Those of you with a sensitive finger on the cultural pulse of the nation may have heard a passing reference to something called ‘The Voice’. It has been occasionally mentioned on the various broadcasting outlets of both the ABC and SBS. The Fairfax press has also, from time to time, made brief remarks about it, generally in terms of approbation. I was in Woolies recently and, instead of their incessant exhortations to take advantage of their generous offers, I was informed, over the PA system, that they were proud to support the Yes vote in a forthcoming referendum about the Voice. Woolworths is not the only major business offering support to those trying to introduce this mysterious program into Australia, and it is increasingly evident that the captains of commerce are getting into bed with the wokerati. In addition, some of our finest legal minds – people with a very deep understanding of constitutional issues – are anxious to give us the benefit of their wisdom in support of the Voice.

So, in case you haven’t previously heard about this issue, or are uncertain about how it will affect you, as you will soon have to vote about the program, I will try to clarify one issue for you. First, and perhaps most importantly, the Voice is probably not a millenarian cult. Our wise old friend, Wiki, defines such cults thus: ‘Millenarianism is the belief by a religious, or political group… in a coming fundamental transformation of society, after which all things will be changed.’ Wiki also notes that, ‘These movements have been especially common among people living under colonialism or other forces that disrupted previous social arrangements’. It so happens that the leaders of the campaign in support of the Voice do insist that the people it will help are the victims of colonialism, and they are also adamant that this Voice will bring about a fundamental change in the lives of the people it affects.

Another characteristic of millenarian cults is the tendency for leaders to make extravagant claims about the value of their programme and some unkind people may believe that the supporters of the Voice are also prone to making similar claims about the Voice. Just because there are superficial similarities between millenarian cults and the Voice project doesn’t mean we should jump to the conclusion that it is a cult. The Voice leaders haven’t said they will turn water into wine nor have they prophesied the end of days. Well, not in so many words.

During the second world war, some Pacific Island tribes convinced themselves that chopping down trees to create runways in the jungle would enable the great bird in the sky to deliver ‘cargo’ to them in the same way that the Allies had obtained military supplies by building airstrips in the jungles of Melanesia. The belief of the villagers in the efficacy of their ‘runways’ was so strong that they destroyed vegetable gardens and killed livestock for celebratory feasts. Famine frequently followed.

Should the Voice campaign succeed, we are in no danger of famine. But there is something oddly similar between the beliefs of the PNG natives and the supporters of the Voice. In both cases there is absolute certainty that their respective schemes will work without any clear explanation as to how. Just as, for the Melanesians, the mere act of chopping down trees would ensure future material abundance, so for Noel, Linda et al., the mere presence of yet another Aboriginal bureaucracy in Canberra will close the gaps, end foetal alcohol spectrum disorder in Aboriginal communities, stop men from murdering their partners, get Aboriginal kids to attend school, and so on and so forth.

When asked how the Voice will solve the problems of Aboriginal society, its supporters claim that the elected representatives will be able to explain to Canberra what needs to be done to solve the aforementioned problems. This too is oddly reminiscent of a cult but, in this case, it’s the UK-based cult of the Aetherians. You may not be familiar with that group of visionaries. They are similar to the better known Raelians in that both are considered to be UFO cults whose adherents believe we are frequently visited by extra-terrestrial beings. The Aetherians were founded by one George King who, over 50 years ago, claimed to be in regular receipt of telepathic messages from an entity called Aetherius, who lived on Venus. According to King (or Aetherius), ‘When you are ready, great enlightenment will come, and an answer to all your problems will be revealed.’

King and his followers believed that an alien pilots a craft known as Satellite Number 3 that orbits Earth. From time to time it instigates a ‘magnetic period’ that ‘makes all spiritual actions 3,000 times more potent in terms of their benefit to the world as a whole’.

OK, I accept that there are a lot more supporters of the Voice than there are Aetherians, and most supporters of the Voice might not give the Aetherian beliefs much credence. But there are, again, disconcerting similarities between the two groups. Both groups believe that a single event, be it a ‘magnetic period’ or a ‘Yes Vote’ will have a transformative effect and both groups reduce society’s complexities to an absurdly simplistic level.

A final affinity between millenarian cults and the Voice is the ambiguity of the leaders. Do the leaders of UFO cults genuinely believe that they have communicated with intelligent beings from outer space or do they take perverse pleasure in fooling people? Pearson, Burney and Megan Davis are undoubtedly familiar with the mechanisms governing the levers of power. Do they genuinely believe, as they have repeatedly claimed, that the establishment of a Voice to parliament, and a government-funded ‘secretariat’, will not have a major impact on how laws are passed and how government business is conducted or is there an underlying motive?

However what the ‘Vote Yes’ mob lack is the one thing essential to cult formation. Namely, a charismatic leader capable of convincing people to offer unwavering devotion to a belief system regardless of how batty or destructive it is. For this we should be grateful.

‘When the hurly-burly’s done/When the battles lost and won’, Burney, Pearson and Davis will undoubtedly meet again on the blasted heath we call Canberra. What we don’t know is what brew they will next concoct. It will be determined by the outcome of the referendum.