and calling it out. His splitting of the Voice referendum question into these two parts created the doubt in the voters mind that the so-called 'modest and gracious’ Voice was anything but, and was highly risky and discriminatory.

2. Deflect, Defer, Delay, Postpone, Abandon, DEFEAT

Another excellent technique used by conservatives to actually ‘conserve’ those things in our society they believe are worth protecting, like our Constitution, is to ‘Deflect, Defer & Delay’, crazy proposals from the Left.

This technique of obfuscation is continued until finally the Left’s crazy-idea’ is further Postponed, Abandoned and hopefully ultimately, Defeated.

That has been the trajectory of the political cause that was the so-called ‘reconcilliation process’ which culminated in a Referendum on the Voice.

Liberal governments were able to deflect and defer the main political push, for more than a decade, coming from the ‘troika’ of Noel Pearson, Megan Davis & Marcia Langton, each with their own band of loyal activist followers and supporters.

Finally when push came to shove, Prime Minister Albanese thinking he was doing the right thing, opened the door to a Referendum on the Voice, and the troika obliging rushed in….straight over the cliff, which no-one in the Yes camp had seen behind the door.

What Albanese and the troika failed to realise is that for the past twenty years they had lived and worked in the bubble that was the ‘remote community of the ACT.’ They thought they could slip the proposal through as a ‘modest and gracious’ offer which would avoid close scrutiny.

But other quieter political brokers and conservatives in the background could foresee what was going to happen and quickly got to work bringing the final defeat of the Voice proposal to fruition.

Thus, ‘game, set & match’ for the Conservatives, who will hang up their rackets for another generation or two before they need to replay that Constitutional Game again, if ever.