Davis and Turnbull-Roberts aren't for Indigenous Voices: They're for the Crown and Anglican megacult

I noticed with interest Dr Vanessa Turnbull-Roberts' recent post in her Instagram account:

As an non-Indigenous European Australian, I confess that I don't feel I have much right to comment on Indigenous affairs. Certainly not as much right as Turnbull-Roberts and Davis. On the other hand, I feel I have far more right to comment than does any member of the Christian megacult - or anyone that is subservient to its narratives and imperatives. So while I defer to most Indigenous about the Voice and about Indigenous affairs, I make an exception for part-Indigenous, part-European Australians who are either Christian megacultists, or seem to have a penchant for supporting the interests of the Crown, which is the representation of the sovereignty of the British Royal family and their Anglican megacult in our courts and parliaments.

I do not think that such Christian megacultists have a right to speak to Indigenous issues. I certainly don't think that they have a right to propose sweeping social changes on the basis of so called Statement from the Heart (whose cultural-narrative heart, exactly?) that includes references to the sovereignty of the Crown. That is the sovereignty of the British Royal family and the Anglican megacult responsible - from the declaration of terra nullius onwards - for the comprehensive structural genocide that has affected Indigenous Australians since European invasion began.

Turnbull-Roberts says that she doesn't support a no vote, but stands for a fair process.

Doesn't a fair process require (necessarily) transparency? There is a lot of complex documentation associated with The Voice that is not accessible to most off Turnbull-Roberts' Indigenous family. It may be well architected, scholarly, and informed. However, that is not all that matters. It also matters what narratives and beliefs - ideological, religious, and cultural - inform and influence people like Professor Megan Davis - the primary (very well-funded) architect of the Voice.

Davis has been unwilling to answer a simple question about whether she is a Christian megacultist. Perhaps she isn't. However, it matters immensely what (if any) religious/megacult influences are shaping her motives and approach. It matters immensely if she is a member of any sect of the Christian megacult (if you think Christianity is not an enormous abusive cult you're either ignorant, confused, or dishonest). It matters if she is a delusional megacultist with an imaginary friend and comorbid paranoid delusions about demons because such a person should not be making legislation or teaching in a university.

The Christian megacult was instrumentally responsible for most of the structural genocide of Indigenous in Australia (orphanages, smallpox blankets, incarceration, stolen generations, outright murder etc.) Not to mention the original lie of the Crown regarding terra nullius. The Crown is, as I noted above, the British Royal Family and Anglican Megacult. They are the last people that should have any say about Indigenous affairs.

Perhaps it is worthwhile keeping in mind that our courts are subservient to the Crown and Crown sovereignty (whatever that is, specifically and unambiguously) and that Davis and Turnbull-Roberts are both lawyers. They're also apparently exceptional scholars. But then - so were John Nash and Kurt Godel, both of whom succumbed to severe paranoid schizophrenia.

What is my point? That Christian megacultists are not well people - since adults with imaginary friends and paranoid and grandiose delusions about such things as demons are not well people - and their credentials don't matter if they're motivated by incoherent, deranged, infidelophobic, and delusional narratives.

I am not even Indigenous, and yet frankly I find the inclusion of references to the sovereignty of the Crown in The Uluru Statement to be offensive and demeaning to the Australian public.

The Christian megacult (including the Crown) is the problem, not the solution, and can not realistically offer any solutions, and should stay out of the matter completely. Adults with imaginary friends and comorbid paranoid and grandiose delusions are not fit to serve in parliament and are certainly not mentally fit to be involved in making legislation and policy in government. This is simply obvious.

The overarching imperative of the Christian megacult in all of its forms is to subsume all other cultural, ideological, and political narratives under the authority and ‘spiritual sovereignty’ (and social, legal, political, moral, and ideological sovereignty and authority) of the Christian megacult’s metanarrative or grand narrative. The Christian megacult’s narrative is not only infidelophobic – but frankly – it’s insane, delusional, inherently infidelophobic and dominionist nonsense and always has been.

The no campaign is not producing more racism. The ongoing program of increasingly sophisticated structural genocide initiated and sustained by the Crown is. The narratology of the Voice and the Uluru Statement from the Heart is part of that. I wonder why someone like Vanessa Turnbull-Roberts cannot see this. It's interesting to me that as a victim of structural-genocidal impositions of the state and its Christian megacult affiliated NGOs and advisory bodies herself, she apparently fails to perceive that the inclusion of references to the Crown in the Uluru statement is just more of the same structural genocide implemented using dominionist narratology and marketing psychology. It is uncomfortably close to the 'big lie' strategy of Adolf Hitler, which should be enough of a red flag. Just keep repeating the propaganda over and over and block and demean anyone that opposes it.

The Voice is in many ways a blatant and obvious continuation of the structural genocide perpetrated on Indigenous. It takes the form of the subsumption of the narratives of indigenous people under the dominionist and abusive metanarratives of the Christian megacult (both the Anglican Crown cult and the other sects of the Christian megacult in this nation.) It is hard to see how the legislatively and politically powerless (without the approval of the government) parallel bureaucracy of the Voice could serve as anything else no matter how sophisticated and complex its marketing psychology and treatises.

The Voice itself is significantly racist, but it is not racist in the way that a hamfisted Peter Dutton thinks. It is not racist because it makes an underclass of white Australians. That is complete nonsense. It is racist because it is a perpetuation and continuation of structural genocide on the level of legislated cultural narratives writ into policy (I have said this three times. Is it sinking in?) Narratives are critically important and instrumental in both Indigenous culture and to the dominance and spread of the abusive, infidelophobic influence of the Crown and the Christian megacult. The Voice seeks to place the concerns of Indigenous outside the government.

With the Voice Indigenous are separated out into another nation that must hold out its hand in supplication to the Anglican megacult Crown. Indigenous are held in their place as the subservient, vassal nation that must conform their sovereignty in polite deference to the sovereignty of the Crown. As an atheist non-Indigenous Australian, I think Indigenous people should reject it. That is my humble recommendation, as someone who recognises he has no real right to advise Indigenous people of anything at all. What is wrong with having more Indigenous leaders in Parliament itself as senators? I strongly suggest that this is what the Crown and the Anglican megacult and a number of other similar, and similarly motivated, groups are terrified of.

---