By Denis Hay
Description
Political factions in Labor and LNP parties support neoliberalism and U.S. militarism. Factions are internal party power blocs hijacking Australia’s democracy.
A Family BBQ, A National Crisis
It was a warm afternoon in suburban Brisbane. A family gathered around the BBQ and debated the latest political headlines. “I don’t see the difference between Labor and the Liberals anymore,” muttered Uncle Ray, a lifelong union member. His niece, just out of uni, replied, “Labor’s right-wing talks like the LNP. They’re all about military deals and cutting services.”
Around the sausages and salad, one truth became clear: the major parties are divided, and those divisions are shaping a democracy that no longer feels representative.
Political factions in Australia have evolved from ideological coalitions into power-hungry machines. These political factions are now shaping government priorities behind closed doors, distorting public policy, stifling debate, and serving the interests of those with vested stakes.
What began as diversity of thought within parties has become a shadow war for influence, one that Australians never voted for.
Problem: How Political Factions Undermine Party Integrity
The Rise of Factions
Labor’s Left and Right have long jostled for control. While once rooted in class consciousness and policy debate, today’s factions often revolve around loyalty, fundraising power, and preselection control. The LNP, while less formalised, has its factions: moderates, conservatives, and hardliners. Both parties run as battlegrounds where internal winners dictate national policy.
Voters Are Losing Trust
Factions create internal strife that spills into public confusion. How can citizens trust a party that campaigns left and governs right? A 2023 Guardian Essential Poll revealed that only 26% of Australians trust the major parties to stand for their interests. Voters see party platforms diluted by factional deals, backroom bargains, and leadership coups.
A Tug of War with Real Consequences
In 2021, Labor’s right faction backed support for the AUKUS military deal without party-wide consensus. Meanwhile, the LNP’s internal divisions stalled climate action for over a decade. These aren’t just philosophical disagreements—they’re decisions affecting defence budgets, housing policy, the future of the planet, and the safety of all Australians.
When Policy Becomes Collateral Damage
Neoliberalism by Stealth
From tax cuts for the wealthy to the casualisation of work, both major parties – driven by entrenched political factions – have embraced neoliberal economics. This convergence has left ordinary Australians with fewer services and rising inequality. In 2014, a Labor-backed NSW government privatised electricity infrastructure. The federal LNP followed suit, pushing for the outsourcing of Medicare services.
“I voted Labor my whole life,” says Helen, a retired nurse from Wollongong. “Now they sound like the Liberals. They’re selling off everything and calling it reform.”
Militarism Over Human Needs
Labor’s right faction and the LNP supported $368 billion for nuclear submarines under AUKUS. That same year, 1 in 6 Australian children lived in poverty. Where is the public debate? Where is the accountability? Factional loyalty to U.S.-aligned defence policy has overridden investment in social needs.
“We’re not allies,” commented veteran journalist John Pilger. “We’re vassals.”
Democracy in Name, Corporate Rule in Practice
Major party factions are deeply tied to lobby groups and corporate donors. The fossil fuel industry, for example, has donated over $15 million to Labor and the LNP since 2012. Factions broker these relationships behind closed doors, often bypassing grassroots voices.
Breaking the Hold of Political Factions
Reclaiming Public Power Through Independents
Independent candidates like Monique Ryan and Zali Steggall have disrupted the grip of political factions by prioritising constituents over party machines. In 2022, community-backed candidates won in safe seats, challenging the idea that only major parties can govern.
Democratise the Major Parties – Or Build Anew?
Reforming party structures to reduce factional power is difficult but possible. Open primaries, caps on internal donations, and member-led policy votes could help. Alternatively, a new political movement rooted in community values and public service may offer a better path forward.
Australia’s Dollar Sovereignty Is the Key
Australia is a monetarily sovereign nation. It issues its own currency and can invest in public goods without needing to “raise taxes” first. Yet faction-led parties continue to act as if federal budgets must be balanced like household finances.
“The real constraint is resources, not money,” explains economist Professor William Mitchell.
Redirecting public money from defence contractors and fossil fuel subsidies toward healthcare, education, and housing is not only possible – it’s necessary.
A Clear Choice Ahead
Question for Readers: Do you believe Australia’s major parties still represent your values, or have factions taken over our democracy?
Political factions in Australia have grown too powerful. They silence dissent, shape policy for donors, and make a mockery of representative democracy. The line between Labor’s right faction and the LNP is increasingly blurred, especially in economic and foreign policy.
But Australians are not powerless. We can reject faction-dominated candidates, support community independents, and advocate for economic reforms grounded in our dollar sovereignty. A better democracy is not a dream – it’s a decision. One that begins by rejecting the dominance of political factions and reclaiming people-powered politics.
Have political factions hijacked your vote? It’s time to take it back.
Q&A: Common Concerns About Party Factions
Q1: Aren’t factions necessary for healthy debate within parties?
A: In theory, yes. But when factions gain more power than the party membership or electorate, they distort democracy. Debate becomes backroom dealing.
Q2: How can voters find candidates tied to factions?
A: Research preselection histories, donor lists, and voting records. Sites like They Vote for You reveal patterns.
Q3: Do you see opportunities for community-driven change in Australia’s dollar sovereignty?
A: Absolutely. With our currency sovereignty, we can fund programs that serve people directly. Community awareness is crucial to advancing this initiative.
References
Who’s Who in the Current Parliament
Inside the Labor machine: Your Guide to All the Factions
Call to Action
Curious what others think? Please read what our readers are saying on our Reader Testimonials page.
If you found this article insightful, you can explore more on political reform and Australia’s monetary sovereignty at Social Justice Australia.
Share this article with your community to help drive the conversation toward a more just and equal society.
Click on our Reader Feedback page. Please let us know how our content has inspired you. Submit your testimonial and help shape the conversation today!
Additionally, leave a comment about this article below.
Support Social Justice Australia – Help Keep The Platform Running
Social Justice Australia is committed to delivering independent, in-depth analysis of critical issues affecting Australians. Unlike corporate-backed media, we rely on our readers to sustain this platform.
If you find value in our content, consider making a small donation to help cover the costs of hosting, maintenance, and continued research. No matter how small, every contribution makes a real difference in keeping this site accessible and ad-free.
💡 Your support helps:
• ✅ Keep this website running without corporate influence
• ✅ Fund research and publishing of articles that challenge the status quo
• ✅ Expand awareness of policies that affect everyday Australians
💰 A one-time or monthly donation ensures Social Justice Australia stays a strong, independent voice.
Thank you for being part of this movement for truth and justice.
This article was originally published on Social Justice Australia
Dear reader, we need your support
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Thanks for articulating what I’ve been trying to say for some time now,Denis.It’s the dilemma Albanese finds himself in right now.He has to choose between managing the factions to keep his job, or govern for the good of the country, free of that limiting handicap.Looking at that fool Marles.
How he chooses will decide the fate of the Labor party.
My guess is, they are already doomed.
One is wary of anecdotal opinions, not just because ‘one sandwich does not make a picnic’ (not a ‘population sample’, but popular with RW MSM); most Australians are not informed well on any policy area.
They may not be following RW MSM etc., but share repetitive talking points heard in social narratives e.g. ‘my mate is a scientist and he says climate science is crap’ &/or versus ‘high immigration’ and ‘unsustainable population growth’ (Koch & Tanton Networks’ fossil fueled talking points).
Those who claim both parties are the same are either lazy & uniformed, or view politics through single or a few issues (without any understanding). It’s more of a way to induce voter cynicism or anger, media wedges and encourage not to vote ie. voter suppression for tne right to prevail.
However, the fact is most Australians are a little nativist, conservative and neoliberal, then due to ageing and longevity with stretched electoral demographics from 18-100+, ‘skips’ are dominating regions versus now being a minority in cities.
Till the great replacement does its work and we have more diverse media for more informed citizens; for now we are straddling the fence between 20thC Anglosphere vs 21stC Eurasian influence?