Is the Voice “divisive”?

Well yeah, obviously, because it’s causing a lot of arguments. But what do we mean when we call something “divisive”?

So many people who oppose the Voice say it’s because it’s divisive, or that it will create division when we should all be Australian. The definition of “divisive” is “causing a lot of disagreement which separates people into groups”. I’m paraphrasing a few different dictionaries for that.

Fair enough. But since when have we agreed on everything?

Having disagreements is normal. The only way to prevent disagreement is to never actually say anything meaningful, to just fart around without ever saying anything real. Australians like to think we call a spade a spade, that we tell it like it is. So “causing disagreement” isn’t enough reason for anyone to vote No. We have to dig a bit deeper.

What are we disagreeing about?

The fact that the British invaded this continent and created the legal fiction called Terra Nullius so they could claim ownership? That definitely happened. The fact that invading and stealing land is a bad thing? If you disagree with that, you’re an arsehole, and immoral. The fact that the invasion and stolen land has caused enormous problems for Indigenous people? Because if you disagree that that happened, you might be Senator Jacinta Price. And even she got told off by other No voters for saying that!

Before the British arrived, the many tribes and peoples living on this land had abundant food, health as good as your average 18th century British citizen (not as good as the rich people, but no-one else had that either), and were educated in how to survive and thrive in their world. There weren’t jails, but there was a system of laws and justice. The British came along and wrecked all of that. They massacred and raped, stole children, introduced alcohol and drugs, and denied justice to an entire continent full of people.

So nearly all of us agree that invading and stealing land is bad, and that it’s caused serious problems for Indigenous people. Is the division over whether or not we should try to solve those problems? I think we’re getting closer, now.

A lot of No voters think that the poverty, incarceration, poor health and education of Indigenous people is their own fault and they don’t deserve any help. Apart from being a shitty way to treat people in trouble, it’s also wrong.

A common conservative opinion is that if someone is having a problem then they need to take personal responsibility to solve it. “What happened to personal responsibility?” is said whenever someone tries to help homeless people, or people with mental illnesses, or people with health problems. You’re supposed to pull yourself up by your bootstraps (just so you know: that saying started as a sarcastic joke, because it is literally impossible to do). But no amount of personal responsibility can undo 200 years of attacks on your very right to live.

Will the Voice create a divide between Australians? Only if you think we were all the same and equal and living in perfection already. Or if you think that it creates special rights based on race, which I’ve already debunked.

Australia is already divided – by race, by class, by sex and gender. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to help people.

What division is created by the Voice, really? A division between people who acknowledge history and have compassion, and people who want to pretend everything is fine because their own life is fine. Call me divisive if you like, but I’m happy to disagree with people who can’t face reality.