It’s kind of pathetic to watch the agony of the left as it fights its own failure still wearing a self-imposed straight jacket.
Leftie media writhed through every excuse under the Sun:
- it was Murdoch’s fault says Rudd, wrote Bianca Hall
- working classes love their tax lurks, wrote David Crowe
- inner city globalisation winners lost working class globalisation losers, wrote Matt Wade
- it was coal and God that cost Labor, says Michael Koziol
- it was coal and Clive, screamed Mike Seccombe
- they weren’t left enough, bellowed Guy Rundle
- progressives are boosting fascists, howled Bernard Keane
- blame God, genuflected Jennine Khalik
- will nobody think of the women, cried Amy Remeikis
- It was all about hate, opined Peter Hartcher
- It was all about love, crooned Annabelle Crabb
Rightie media wasn’t much better:
- everybody hates Labor’s progressives, wrote Paul Kelly
- it’s carbon pricing, said Ean Higgins
- it’s Sally McManus, scribbled Katrina Grace Kelly on the wall of her padded cell.
- must swing to centre, said PVO
- time to get abusive, yelled Noel Pearson
- Shorten is just a loser, sneered Gerard Henderson
- God was on the LNP’s side, prayed Bernard Lane and Angela Shanahan
Let’s start with a few facts. Both the ALP and LNP suffered swings against on the primary vote. Australia voted for change.
But what it got was the same, owing to an avalanche of preferences to the Right. Most pointedly it happened in QLD but also in Western Sydney and Melbourne plus Northern Tasmania.
There were clearly a few seats swung on specific issues. Coal and Adani in central QLD. Franking credits in Tassie. Let’s put those to one side.
The real question posed by the election is why did One Nation and United Australia Party get the big swing? What is it about both major parties that this angry swing vote does not like?
Neither ON nor UAP fit into any easy ideological box but what they share in spirit is nationalism. They are Australia First parties, that by and large are:
- socially conservative;
- skeptical of climate science;
- biased towards ‘aged battlers’ over ‘young bludgers’.
Obviously this is a policy mix that is more oriented to the Coalition so it won on the preference derivative. But the platform is also pretty deluded, so the LNP shouldn’t be celebrating too hard, either. Climate change is only going to get worse and the old die.
But what strikes me most about the above characteristics is how they are the literal antithesis of the ALP’s globalist elites:
- socially progressive;
- climate mitigation warriors;
- immigration fundamentalists;
- Davosian free traders;
- biased towards ‘young battlers’ over ‘old bludgers’.
The LNP is on the nose as its economic model destroys the living standards of working people. Wages are going to get worse. There’s more immigration crush-loading ahead. House prices will keep shitting on the Australian dream. Cost-of-living (read energy prices) are out of control. The opportunity for Labor to win is as obvious as it is unchanged.
But if it cannot change to embrace some of the spirit of the Quexit nationalists then it will be trapped in opposition until Australia is hot and young enough to elect it. That could be a long time on the political calendar.
So, to win, Labor must shift towards the nationalists. That ought to include:
- socially inclusive rather than progressive;
- climate change commitment that explicitly compensates the losers (that is, coal miners);
- larger immigration cuts than the LNP;
- stronger defence ties with the US, booting the CPC parasites;
- keep negative gearing reform but dump franking credits reform to balance generational sacrifices.
These things don’t need to be overly dramatic. A nudge here and there with much stronger rhetoric will do it. As ScoMo showed with his minor immigration cut, Quexit loved it.
Top of mind for Labor, absolutely essential if it to win back power, is to stop reading the mainstream media (MSM). For instance, in not one article above was the word “immigration” mentioned. The Aussie MSM is the epitome of why Labor lost.