I probably have a pretty naive / 2 dimensional understanding of politics but, I just don't understand Nampijinpa Price.

I'm not particularly well informed as to the plight of first nations peoples, but my understanding was that their interests are better aligned with progressive parties with social policies.

From her wiki:

Price's activism and views focus primarily on issues faced by Aboriginal communities, and she is a vocal advocate for conservative Aboriginal politics in Australia. She has highlighted the high rates of domestic and other violence in Aboriginal communities, and advocates for a law and order approach. She is critical of welfare dependency and "opportunistic collectivism". She opposed the proposed Indigenous Voice to Parliament, and thinks that calls to change Australia Day and the Australian flag are counterproductive to Aboriginal advancement.

All of these positions are more or less the opposite of the positions I would expect aboriginal people to take up.

The best I can surmise, is that her views are indeed a rarity amongst First Nations People, and because of that she's a highly desirable member for conservative parties to kind of have their policies "blessed" by a token First Nations Woman.

Is it really that simple? Or am I missing something ?

all 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 10 points 1 year ago

I think you need to stop thinking that being a first nations person means she can't be right wing, or a scheming opportunist, or a hypocrite. First nations are still human, they can be sellout shitbags just like any other person.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    I just want to say good on you for applying some critical thinking, doing some research, and then testing your conclusions by inviting others opinions.

    I so wish that most people could even do one of these steps instead of just parroting whatever they had last heard.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    She is an opportunist. She does not care about the advancement of aboriginal well-being.

  • source
  • [+] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Why would you expect Aboriginal people to all vote as a bloc? Nobody does that, regardless of heritage. Expecting them all to vote left wing because you think it would progress their interests is in the same line as someone from the right expecting all white people to vote for them to preserve perceived privileges.

    We don't even have have such a clear political split in groups which would gain direct benefit from progressive parties such as welfare recipients. You'd think that would make for a clear choice between the party that wants to either keep or increase your source of money and the party that wants to cut it, but there's a lot who still vote conservative either because they believe something else in that side of politics is more important or they simply don't care enough to think through the ramifications.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 year ago

    I'm not expecting Aboriginal people to all vote as a bloc, I'm expecting an Aboriginal member with (I strongly suspect) the highest number of Aboriginal constituents of any member, to represent the interests of her constituents.

    So for example, I expected the majority of her constituents to be in favor of the voice to parliament, but she was not.

    However, I freely admit that there's something going on here that I just don't understand, which is why I have posed the question.

  • source
  • parent
  • The Minefield, ABC Listen

    I've been listening to this weeks Minefield and considering their topic as an emotional driver for different actors here and internationally.

    Price's actions in relation to ego and "saving face" from those embarrassments, and/or the need to dominate opponents, perceived and real, in reaction to their internal view of themselves and their identified 'side'.

    I think its helping me, you might find their discussion insightful as well.

  • source