Instead of competing with One Nation, the Liberal party under Angus Taylor is echoing One Nation’s divisive, hateful position on immigration and in Farrer is preferencing One Nation – a move that could put a One Nation MP in the House of Representatives for the first time.
Liberals in Farrer should ignore Taylor’s how-to-vote card and put One Nation last.
I remember when Pauline Hansen first started in politics, she was a member of the Liberal Party and ran on their policies.
Her “problem” was she publicly talked about the policies she got in the Liberal Party handbook.
She got in trouble from party bosses for saying outrageous racist things, except she was just talking real Liberal Party policies from the handbook.
The Liberal Party has always been anti-worker , racist and nativist. Always. Even when it’s unspoken. You only have to look at what they do.
Why are people surprised?
Why are people surprised?
Because most data and analysis of that data suggests moving further right will cement the Liberal Party’s place as a minor party that can never form government.
Not necessarily “surprised” but your comment is interesting to me. Pauline has been around for a long time. I was a kid (like under 10) when I just remember her being the butt of a bunch of jokes (please explain) and that she was “bad” (simplistic kid perception).
As an adult, I obviously know a bit more but clearly not enough (I didn’t know she actually started in the liberal party!) so I would suspect a lot of people my age and younger are probably in the same boat. She was a figure that got mocked because she was “bad” (lol obviously this depends on your families political leanings) and then tbh, I don’t remember hearing much about her for quite a while. So for some, at least, it’s kinda like shit that please explain lady is still around and actually has a following and retroactively looking back on how this happened.
I’m not proud of it, by the way, but I clearly need to learn more about our political history to understand where we are currently.
This could add to your understanding: https://stories.theconversation.com/the-making-of-one-nation-pauline-explained/
"Whether their target is Asians, Aboriginal people or Muslims the formula is the same – identify a minority group and blame them for our current discontents.
This type of politics has been denounced by Liberal and Labor leaders for decades."
This guy is so lacking in self awareness. Took over from Howard and Abbott, was followed by Morrison. Chose the liberal party and thinks he is better than them.
I feel like he is better those three though. Why isn’t he?
I mean Howard’s legacy is screwing over all the younger generations in housing, Unions, and he also did the GST, Abbotts legacy is killing a functioning (not perfect) carbon price, and Morrison’s legacy is terrible and unserious COVID19 management the mistakes of which will never be felt because the States and Territories saved Australia and corralled the federals, and AUKUS which is slowly turningbinto a geopolitical nightmare for the Nation.
Turnbulls got the white elephant of Snowy 2.0. Like, at least he tried to build something there that would have a lasting and good benefit for Australians.
I hear you, but this guy always wanted to have it both ways. He is more mature and has more integrity than Abbott and Morrison, but he still pandered to the worst elements of his party to maintain his career. The same sex marriage plebiscite conversation was damaging. He fucked the NBN for political points. There’s a social media interaction where he told a woman if her house had bad internet she should buy somewhere better. He’s just another rich dick. And he only grew a backbone once he left office and had no skin in the game.
Both you and Gorgritch make really good observations. To add my 20c worth, of all the Liberal PMs in the last few decades he was the most progressive, not great as you point out, but his instincts were much more civilised and pluralist than the ‘conservatives’ and climate deniers who were baying for his blood and finally plunged the dagger.
Thanks mate, appreciate that. I’m not a malcontent, I can appreciate good things when I see them. I just haven’t seen many good things come to fruition during the course of my millennial life observing politics. I feel there is something about the Australian mindset that makes apologies for those in power who don’t improve things. We have this idea that change is hard. The government has limited power etc. I remind people that during the lockdowns we had a 9pm curfew. In the 2010s, most people would have said the government couldn’t do that. They absolutely have power to make change. They choose not to, because the status quo benefits them. They could fix housing. They could fix wealth inequality. We’ve been conditioned to believe that change is impossible. I don’t buy it.
You make some interesting points. I’m a millennial too and I remember my introduction as a late teen to our politics was in that stage of all the backstabbing shit. Rudd getting ousted by Gillard then the same in reverse. It was all pretty ridiculous and as a first time voter (would’ve been 2010 election) it all just felt like so this how politics works huh, they all tell at each other instead of discussing shit and they all turn on their own parties? Sooo I didn’t really just leave high school behind at all, the adult world is exactly the same 😅
It is interesting to see what different PMs are remembered for from different people though. Howard (I was so young) I just remember children overboard, “war on terror” and GST. Rudd - the sorry speech - I was in yr 11 and this was the first time we started to learn about indigenous history so I do give Rudd some credit for that, I think he also enacted NBN and withdrew troops from the middle east? Gillard - NDIS (obviously an emotive topic right now, disclosure I am on the NDIS myself), Royal commission into Institutional Child Abuse, Gonski and of course the misogyny speech, Abbott carbon tax, I thought it was him that screwed up the NBN but I see others saying that was Turnbull. Turnbull - plebescite - ultimate outcome great but what a bloody mess to get there. Not sure who did the royal commission into aged care and disability, I think I stopped following closely at some point because there was a lot of talk but very little action.
I think you’re right that it’s too easy for politicians (and even society) to claim that change is too hard or that change has to take an excessively long time. Change IS possible, not always easy but not as difficult as people believe.
You are right to not buy it. Keep not buying the numbing narrative. You younger people need to put a stop to the insanity leading the world into more and more poverty, war and climate destruction. With you all the way.
Sorry chief. This might shock you but Australia has voted against fixing housing a bunch of times.
Sounds like Labor is going to announce some changes to capital gains in the budget in a few weeks. Watch the libs, nats, and phon scream blue bloody murder about it and promise to reverse the change next election.
That’s where majoritarian politics fails. Sometimes unpopular decisions need to be made to help those who aren’t in the majority. And leave off with the patronising language. I’m not shocked, I’ve lived through it and it’s what I’ve come to expect.
By “majoritarian politics” you mean democracy right?
I thought the plebiscite was under Abbott?
Nah it was in 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Marriage_Law_Postal_Survey Turnbull was PM. Abbott was against it, despite his sister being gay. Absolute toe rag of a human being.
Ah maybe thats it, i have a vague memory of the sister being gay and being perplexed about that.
I would have sworn it was Morrison 😆
But no, the postal survey was November 2017, and Turnbull was Prime Minister 2015-2018.
Haha, kinda melds together after a bit 😆
I camt dispute any of that, but hes a former conservative party leader who regularly criticises the conservatives very eloquently. You dont have to like him to appreciate what hes doing. Morrison ain’t out there throwing punches.
Doesn’t mean much to me when he’s not the decision maker anymore. He gets to bolster his reputation without taking responsibility. That doesn’t impress me at all. Gillard does the same. They had their opportunity to make changes and they didn’t take it. Most people don’t get that opportunity.
What are you talking about with Gillard? Didn’t she try to shoot her shot while PM, get dragged through the coals by murdochs fash news, and ousted before enacting most of it?
Turnbull
Gutted the NBN.
ETA: Oh, someone else got there first, bears repeating.
I also think the “at least” being the common refrain when commenting on the performance of our leaders is very telling. Our standards are in the toilet.
Hahaha… yeah. But i also wouldn’t want to give any PM too much more credit for things, especially while they’re still alive. They have large enough ego’s as it is.
A big ego is OK sometimes. The problem is when it’s coupled with narcissism. A truly confident person won’t become overly defensive when criticised. They can recognise their faults and work around them. Albo doesn’t have that quality. Which is partly why he is fixated on his class background. He never grew out of it mentally. So when his policies are scrutinised, it makes him feel insecure.
The ego + narcissism thing was also the big problem with Rudd’s government. His own party room colleagues hated him because of his ego, and he put the cross-bench offside by refusing to do any sort of compromise with them, which is what gave the LNP a clear target to criticise.
Yeah for sure. He always had to signal his intellect. It was condescending. I remember his comment about “detailed programmatic specificity”. Morrison was a dick head, but he got elected because of his daggy dad routine. He pretended to be relatable.
You’ve reminded me of the Life Well Lived - spotify podcast I listened to today. They interviewed Claude Steele a US social psychologist. Steele spoke about stereotype threat, the idea that underperformance in an activity can be brought on by the threat of confirming a stereotype about the participants own context, such as social standing, race, gender, etc).
Steele cited a mini golf study where the black and white ‘elite athletes’ were brought in to play one at a time. Before each started they put the white athletes under stereotype threat by saying “This mini golf course is really a standardised test of natural athletic ability. Do the best you can.” By making this statement it was posited those subjects had an added mental load. To describe differently were multi-tasking. They were trying to play the course, but also thinking about whether they’re confirming those stereotypes about white athletes being worse in natural ability than black athletes. This in turn makes those players play worse than average. Anyway sounded an interesting idea.
The way it relates to what you’re saying is maybe Albanese being fixated on his class background is because he’s feeling that stereotype threat in so many situations he dives into as PM.
Maybe the defensiveness is a result of his fear of confirming the stereotype that only ‘elite’ schooled or wealthy children can grow up to lead a nation. This distracting thought in turn means his mind has that multi-tasking idea interrupting his ability to perform as well as Albanese might.
I mean that’s interesting, but my thoughts on it weren’t that sophisticated. Narcissistic people just don’t like having their behaviour questioned. Think of it like the oppositional defiance of a frustrated child. They will say no when questioned by default. He probably does have some of that class anxiety, being around people from elite backgrounds. I’m not a psychologist, I’ve just grown up around narcissistic people from troubled backgrounds, so I see patterns in body language and speech. What you’ve mentioned is food for thought though.
While there is no place for moderates in today’s Liberal party it was traditionally a mainstream party representing a broad range of interests on the other side of the class divide to Labor.
Turnbull held lots of humanist small-l liberal views which I personally respect as much as I dislike many if the things he did. Fraser was also a proponent of humanitarian causes. The AusDems were created by SA Liberals and were the biggest minor party from the late 70s to mid 2000s. Xenophon was also a young lib I think. They also produced people like Bernardi and Hanson but in the old days they had more depth. It was consensus politics that made these big parties successful and gave them broad appeal.
Australians were sensibly distrustful of populist single issue parties until social media brainwashing became a thing.
Never forget that the ALP is also a very diverse party. After Whitlam the anti-socialist Catholic DLP people came back and became the dominant Labor Right faction backed by unions like the SDA. While they are banning protests, sucking up to lobbyists etc there are people in their own party who hold very different views to them. Without this broadness the ALP might be sitting somewhere between the Greens 10% and Socialist 0 instead of totally dominating but it definitely feeds the view that LibLab is a uniparty. The risk of a party with such diverse interests is that it stands for nothing but getting elected. The ALP once thought Mark Lathham should be our PM. Probably lots of Labor voters agreed.
Pauline has been playing the racism card for 30 years. Nobody is going to compete with her on her own turf. Many of the people who support her think she is authentic in ways the rest of us cannot understand. To me she is an obvious opportunist career politician funded by big money to do their bidding. But to the sweet little old ladies in the local cafe who “aren’t racist but…” she is “Our Pauline” and she “talks a lot of sense”.
The Libs are fucking crazy. They have put themselves in a corner playing No True Scotsman on their members until they have gained the depth and competence of One Nation with none of the popular appeal. Its pretty clear right now that One Nation and the machine promoting them are setting the agenda. The Libs follow because they are a spent force.
The ALP can afford to stand apart because they have depth and policies and lots of supporters who want them in government as much as we want them to be more effective. While the ALP will lose many working class voters to One Nations simplistic populism they will also pick up Turnbull voters from the Libs. Meanwhile the Libs have positioned themselves to be unable to gain votes from anywhere.
Genuine question because I’ve never (knowingly) known anyone that supports one nation or Pauline Hanson generally, is there a strong demographic? I was surprised at the image of sweet little old ladies lol. Though how old is old?
I didn’t see her reach as just to little old people but again, historically, I’ve only ever known people who have always and still have a negative opinion on her. I’m mid 30s btw so I guess I’m talking about my parents (60s/70) and some of their friends.
I kinda thought her reach was just to…angry people, who are already or willing to be bigots. Similar to Trump, yeah he’s old but there are plenty of people younger than him that just bought into his shit because they were frustrated, angry people, regardless of age.
