Rita Panahi: The AFL routinely buys into the most absurd notions of victimhood

The league needs to realise its political posturing and advocacy for special treatment of particular racial groups is alienating huge segments of the community.

Gill McLachlan’s legacy is set to be tarnished together with the game. Picture Chris Kidd

Australia’s leading sporting bodies are determined to play a dangerous and divisive game of race politics that’s certain to alienate huge segments of the community.

The AFL together with the NRL, NBL, Rugby Australia, Football Australia, Cricket Australia and Tennis Australia and Netball Australia are working with the Albanese government to push the “yes” campaign for the race based referendum for an indigenous voice to parliament.

What they want to do is guilt Australians into enshrining racial politics into the constitution; a move that manages to be foolish both commercially and ethically.

The AFL in particular appears to be a slow learner after recklessly diving into toxic race politics again and again.

The ongoing Alastair Clarkson and Chris Fagan inquiry, sparked by Hawthorn’s discredited review, will embarrass the league on several fronts, all of them self-inflicted and entirely avoidable.

Gill McLachlan’s legacy is set to be tarnished together with the game.

For a league obsessed with spin and brand management, the AFL sure have developed an unfortunate knack for hara-kiri.

The AFL has recklessly dived into toxic race politics again and again. Picture: Jason Edwards

It was McLachlan who falsely labelled large swathes of footy fans racist for booing Swans great Adam Goodes, a false narrative pushed by the race-baiting media and accepted as gospel.

There was a time, decades ago, when the AFL was at the forefront of stamping out racist abuse and ensuring everyone was treated equally, now it routinely engages in divisive political posturing, advocate for special treatment of particular racial groups and buy into the most absurd notions of victimhood.

The so-called indigenous voice is not only divisive and, many would argue, racist, but it also undermines the democratic principle of “one man, one vote”.

It is a policy that is highly controversial and with a decent chance of failing particularly if the Liberal Party grow a backbone and come out strongly against the referendum.

Details have thus far been scant but what little we do know paints a disturbing picture of how “the voice” can be weaponised by activists in the High Court.

Former High Court Justice Ian Callinan warns that we may see a “decade or more of constitutional and administrative law litigation” if the ‘yes’ vote gets up.

“Like Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and many other Australians, including many, many lawyers of goodwill, I do not think the voice is the way,” he wrote.

Most sports fans, whatever their political persuasion, would prefer politics to stop intruding into the game they love. Sport is supposed to be an escape, not a vehicle to push political ideology.