Australia Asks Voters to Expand a Racial Welfare State

The referendum to give indigenous people a special ‘voice’ would only worsen disparities

By Jason Riley. Excerpts:

"a ballot initiative amending the constitution to give indigenous Australians—and only them—a special “voice to parliament.”"

"Part of the problem is the studied vagueness of the referendum’s language, which gives the impression that Mr. Albanese and his allies have something to hide. Australia already has an indigenous affairs minister, and aboriginal Australians won the right to vote in 1962. What, precisely, does enshrining an indigenous voice to Parliament in the constitution mean in practice? How can the government give a special voice to one racial group without necessarily diminishing other voices? Indian-Australians are the fastest-growing minority. Do they deserve constitutionally embedded special rights as well?

Supporters of the referendum can’t or won’t answer these questions. They say the details will be fleshed out at some future date"

"much of the harm being done to these communities is self-inflicted. In his essay, Mr. Purcell wrote that some 70% of aboriginal Australians in jail “are there for crimes of violence against their loved ones.” For many in the No camp, it’s not clear how a successful referendum would help close the gap in outcomes between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians.

Australia already spends billions of dollars annually on indigenous welfare programs. If a greater “voice” for the indigenous population simply translates into more government lucre for politically connected tribal elders and aboriginal elites in urban areas—which is the track record of racial preferences for minorities in countries all over the world—the result may well be wider social and economic disparities for everyday indigenous Australians. Worse, it will further subsidize antisocial behavior and thereby retard the development of attitudes, habits and skills that facilitate upward mobility."