“The three elements of the campaign were in the wrong order – it should have been hearts first, heads second: that is, truth-telling that revealed the attempted colonial genocide revealed – before the treaty, of which the Voice is part,” writes “The Gadfly” columnist ROBERT MACKLIN. 

The loss of the Voice referendum – now in serious prospect – is very sad, but not the existential tragedy that some well-meaning commentators of the left have labelled it.

It will not mean, for example, that Peter Dutton will be successful in importing the raging hatred from the hoi polloi that occurred in the UK Brexit disaster or the election of Donald Trump in the US. The genius of our electoral system with its compulsory voting will protect us from that particular horror story.

Instead, it is the conduct and the personnel of the “Yes” case that did us in. And it will be a spur to the eventual engagement of the Aboriginal people in the true essence of “closing the gap” – that is, their involvement at every level of government – and the negotiation of a treaty (or treaties) with the First Nations.

But it’s important to analyse the reasons for the failure before we can move forward with confidence; so in all humility, here’s my view after a dedication to the cause since I initiated Canberra’s “reconciliation march” across Canberra’s Commonwealth Bridge in 2000.

1. From the beginning, the three elements of the campaign were in the wrong order – it should have been hearts first, heads second: that is, Truth-telling that revealed the attempted colonial genocide, the massacres, the dispossession and virtual slavery – the secret history revealed – before the treaty, of which the Voice is part.
2. The leaders were the wrong people – Noel Pearson is not a victim and he has a wicked tongue; Prof Marcia Langton is a leading academic who attracts enemies, but never wins them over. Megan Davis is not a victim, nor is she a persuasive performer in the media. Instead, Tom Calma presents the gentle face and friendly demeanor so necessary in such a debate… supported by the almost unlimited pleasant and articulate Aboriginal women we see daily on the ABC’s early evening program “The Drum”.
3. They forgot the millions of migrants who have arrived in the last 30 years who knew nothing about Australian history – but could have been engaged through the “White Australia” story from the Chinese experience in the goldfields.
4. The “Dark Emu” gibberish should have been exposed for what it is – not just contradicted in an academic tome or combined with Bill Gammage’s comparison of a European-stye parkland.
5. PM Albanese’s soft “democratic” view re the “No” case. He’s tough enough with his only possible challenger, Tanya Plibersek, to destroy her credibility through the Environment Ministry permitting new coal mines; so why not tell Dutton et al to raise their own funding if they want to mount a “No” case.
6. He could also warn the media against the false equivalence of the “Yes” and “No” cases. The Murdoch gang will do it anyway, but it truly is a false equivalence.
7. Should the referendum be lost, the government should indicate that the work will continue – at a greater pace – through the parliament to “close the gap”. 
8. They will work through states and will mandate Aboriginal participation at federal, state and council level; and immediately set a schedule to assist the Aboriginal people to begin a legal and UN case against the British government for reparations.

So, if Dutton thinks he has effectively ended Aboriginal advancement and participation in closing the gap by importing Trumpian politics, he’s not only just failed. By his foolish, racist politics, he has opened the way for the great attainment of making Australia whole… after 235 years of colonial occupation.

robert@robertmacklin.com