Continued from Part 1
After three decades in politics, Pauline Hanson seems to have grown sharper in nastiness but duller in knowledge and eloquence, even as the Coalition borrows more of her ideas. Once the blazing star of the Australian right, she’s now its embarrassing, complaining aunt at family gatherings.
The rest of the right’s independents and minor parties are the same old circus of hacks and oddballs. Malcolm Roberts and Gerard Rennick make Bob Katter seem like a paragon of wisdom. Ralph Babet, for his part, manages to make Brian Burston look almost dignified (seriously, Google “Brian Burston + best sex of her life”).
Having said that, it’s also been difficult in recent years to distinguish the outer fringes of the Coalition from its exiles. What separates Barnaby Joyce or Alex Antic from George Christensen or Craig Kelly? Very little, because since at least Tony Abbott’s leadership, the cranks and weirdos have been more prominent than the moderates in the Coalition.
Jacinta Nampijinpa Price became an opposition frontbencher simply by spouting idiotic Trumpisms, because anyone who attracts attention on the right is immediately deemed a rising star. And to be fair, compared with the likes of Dan Tehan, Angus Taylor and Sussan Ley, at least she actually does possess some charisma.
But why is Australia’s right so talentless? Somehow, we’ve escaped the trend that’s swept Europe and the United States, and we’ve yet to face the likes of a Marine Le Pen or Giorgia Meloni – or the rise of a serious hard-right party such as Germany’s AFD, let alone the movements led by Viktor Orbán and Donald Trump. In the UK, Nigel Farage – a charismatic, semi-permanent feature of British politics who helped usher in Brexit – had a resounding victory in the recent local election with his Reform Party. It would be reductive to attribute the failure of the hard right solely to sentimental notions such as Australia’s egalitarian roots or its so-called “fundamental decency,” and equally insufficient to focus exclusively on the mechanics of the preferential voting system. While these factors may encourage a centrist tilt, historical precedents like Abbott’s ‘stop the boats’ and Howard’s Tampa affair demonstrate that neither fully constrains the emergence or electoral success of populist or conservative currents.
Moreover, the presence of centre-right tendencies within the Labor Party itself lends some credibility to the argument that the Australian electorate remains receptive to more assertive right-wing alternatives, provided they are articulated by credible leaders or respond to shifting public concerns. Thus, some analysts argue that the relative absence of a successful hard-right movement may be as much a temporary circumstance as a structural inevitability, underscoring the potential for right-wing resurgence should effective counter-narratives and charismatic leadership emerge.
When the largest and most influential news company in the land is the hard-right News Corp, and most other major outlets are also now at least right-curious, the potential for the rise of the right is baked in.
In other words, the failure of the hard right hasn’t been structural: it’s been personal. Thanks to News Corp, and especially its organs, Sky News and The Australian, right-wing politicians are never truly tested until the ballot box arrives. All it takes is the imprimatur of Gina Rinehart, or a Murdoch editor or presenter, and any bozo can float to the top. A few friendly interviews, a round of fundraising lunches, and congratulations! You’ve won preselection/attracted donations for your Senate run. Your ideas and policies will rarely be challenged, your credentials rarely scrutinised, and the relevance of your messages to the Australian public never, ever questioned.
This is how you end up with a Liberal leader promoting nuclear power in the land of cheap renewable energy, or a Liberal prime minister (Scott Morrison) hand-picking a candidate (Katherine Deves) for North Sydney’s Warringah seat because she lobbied to stop transgender women from competing in women’s sport. The right appears resistant to learning from its mistakes, though this dynamic may not be permanent. Currently, leadership on the right is characterised by individuals who lack effective communication skills and focus excessively on issues such as wind farms rather than substantive policy debate.
However, it is important to connect this hypothetical directly to the central thesis regarding One Nation’s unfitness to govern: if a sharp, charismatic right-wing leader who appeals broadly and demonstrates actual political competence were to emerge, the landscape could change significantly. In such a scenario, One Nation’s current lack of credible leadership and inclusive policy would be thrown into even sharper relief, reinforcing the argument that, as it stands, the party is not fit to govern Australia. A right-wing resurgence, driven by modernised policies and a leader capable of articulating solutions relevant to the Australian public, could expose just how far One Nation falls short of the standards required for effective national governance. Thus, the potential rise of a genuine right-wing alternative both highlights and underscores One Nation’s deficiencies in its capacity to lead.
Without willing it into being, it’s not hard to imagine a sun-kissed young thing with good hair, a strong torso and a firm corporate background bemoaning how difficult migrants have made it to buy a family home, how the past is the past, and let’s not regret it, and how regulations and taxes are strangling our shiny future. We need a new voice, and Australia is for Australians! Someone who can cook a BBQ without it looking like cosplay, and play a sport without looking like a disoriented alien. Someone who can dog-whistle for Australia. It’s hard to believe it hasn’t already happened.
While progressive Australians may express frustration with the Labour Party’s cautious approach and the lack of momentum among genuine left-wing alternatives, they might also recognise that the current disarray within the political right has provided a period of relative stability for progressive causes. However, the emergence and success of the teals demonstrate that effective strategies such as leveraging social media, building community support, and sustained grassroots engagement can be adopted by other political factions, including those on the right. This possibility underscores the need for progressives to remain vigilant, as the organisational tools that bolstered centrist and progressive movements could equally empower a renewed, more effective political right.
My Thought for the Day
We dislike and resist change in the foolish assumption that we can make permanent that which makes us feel secure. Yet change is in fact part of the very fabric of our existence.
Also by John Lord
Peter Dutton: Then and now, always the wrong man for the job
A View of Trump from Down Under – Revisited
Keep Independent Journalism Alive – Support The AIMN
Dear Reader,
Since 2013, The Australian Independent Media Network has been a fearless voice for truth, giving public interest journalists a platform to hold power to account. From expert analysis on national and global events to uncovering issues that matter to you, we’re here because of your support.
Running an independent site isn’t cheap, and rising costs mean we need you now more than ever. Your donation – big or small – keeps our servers humming, our writers digging, and our stories free for all.
Join our community of truth-seekers. Please consider donating now via:
PayPal or credit card – just click on the Donate button below
Direct bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
We’ve also set up a GoFundMe as a dedicated reserve fund to help secure the future of our site.
Your support will go directly toward covering essential costs like web hosting renewals and helping us bring new features to life. Every contribution, no matter the size, helps us keep improving and growing.
Thank you for standing with us – we truly couldn’t do this without you.
With gratitude, The AIMN Team
The seventh circle of hell?
John correctly makes the point that “if a sharp, charismatic right-wing leader who appeals broadly and demonstrates actual political competence were to emerge, the landscape could change significantly”.
In that, there is a warning for the Left.
Labor is part of the problem here by allowing the party to drift right, and to not just accept, but totally embrace hyper-liberal economic hogwash.
If the Left does not produce a sharp, charismatic leader to turn Labor back to its core principles, John’s warning will be too late.
The Right will come up with the goods.
We will then be forced to endure a decade or so of right-wing ruin.
UK Labour is presently going through such a process of renewal, and it will not be pretty.
Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham is poised to challenge Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer for the country’s premiership on his return to parliament after winning a by-election in Makerfield, northwest England.
And in the media, at least, Burnham has become associated with “Manchesterism,” a term referring to his time as Manchester mayor.
For Burnham, “Manchesterism” means “business-friendly socialism” or the “end of neoliberalism, the end of trickle-down economics that has left out places like Makerfield,” as he said in his campaign launch video.
Most importantly for Mathew Lawrence, founder of the Common Wealth thinktank who is seen as one of the intellectual voices behind Burnham, Manchesterism entails getting “better control of essential services, whether that’s housing, water, energy, transport that have been systematically outsourced, deregulated, privatized.”
Assuming that Burnham becomes PM, can you imagine the forces that will line up against him as he prepares to wind back privatisation?
It will not be pretty, but that’s the price you pay when you cosy up to big business.
The original Manchesterism from the 19th century gave birth eventually to the hyper-liberalism of today.
It was based on the misconception that you can mix socialism with liberal economic theory.
Hopefully Burnham has learned from that disastrous failure, because the only way that “business-friendly” socialism works is the Chinese way — You can be as rich as you like, but keep your nose out of politics.
Tom Mc Ilroy, writing in the Guardian, suggests P Hanson is firmly on the fringes, rather like a flea on the fanny fur, but of lower intellect. Hanson is the most un-Australan politician around, eclipsing S Morrison the superstitious scummy onanist oaf. The Australian right wing poobrains are worse than world average in many ways as they are so imbecilically ignorant and unoriginal. Some equivalent to Nauru might suit, but that would be unthinkable, too much like them and their filth.
The squeaky wheel gets the most attention – I think PHON has made its run too early, they’ll be out of one line slogans and abusive media comments by the next election. In any event, 76 ON seats right off the bat seems a tad ambitious given that the Coalition could only manage 41 last time, and even if they ALL migrate to PHON it’s never going to be enough On top of that she would really need to be in the Reps to be PM, and that’d be a fun thing to watch,
Clearly One Nation are unlikely to gain sufficient seats in the Lower House to form government in their own right so they will need to form a coalition, probably with the Liberal Party and the Nationals.
To achieve a majority government a party or coalition must secure a majority of at least 76 seats out of the 151 total seats in the Lower House where government is formed.
This inevitably means that both Hanson and Joyce would ideally need to secure seats in the Lower House rather than languish in the Senate.
If this coalition were to come about with the Liberals as dominant party, convention would dictate that the role of Deputy PM would be offered either to the Nationals (Senator Matt Canavan but more likely, Darren Chester as convention would suggest that a Deputy would need to hold a Seat in the Lower House). Or if One Nation were the dominant party, Hanson or Joyce could become Deputy PM if either held a seat in the Lower House.
A Deputy PM could come from the Senate but that has never happened before and it would be unworkable as the PM and Deputy need to be in the one House, i.e. the House of Representatives
Whatever the case, One Nation could only hope to form government as the member of a coalition with the Liberals and the Nationals and then it would only give them real power if Hanson (or Joyce) held Lower House seats allowing them to perform the role of Deputy PM.
The next federal election could be a real schemozzle with all the competing forces and personalities from the Conservative Right and even if they did achieve the numbers to form a coalition government it would be like herding cats and the result would be chaos.
I remain confident that the Australian electorate would re-elect a federal Labor government rather than a rag-tag coalition.
Me thinks she is being used as a PR delivery system to spew out MAGA or white Christian nationalist talking points, to help condition the electorate and RW MSM ecosystem, for any future election giving Libs/Nats plausible deniability on bigotry.
Earlier days she leveraged old white Australia sentiments to the converted older generations (paring off mostly LNP & some ALP types), but now US MAGA Tanton Network (SusPopAus) to get at younger ie middle aged GenX & boomers.
No coincidence that according to a Media Matters article based on NYT investigation, that Tanton Network peeps were informing Fox News management, and allegedly NewsCorp inferred editorial from the same.
Article by Gertz ’22 in Media Matters titled ‘If you are in business with Fox News you are on the hook for its white nationalism’
@ John Lord: I agree that the ALBANESE LABOR GOVERNMENT has wasted too much of the three year term being gentle on establishment priorities. I am reminded that in 1972 Whitlam removed Australia from the US v Vietnam imperialist war within the first week of government.
From too many decades playing politics at all levels ….. you never give the conservatives, especially the Notional$, a chance to stay organised in their mendacious ways. Rather, you organise and make the necessary reforms quickly so that their incompetence is exposed for what it is, and their personl benefits are reduced ASAP.
Steadying the ship may have been the comfortable choice after nine (9) years of COALition chaos, but resting on electoral laurels often needs a thorn in the backside to wake you up to reality.
Perhaps the ALBANESE LABOR GOVERNMENT needs to get on with the necessary reforms and use social media as the optimal pathway for selling those programmes.
“After three decades in politics, Pauline Hanson seems to have grown sharper in nastiness but duller in knowledge and eloquence”
Not sure she ever had any eloquence at all.
Another perspective, just as sharp….
https://theshot.net.au/uncategorized/one-nations-ascendancy-is-a-result-of-duopoly-party-failures/
Another view of the causes of worker financial concerns:
https://www.greenleft.org.au/2026/1455/analysis/big-lie-heart-one-nations-surge