Indigenous Voice to Parliament

[David]

https://www.managementstudyguide.com/kotters-8-step-model-of-change.htm

This is one of the oldest and still functional change models. Have a read and think about how many of these steps the Yes campaign got right.

Doesn't seem like a bad place to start. Would be interesting to see if this model has been adapted or interpreted for a purely political rather than corporate context.

[stui magpie]

^

For Politics, you'd plug in emotion, hard, into the early stages. Work people into a frenzy. Plenty of examples to pick from.

[slangman]

I have a question and I would like honest opinions.

It has been very noticeable around where I live and during my commutes around town that displays of Yes signs and placards far outnumber No signs on people’s cars, houses, tshirts etc.
By my observations it seems to be 9/10 are Yes signs.
I have been pondering the question of why someone voting Yes is more compelled to publicly express that view than someone voting No and especially considering the current opinion polls.

I’m curious more so from a physiological view more than political.

[What'sinaname]

I have a question and I would like honest opinions.

It has been very noticeable around where I live and during my commutes around town that displays of Yes signs and placards far outnumber No signs on people’s cars, houses, tshirts etc.
By my observations it seems to be 9/10 are Yes signs.
I have been pondering the question of why someone voting Yes is more compelled to publicly express that view than someone voting No and especially considering the current opinion polls.

I’m curious more so from a physiological view more than political.

Because yes voters are more emotionally unhinged and likely to cause property damage. They are likely younger and enjoy broadcasting to the world their views on everything - especially through social media.

Whereas people voting no are likely more conservative people who like to keep their views private.

[Dark Beanie]

Not in the area I live in.

But then again, house in the next street has a big Go Blues board on their front fence and it still intact.

[stui magpie]

I have a question and I would like honest opinions.

It has been very noticeable around where I live and during my commutes around town that displays of Yes signs and placards far outnumber No signs on people’s cars, houses, tshirts etc.
By my observations it seems to be 9/10 are Yes signs.
I have been pondering the question of why someone voting Yes is more compelled to publicly express that view than someone voting No and especially considering the current opinion polls.

I’m curious more so from a physiological view more than political.

My view is that there is more potential for stigma and abuse by publically declaring you're a No voter.

[David]

FMD even my son is telling me he's going to vote No.

I had to remind him he's 8 and not getting a vote either way.

[David]

I have a question and I would like honest opinions.

It has been very noticeable around where I live and during my commutes around town that displays of Yes signs and placards far outnumber No signs on people’s cars, houses, tshirts etc.
By my observations it seems to be 9/10 are Yes signs.
I have been pondering the question of why someone voting Yes is more compelled to publicly express that view than someone voting No and especially considering the current opinion polls.

I’m curious more so from a physiological view more than political.

As others above have suggested, it's partially about not making yourself a target, but I think it also speaks to the nature of the campaigns. The Yes campaign is about a vision for the future that people can get behind, and for some that's a cause for hope and enthusiasm; the No campaign is about being against that. So there's nothing to really tie your mast to.

There's an additional virtue-signalling component here: putting up Yes signs is a way to signal that you care about Indigenous people's struggles. No signals that you don't. (I'm not saying those things are necessarily true, just that that's how a lot of people will interpret those signals.) And people know that and will act accordingly, because most of us, to some extent or other, care about our social capital and don't want to jeopardise it.

I wouldn't be surprised if the situation were quite similar in the 1999 referendum, in terms of visibility of the pro-republic side: I can't remember off the top of my head, but I suspect you would have seen a lot more Yes than No posters back then, because the republic was a cause to rally around. But even then you had a minority of people (*cough* weirdos) who were genuinely passionate about the monarchy and maintaining our ties to the motherland. What's the unifying goal for No voters here, apart from "standing up to wokeness" or something like that? Negative politics like that can be very effective, but it's not a cause so much as a disposition.

So yeah, I think it's a combination of three things: 1) the distinct nature of each campaign as a positive vs negative vision; 2) advancement/preservation of social capital; and 3) fear of being targeted for being on the "wrong" side.

[slangman]

FMD even my son is telling me he's going to vote No.

I had to remind him he's 8 and not getting a vote either way.

Wait till they become teenagers

[stui magpie]

FMD even my son is telling me he's going to vote No.

I had to remind him he's 8 and not getting a vote either way.

Did he have reasons? I'm curious.

[David]

[pietillidie]

On the signage mentioned earlier, to add to David's comment, two-sidedness signals a blanket 'for and against'; there's no nuance in it. Apply an unnuanced signal to a topic centred on one group of people, and you're left with a signal that can readily imply for/against that group of people, even it it doesn't.

And that's also why I think the no vote winning risks leaving a really bad taste in the mouth. Put it this way, it most definitely doesn't 'risk' sending a positive signal, which is the really angering part of the whole thing. That being the case, why TF hold such a referendum in the first place? The psychological naivety is breathtaking.

That said, this not like the Iraq War where you know something has a high chance of being a disaster. Now we're trapped in a binary vote, there is at least some chance that generalisational shift and general learning might result in improvement (generational shift is one of the biggest drivers of sociological change by far, so the passage of time shouldn't be underestimated). As such I dont think voting no is racist, just emotionally stingy.

[think positive]

[think positive]

[stui magpie]