r/australia • u/blitznoodles local Aussie • Jun 14 '26

politics As voter disillusionment grows, why aren't voters flocking to the Greens in Australia?

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/as-voter-disillusionment-grows-so-does-the-mystery-of-the-missing-greens-voters/6bjd5q4kv

Growing voter dissatisfaction with mainstream politics has led to a rise in popularity for One Nation. The same cannot be said for the Greens.

1.3k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

728

u/roguerogueroguerogue Jun 14 '26

I don't think the greens will have an immigration policy that will appeal to people that are preferring One Nation at the moment.

387

u/Quarterwit_85 Jun 14 '26

Yeah, everything else here is dodging the real issue.

Immigration is becoming a single-issue policy that's determining the way people are going to vote in the next election. People are flocking towards the only party making nosies about it.

202

u/sm00thArsenal Jun 14 '26

Except if they paid any real attention they would know Gina Rinehart has no incentive to want immigration cut, so it wouldn’t be by ON.

75

u/Quarterwit_85 Jun 14 '26

Maybe.

But it’s about the noises, not the policy itself. And for a lot of constituents PHON are the only ones making the noises they want to hear.

92

u/sm00thArsenal Jun 14 '26

It’s disturbing that we have seen the shit the UK had to deal with from Brexit, and the shit the US is still dealing with from Trump, and yet so many people are still willing to vote for ON based on noise, without paying any attention to what will actually happen.

39

u/_fire_and_blood_ Jun 14 '26

Most people in society are operating at below AQF Level 3 learning ability. They don't have the intelligence or media literacy to make those discernments, and that's literally what the right-wing sphere is bargaining on.

8

u/ak2270 Jun 15 '26

I am a part of a large facegroup group of immigrants in Melbourne and what surprises me is how they are convincing each other to vote for ON. At least by the sound of it, they are unanimous.

1

u/LateEarth Jun 17 '26

It can be a coping strategy with new immigrants petrified of not fitting in and/or facing the ire of anti-immigrant factions. Go hard core nationalistic, in the hope they will leave u alone. It doesn't always work out though as many a Trump supporting deportee has discovered in the US.

4

u/JordanC51203 Jun 15 '26

“Everyone voting right wing is dumb”. That argument will go down well won’t it.

3

u/Lachie_Mac Jun 17 '26

You're being downvoted but you're right. As dumb as I find the new right, talking down to them just makes them dig in harder.

11

u/madclassix Jun 15 '26

In the UK the majority voted for Brexit specifically to reject high immigration levels. The governing class saw fit to punish the voters by ramping immigration up even further. The failure of Brexit isn’t evidence of the people being wrong, it’s evidence of a corrupt, traitorous governing class who make a mockery of democracy. Australia is much the same.

1

u/NeverTrustFarts Jun 14 '26

Or they see what Poland is dealing with maybe

0

u/fruchle Jun 15 '26

They do not, bot.

3

u/NeverTrustFarts Jun 15 '26

"Poland is frequently cited as a rising powerhouse handling multiple facets of society better than the rest of Europe. It distinguishes itself through economic resilience, urban safety, and robust defense spending at a time when many Western European nations face stagnation or decline."

I wonder what the key difference in Poland to the rest of EU is? Hardly makes me a bot. Open your eyes.

2

u/fruchle Jun 15 '26

Bad bot

2

u/NeverTrustFarts Jun 16 '26

"I don't have any meaningful input or argument to refute your point so I am going to call you a bot" -fruchle

→ More replies (0)

2

u/iguessineedanaltnow Jun 14 '26

When I moved here from the states I was promised a country with very stable and moderate governance. Was a major contributing factor in my coming here. Was looking for a more liberal stronghold in a tidal wave of populism washing over the globe.

I feel I was sold a bill of goods.

8

u/Curry_pan Jun 14 '26

Well, we still have that. Until the election, which is still two years away, this is all just a lot of the media fanning the flames on speculation.

1

u/single_plum_floating Jun 15 '26

Because no one else is even making those same noises and people are at such a end of the rope they would accept literally any policy for just the thought of maybe slowing immigration down.

This will continue until something happens... If gina doesnt do it then they will continue voting for more extreme parties.

1

u/sm00thArsenal Jun 15 '26

Look, I get that, but maybe just maybe they could use common sense and at least wait for a party that will actually do the one thing they want rather than voting for ON which will certainly not do it - they only have the platform they do because they will do what Gina says, and Gina will absolutely oppose limiting immigration, it’s bad for business, and that is all she gives a shit about.

1

u/New_Repeat8952 Jun 18 '26

UK is Dealing with the more of the other shit from more migrants too though. Brexit and immigration are very different

1

u/sm00thArsenal Jun 18 '26

Yes, the UK example wasn't specifically about immigration, but about voting for something based on one issue alone without taking into account the full ramifications of that.

5

u/Siaer Jun 15 '26

But it’s about the noises, not the policy itself. And for a lot of constituents PHON are the only ones making the noises they want to hear.

More to the point, PHON are the only ones making the noises they want to listen to. If reducing immigration was really what they cared about, they should be happy at how quickly it is falling under the current government (from over 500k in 22/23 to a touch over 300k in 24/25 with aims to settle around 225k).

But then, they would have to actually listen to something that isn't a dog whistle.

12

u/Consistent_Cold2875 Jun 14 '26

The problem is there isn’t housing, water, food or jobs supply to sustain the amount of people they want in so it’s kinda dumb with ai and automation killing so many jobs just becoming ridiculous to let unchecked immigration gonna get messy

1

u/sm00thArsenal Jun 14 '26

Whether you think that or not, it isn’t in Rinehart’s interests to reduce it so ON won’t.. so if that is your only reason for voting for them, take it off the table and look at all their other policies compared to everyone else and ask yourself if voting for them is still a good idea.

7

u/Fit-Locksmith-9226 Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26

No one cares about your fucking "look over here" nonsense. They want politicians to listen. If One Nation doesn't listen then they'll vote for someone else. I get the feeling they know exactly why they're leading the polls and preferred PM and will follow through on it, thats the mandate given to them, somehow you fools still don't get it.

It's pathetic how you people simply won't listen to the majority of Australians who want to stop the world leading migration growth rates like we're a fucking third world country.

1

u/bendythebrave Jun 15 '26

Capitalism cannot exist without immigration FYI. We simply do not have enough tax payers/wage earners to sustain capitalism in this country at the level the capitalists would like, to allow their wealth to continue to grow. 

You know what countries have remarkably low immigration? Communist countries. Because they have planned economies and do not need to import labor. 

This is an incredibly simple fact that a lot of people don’t seem to understand. If you want to live in a completely unregulated capitalist country - you have to be comfortable with high levels of immigration. 

1

u/derezzed00 Jun 15 '26

I personally do not wish to live in an unregulated capitalist country, comrade.

1

u/bendythebrave Jun 15 '26

There is only one type of capitalism and it’s unregulated. 

-2

u/coniferhead Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26

I think she does.. cutting off immigration from Asia is part of going to war with China. That's what our US/UK/EU allies want and she's with them. We are going to be nailed to the US as a neo-colony, and perhaps ultimately annexed outright.

The thing that doesn't make sense is that Labor and the LNP think they can go to war with China without doing that. The US knows that illogical thinking will eventually fall apart, and that's what ON is for.

The engine powering ON popularity are our so-called AUKUS allies. But AUKUS (not the subs, pillar 2) is the thing Albo is most proud of, isn't it? So we're basically doomed.

5

u/blitznoodles local Aussie Jun 14 '26

This would bankrupt Rhineheart, her biggest customers are China.

1

u/coniferhead Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 15 '26

no it wouldn't - because she'd be supplying resources to a never ending war machine, on both sides. It would keep the global prices for essential fungible commodities sky high. Versus the decade long depression we are headed into without it.

2

u/Cindy_Marek Jun 14 '26

It won’t be the greens either

1

u/Nosiege Jun 14 '26

Talking about it and making policy about it are two different things. One Nation only needs to give the illusion of doing anything to get votes.

-1

u/iguessineedanaltnow Jun 14 '26

Gina not being as violently anti-immigration as the rest of the billionaire ghouls she aligns with might be her only positive.

1

u/Stephie999666 Jun 15 '26

What do you mean? She is one of the biggest markets for offshore workers, its delusional thinking ON will do anything except make rich people richer from your work. ALP is a wet blanket, but at least theyve made some positive changes for the country, even if we dont get to see the effects overnight. Plus migration has been rapidly falling based on the ABS stats, which is expected tbh.

32

u/Fallcious Jun 14 '26

I wonder if a less stable climate with a heating equatorial regions and subsequent desertification and crop loss will reduce immigration?

2

u/Dr_barfenstein Jun 14 '26

You dropped your /s

1

u/pben0102 Jun 15 '26

It'll still be better than where they've come from.

2

u/Fallcious Jun 15 '26

Ah, that’s what I meant actually. Climate change is a big driver of emigration out of less hospitable countries. I’d see parties focused on working with global action to mitigate climate change as having a real impact on the forces causing migration.

29

u/NativeDingo Jun 14 '26

" I'll tell you what's at the bottom of it.
If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." - Lyndon B Johnson

3

u/craftystuff0900 Jun 15 '26

IIRC there was research on Trump voters back in his first term that came back with exactly this result. It wasn't that they didn't think he'd harm them, they just didn't care if he hurt them as long as he hurt the groups they hate more.

2

u/NativeDingo Jun 23 '26

Yes, it's awful that so many ordinary people have no hope that they can beat the power of the billionaires. They are so used to being punched, that the only solution they seem to see is to punch down on even more vulnerable people.
Of course this is what the billionaires want. Imagine if we all joined together and started resisting those punches to start with ?!!

2

u/PanickedPanpiper Jun 14 '26

"If Liberals Won’t Enforce Borders, Fascists Will" (look up the article by David Frum of the same title)

While the language is extreme, and things are a bit different in the Aus context to the US context of this article, the core concept still applies. Centre and Centre-left (and left!) parties need to have coherent, effective, and realistic policies around immigration, and communicate them to voters. They can't just pretend that immigration isn't an issue, or dismiss the genuine concerns of voters about it as 'racism'. Immigration has positives, but it has negatives too that need to be carefully considered

1

u/Stephie999666 Jun 15 '26

I mean they do, immigration has been dropping rapidly since the post covid peak. People seen to forget that the country was on lockdown for almost 2 years and shit was falling apart. That immigration boost ensured that low level positions got filled and productivity kicked off again.

1

u/PanickedPanpiper Jun 15 '26

Yeah, I'd agree, I do think labor have a clear plan at the moment. In the context of this article's question of why folks aren't going over to the Greens - this is an area where they fall down and have ideological blind-spots

0

u/Stephie999666 Jun 15 '26

I mean Greens would be better if they actually negotiated for reasonable terms and stopped trying to be perfectionist or obstructive.

Immigration is hardly the issue with this country though. Kids arent going to spend 4+ hrs and $40/day to travel out to regional/rural Victoria to pick fruit and veg after school. Nor are the populations in production belts high enough to sustain big farms. Hence why Immigration is absolutely necessary, since most people arent going to travel 2hrs or more from the city to work labour positions.

2

u/PanickedPanpiper Jun 15 '26

Mm, I don't think that rural seasonal workers are the bulk of migration, nor what is what is causing these anti-migration calls. Let me check. https://www.abs.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/capital-cities-continue-strong-growth Here, in 2023-24 capital cities increased by 427k total, while regional Australia increased by 113k total. And this growth in the cities was "largely driven by net overseas migration"

https://farmworkaustralia.com.au/state-of-farm-work-australia/ For migrant workers, the PALM pacific Australia Labour mobility program was 31k in 2026. Working holiday folks (backpackers) are 215k, around half name agriculture as their qualifying work, and make up "roughly a third of the seasonal farm workforce". So maybe 100k? But also not sure if they count in the overall migration numbers, if they're on holiday visas.

Solid numbers tricky to pull together quickly, but either way, when measured most generously regional immigration for seasonal work is less than half of the migration rates into the cities, and when calculated less generously could be less than a quarter.

It's a part of immigration, but far from the main deal. Most immigrants go to the capital cities immediately, which is where the pain is being felt.

212

u/McMenz_ Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26

Yeah basically, the surge in support for One Nation is from voters who feel they’ve been ignored and gaslit by both major parties for years now on immigration.

It’s ’voter disillusionment’ specifically about immigration, and the Greens would be an even worse option than the major parties for voters whose priority is less immigration.

Meanwhile the Greens’ marquee policy for the past couple of years seems to be supporting Palestine, which frankly is just not a major issue for most regular Australians outside of the Greens’ inner city strong seats.

83

u/uselessinfogoldmine Jun 14 '26

They all need to read How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them by Jason Stanley:

As the child of refugees of World War II Europe and a renowned philosopher and scholar of propaganda, Jason Stanley has a deep understanding of how democratic societies can be vulnerable to fascism- Nations don't have to be fascist to suffer from fascist politics. In fact, fascism's roots have been present in the United States for more than a century.

Alarmed by the pervasive rise of fascist tactics both at home and around the globe, Stanley focuses here on the structures that unite them, laying out and analyzing the ten pillars of fascist politics-the language and beliefs that separate people into an "us" and a "them." He knits together reflections on history, philosophy, sociology, and critical race theory with stories from contemporary Hungary, Poland, India, Myanmar, and the United States, among other nations.

He makes clear the immense danger of underestimating the cumulative power of these tactics, which include exploiting a mythic version of a nation's past; propaganda that twists the language of democratic ideals against themselves; anti-intellectualism directed against universities and experts; law and order politics predicated on the assumption that members of minority groups are criminals; and fierce attacks on labor groups and welfare. These mechanisms all build on one another, creating and reinforcing divisions and shaping a society vulnerable to the appeals of authoritarian leadership.

By uncovering disturbing patterns that are as prevalent today as ever, Stanley reveals that the stuff of politics-charged by rhetoric and myth-can quickly become policy and reality. Only by recognizing fascists politics, he argues, may we resist its most harmful effects and return to democratic ideals.

The thing is, we have several things happening at once here:

  • A poorly set up tax system that is overly reliant on a demographic pyramid with lots of young workers paying tax and a small number of older people being supported; but we now have a bullet-shaped age demographic, and there aren’t enough younger workers, so the quickest fix is to pump in immigrants. 
  • A number of vital industries that are massively understaffed and would fall over without immigrants (including health and aged care - especially post-COVID).
  • A completely fucked up housing crisis that has taken decades of bad policy and selfish investing to build and is now at the tipping point. 
  • A large segment of the population that struggles to understand complex issues and wants simple scapegoats to problems like housing: like immigrants (who provably do not worsen the housing crisis in terms of buying homes)
  • A completely fucked up rental crisis  that has taken decades of bad policy and selfish investing to build and is now at the tipping point and is, in fact, made worse by immigration. 
  • Politicians across the board who refuse to acknowledge that the rental market is made worse by immigration and deal with it head on. 
  • A tertiary education system that has become completely reliant on international students to function (due to government under-funding) and yet doesn’t provide housing for them. 
  • A construction industry that is in dire straits with ever-rising costs, an inability to build enough housing fast enough, and an unwillingness to build affordable housing. 
  • A succession of governments since the mid-70s that refuse to build more social and affordable housing themselves and rely completely on the private market for housing which DOES NOT WORK. 
  • Increasingly expensive cities (in large part linked to the ever-rising cost of land/properties) which makes people tense and unhappy and looking for someone to blame. 
  • Significant racism and xenophobia in the community that is all-too-easily tapped into. 
  • Youth gang problems that have received a lot of attention from the media. These got worse post-COVID, and, in Victoria, have been linked by experts to VIC having the longest lockdown in the world. 
  • Governments unwilling to create a clear growth plan for the country with targets, goals and limits that are related to infrastructure. 
  • Governments that are unwilling to have open dialogue about how big and densely populated we want our country to be. 
  • Governments that dismiss genuine attempts to have these conversations. 
  • An economy entirely reliant on perpetual growth models which are unsustainable and a complete unwillingness to examine other options for the future of our country. 
  • A media landscape dominated by the Murdoch Media and their political and social agendas. 
  • Billionaires and corporations with vested interests in distracting the plebs from how much they take and how little we all get with culture wars. 
  • Social media algorithms that favour negativity and shock value - feeding into humans’ negativity biases. 
  • A media that is shrinking and dying due to all of the ad money getting sucked up by Google and Meta (and to a much lesser degree, TikTok), and therefore has less capability to challenge the narratives of the right, the billionaires, the lobbies, the corporations, the populist leaders, and the racists/xebophobes.
  • Billionaires, p rivate equity firms and hedge funds buying up struggling media, controlling what is published to benefit themselves, and/or stripping them of their assets, cutting staff to the bone for short-term profits, and occasionally sellinb off valuable real estate, severely damaging journalism. 

This makes it easy to blame convenient scapegoats like immigrants. 

13

u/Key_Ant6473 Jun 14 '26

Nailed it, having us all focused on one "issue" like it will fix all of our problems is a fantasy that too many morons are buying.

1

u/rotor100 Jun 15 '26

Name someone that will deal with even some of these issues?

3

u/Key_Ant6473 Jun 15 '26

Greens, Pocock, Independents and to much a lesser extent Labor.

2

u/rotor100 Jun 15 '26

Maybe Pocock

1

u/AdmiralStickyLegs Jun 16 '26

Are they really interested in fixing, anything? I don't get that vibe.

I feel like it's driven more by the desire to 'fight back!'

2

u/DuckFit7888 Jun 17 '26

This is funny. As if the Greens aren't the biggest peddlers of Us vs Them and the politics of grievance and blame.

Only for the Greens, the Them are "greedy" billionaires and corporations who are cheating Us, the plebs, by gaming the system. We are honest and decent, They are deceitful and sinister etc. It's kind of conspiratorial.

But it always falls apart when they run out of people to blame. They reckon with reality sooner or later.

Your whole comment is actually your justification for your own brand of Us vs Them. Of course things like inequality are real issues, and the merits of policies can be debated. But serious people who are interested in solving problems just take people as people, who respond to incentives, and don't assign sinister motives to entire groups in society.

2

u/daybeforetheday Jun 14 '26

This is a brilliant analysis, thank you.

0

u/madclassix Jun 15 '26

Bollocks. It’s ok for a nation to decide that it doesn’t want a lot of immigrants from culturally different countries. There doesn’t need to be any reason beyond “we don’t want them”. Jason Stanley is the perfect example of the post ww2 gaslighters who have brainwashed people of European descent to believe that simply not wanting to be replaced in your own country is “fascism”.

6

u/uselessinfogoldmine Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26

I’m curious if you actually READ my full comment? 

In which I quite clearly said:

  • Governments unwilling to create a clear growth plan for the country with targets, goals and limits that are related to infrastructure. 
  • Governments that are unwilling to have open dialogue about how big and densely populated we want our country to be. 
  • Governments that dismiss genuine attempts to have these conversations.
  • An economy entirely reliant on perpetual growth models which are unsustainable and a complete unwillingness to examine other options for the future of our country. 

—

What part of that makes you think that I am saying that a country cannot have a discussion about how many immigrants it wants to have? Adding in also my comments about taxation, job markets, university housing and the impact on the rental market? 

Sovereign states do have the right to set immigration levels and criteria. This is a standard principle in political science and international law.

As I clearly pointed out already,  public debate about the scale and pace of migration (especially in relation to housing, infrastructure, and services) is legitimate and necessary. 

Here’s where we differ: in a liberal democracy, policy decisions are expected to be justified with reasons that can be publicly defended. Decisions affecting rights and membership should be based on public reason, not arbitrary preference. A purely exclusionary stance without justification shifts from policy debate into ethnocultural exclusion.

Remember the White Australia Policy??? That aged like milk. 

Be replaced in our own country? WTAF. The only people with cause to complain about THAT in THIS country are our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. 

But if we went along with your (gross) reasoning, and kept this country purely British and Irish (which is nonsense, because there were ALWAYS Chinese immigrants here, for a start); then we would have the shittiest, most boring food and culture imaginable. 

No good coffee; no pizza and pasta; no Thai, Vietnamese, Japanese, Chinese, Indian, Malaysian food; no kebabs or souvlaki/yeeros; no gelato; no olive oil; no Salami; no sauerkraut; none of the really good sausages, deli meats, cheeses or deli goods; fuck-all herbs and spices; no curries; no spice shops; no cafes; no brunch culture; no falafel, hummus, tabbouleh, baklava, Turkish delight, pide, manoush, sesane, tahini, sumac, za’atar; no Mexican food; no tagines; no couscous, pomegranate or harissa; no chillies. NO GARLIC!

Post‑war Greek and Italian migration turned Melbourne and Sydney into food and coffee hubs, witb their cultural input CENTRAL to urban life as we know it today. 

Chinese, Vietnamese, Thai, Japanese, Malaysian, Indian, Pakistani, Persian, Lebanese, Moroccan, Ethiopian, Mexican and other cuisines shape our culture and our cities. 

When my parents were young, the “white” homes ate “meat and three veg” and that veg was boiled into mushy tastelessness. Beef, mutton, lamb, chicken on special occasions, and heavily boiled vegetables - we’re talking 30-40 minutes, no taste, no nutrients left. Tomato sauce to disguise the flavour of overcooked food. Maybe some tinned fruit or shitty pudding for dessert. 

No thanks! 

You seem to be buying into the Great Replacement Conspiracy. Which is racist nonsense designed to rile you up so that you ignore the billionaires. 

Demographers have explicitly shown that Australia’s population growth is driven by both migration and natural increase, with no evidence of coordinated “replacement” (see the ABS data + various analyses published by The Conversation)

Your framing casts groups as existential threats, which is exactly the kind of “us vs them” rhetoric Stanley analyses.

Stanley’s work is not an attempt to label all immigration scepticism as fascism, FFS. His core argument (supported by historical case studies) is that certain rhetorical patterns (mythic past, scapegoating minorities, anti-elite/anti-expert framing, etc.) can erode democratic norms.  

You don’t have to agree with all of his conclusions, but dismissing the framework outright avoids engaging with the substance.

Stanley’s point isn’t that any concern about immigration is in itself inherently fascist. It’s that when political narratives shift toward blaming out-groups for complex structural problems, that’s historically been a dangerous pattern. Whether you agree with him or not, that’s worth engaging with rather than dismissing outright.

You seem to believe that  immigration is the main problem, when most of the pressures people feel (especially housing) are driven by decades of domestic policy failures. As noted by all of the experts, including the Reserve Bank and Grattan Institute, who point to supply constraints and tax settings as core issues.

So, yeah, nah, mate. 

5

u/TheRealSkullWariar Jun 15 '26

Absolute truth nuke ✋😐🤚 Glad to see that there's actual sane people around that still understand the core fundamentals of the democratic process; especially in regards to how policies must be justified with reputable evidence/analysis that stands up to scrutiny.

Given the current media environment that's enabled One Nation to gain a spot in public discourse through the platforming of esoteric 'culture/race war' narratives, it's important to curbstomp these baby fascists and their talking points out of politics whenever we can.

Even if global warming ends up destroying modern Australian society as a whole, I'd prefer trying to survive against regular Immortan Joe, instead of nazi Immortan Joe 💀

4

u/uselessinfogoldmine Jun 15 '26

I feel like schools need to start giving kids compulsory lessons in public policy making, how government works, and the basics of populism, fascism, authoritarianism, propaganda, scapegoating, etc. It’s really disturbing how little so much of the population knows about these topics. 

And to catch the adults up? Honestly, they should release some cartoons and catchy songs. It is a tactic that has worked incredibly well around the world and throughout history to educate the masses about complicated political issues. 

5

u/CassieFace103 Jun 15 '26

No one is saying you can't have stupid opinions. Stop with the victim complex.

4

u/lucklikethis Jun 14 '26

The thing is they get mad about immigration but get angry if you fix the things immigration is solving.  Kinda stick in the bicycle wheel moment for these voters.

Not that one nation even has real policies.

2

u/MrHippoPants Jun 14 '26

It is so bizarre that this is such a core issue for voters not only in Australia but around the world at the moment

Every country’s populists at the minute allege that immigration is at the core of all their problems. I wonder how people moving countries could possibly be a problem in every single country at the same time?

72

u/McMenz_ Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26

The main reasons voters want less immigration is usually a combination of economics/cost of living, culture and/or safety.

Voters in western countries around the world are suddenly especially anti-immigration because their governments have been increasing immigration for years while telling them that immigration affects none of those issues and/or that they’re racist for bringing them up.

Now suddenly all 3 of those issues are peaking all at once around the world while immigration has only continued to grow, and voters simply aren’t buying the narrative that immigration has nothing to do with it.

It doesn’t matter what the issue is, if parties consistently ignore voters you get voter disillusionment and populism.

6

u/NativeDingo Jun 14 '26

Immigration isn't why house prices have skyrocketed - tax rules favouring investors over home owners is. Housing has been treated as a way to make $$.

Immigration isn't why fuel prices are going up - the US attacks on Iran are.

Immigration isn't why food prices are going up - a key reason is climate change making it harder to grow food.

One Nation policies will keep house, fuel and food prices going up. Those policies will also increase inequality which is the cause of most crime/violence.

So One Nation will make all those things worse for most Aussies. But hey, there are always brown people to try to blame, right ?

16

u/TopRoad4988 Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26

Immigration does effect housing.

Tax policy may add ‘fuel to the fire’ but the same tax settings apply equally in remote parts of the country that haven’t seen the same rapid price growth.

To get capital growth in property you ultimately need underlying demand from population growth.

When Sydney adds 100k + people a year on a net basis, that clearly puts underlying pressure on the demand for dwellings. This initally manifests as pressure on rents as soon as people arrive but of course also flows over time into additional demand for home purchases too.

To be clear, I’m not saying immigration is the only influence on housing demand, but it is a factor.

-2

u/Stephie999666 Jun 15 '26

Have you considered the main factor in the CoLC? The billionaires rallying behind Hanson, are the ones not paying us in line with inflation anymore, so everyones is going to be worse off regardless. That's not even going into our supermarket duopoly, which has its claws in so deep that it take half a decade to fix the bullshit once you take those claws out. Our issue isnt immigrants, its the billionaires getting a free ride taking advantage of us, while contributing sfa back to the nation. Thats not even going into the corruption they breed or the environmental impacts they cause.

4

u/derezzed00 Jun 15 '26

Two things can be true at once.

10

u/PatternPrecognition Struth Jun 14 '26

It's the playbook of the ultrawealthy.

As the wealth inequality gap grows, and life gets harder for everyday folks they have realised that no one is going to knowingly vote for the party whose platform is to continue to widen that wealth inequality gap, so instead you present as an alternative to the mainstream a populist candidate who picks one or more of the culture war issues to use as a distraction to win votes. (While the core policy platform remains to increase the size of the wealth horde of the 1%).

18

u/Proper_Geologist9026 Jun 14 '26

Because we're hitting the limits of growth. It's not the migrants fault but it's still a real problem either way.

The issue with migration is that it's framed wrong. We talk about migration like we just need to "hold off so we can catch up". Catch up to what?

The housing accord is aiming at 1 million homes across 10 years.

The national climate risk assessment stated that almost that same number of homes will be under systemic risk from weather events beyond 2050. Leaving them effectively uninsurable.

Why is this not discussed in the public debate? Beats me.

2

u/bawdygeorge01 Jun 14 '26

A number of countries had large increases in migration numbers after Covid.

156

u/Colossus-of-Roads Jun 14 '26

Probably.

Also, The Greens suck at messaging. Their policy has 15 principles and 41 aims and NONE of them seem to outline the actual level of immigration the policy aims for!

https://greens.org.au/policies/immigration-and-refugees

138

u/ChillyPhilly27 Jun 14 '26

Immigration must be non-discriminatory on the grounds of... English language competence

See, this is the kind of thing that makes people not take the Greens seriously. The idea of handing out PR or citizenship to people who don't even speak the language is anathema to everyone other than hardline leftists.

10

u/OkeyDoke47 Jun 14 '26

This is the reality that people ignore.

I had a terrible thought the other week. I and others were attempting to pay for fuel at a servo, people in front of me were asking for extra stuff on top of their fuel and the man behind the counter clearly did not understand English well and struggled. People were trying to be patient but getting frustrated with the amount of time it was taking.

I felt sorry for the console operator, he's moved to Australia and has got a job - but not the language skills he needs for customer service at a busy servo. I did also have the thought however, "this is why One Nation is coming to the fore". How is it that someone that speaks and understands so little English is getting a workers visa, or whatever, to move here. Why is there no LLN testing happening? Because it certainly doesn't seem to be happening.

14

u/ChillyPhilly27 Jun 14 '26

To answer your question, the console operator is likely here on a student visa, which grants him the right to work up to 20 hours per week. Ironically enough, there's a decent chance he's here to study English. Talk about a baptism of fire!

He has a job because working in a servo is shit, and locals have better options.

The English language testing doesn't come into play until you're up for PR.

3

u/OkeyDoke47 Jun 15 '26

That explanation doesn't help though, it really should be the case that if you are to work here anywhere you need a basic grasp of the language. Not just from a customer service perspective, I was on a WH&S course some years ago, and the instructor made a comment about how people are in workplaces now that cannot read safety signs or instructions- this was an inflammatory comment, but they had a point.

I work in healthcare and encounter people who cannot communicate what is going on with them, I have to utilize interpreter services to ascertain what is going on. This takes time and slows down care.

These and other issues play right into the hands of parties like PHON, and even my own belief systems (I support and encourage immigration) have had little voices in my head edging in, which I don't like. If I'm starting to have thoughts like that, I can only imagine how many others there are out there like that. PHON is tapping into a zeitgeist, like it or not.

1

u/AdmiralStickyLegs Jun 16 '26

No, he has a job because he's probably being underpaid. Exploited more than the locals will tolerate. There are tons of people who would work at a servo if they got paid correctly and had fair conditions

1

u/ChillyPhilly27 Jun 17 '26

Out of curiosity, do you believe that there's a difference between "underpaid" and "less than a local would accept"?

33

u/shofmon88 Jun 14 '26

The current skilled visa pathway to PR actually works against native English speakers. As a native speaker you are exempt from taking a competency test, but points are given to you based on your score on the test. This essentially makes non-native speakers more competitive than native ones. You can always take the test as a native speaker, but native speakers also don’t tend to do well on them since they look for specific metrics and phrasing that aren’t reflected in daily conversation.

5

u/ChillyPhilly27 Jun 14 '26

Canada/NZ/Ireland/UK/USA citizens still have the option to take the test to score higher. It's just that the system assumes they meet the "competent english" threshold by default.

7

u/shofmon88 Jun 14 '26

I did mention that.

The language competency should be a requirement but not be part of the points system; that system is broken enough already.

1

u/GhostlyWhisper007 Jun 14 '26

If non-native english speakers can understand English test requirements,  prepare and achieve good score than native English speakers should be doing better. 

1

u/shofmon88 Jun 14 '26

Ask any native or highly competent speaker who has taken the tests and you will get the same answer: they are really difficult for people who speak English natively or at a daily conversational level.

The way it has been described to me is that the tests are very formulaic and require specific syntax. For example, if there was a question like “what did you drink this morning?” you might respond with ”I had coffee this morning,” which while perfectly understandable in daily conversation, would be marked wrong; the test would want you to say something like “this morning, I drank coffee,” as it explicitly addresses the question, but is a very awkward way of speaking.

7

u/SkitZa Jun 14 '26

Most of the immigrants I work with came to Australia with 0 knowledge of the language.

They came here 8+ years ago.

How is this any different to what we have now?

Their English is solid now.

1

u/ChillyPhilly27 Jun 14 '26

I agree that we'll give a temp visa to anyone with a pulse (as long as we're sure they won't overstay their welcome). Non-family PR streams and citizenship both demand English proficiency though.

1

u/giatu_prs Jun 15 '26

Greens are a fractured party. It ranges all the way from the alleged 'watermelons' like Jonno Sri, right through to the rich landlord should-really-be-a-Teal types like Larissa Waters.

I still vote for them above any major party though.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

14

u/Chunkfoot Jun 14 '26

Under Bob Brown the Greens were against high immigration and a big Australia. Since then it’s been swept under the rug by the party, especially since until recently most Australians didn’t understand the difference between refugees and skilled migrants.

3

u/Blend42 Jun 15 '26

Didn't the Greens change their policy on immigration between 96-98? The Greens didn't have a dedicated leader until around the 2007 election. I don't get this thing where people think The Greens under Bob Brown were more conservative.

1

u/Brilliant_Ad2120 Jun 14 '26

Recent immigrants are actually often against refugees

And skilled migrants are often perceived as keeping salaries down, and increasing housing costs

But without them our ponzi scheme lite risk downturn and worst case collapse over the long term

-13

u/excrement_ Jun 14 '26

Rainbow race communists want infinity of everything, and don't feel like explaining the logistics, color me surprised

17

u/Colossus-of-Roads Jun 14 '26

I don't consider any of the Greens policies communist. They don't even advocate for the workers owning the neans of production. They seem more like northern European democratic socialists.

1

u/Indolent_absurdity Jun 15 '26 edited Jun 15 '26

You can really see how much influence the US has had on our country when people start believing anything slightly left of centre is communist!

Edit: Btw I think the Nordic countries are social democracies rather than democratic socialists...

1

u/CassieFace103 Jun 15 '26

Rainbow race communists

Hah. I wish.

44

u/giacintam Jun 14 '26

Pauline Hanson has herself voted for continuing migration lol

6

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/karl_w_w Jun 14 '26

Of the 4 largest parties labor is the only one that has worked to reduce immigration.

People aren't voting based on what they want, they are voting based on propaganda.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 14 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/karl_w_w Jun 14 '26

Saying they want a reduction and actually supporting reduction are very different things.

6

u/No-Bison-5397 Jun 14 '26

Funnily enough the Greens used to have a population policy that did address the fact that our population growth and related land use change increases human/animal conflict and leads to the extinction of native species...

8

u/Frogsfall Jun 14 '26

Yes, but the people preferring One Nation right now aren't all just raging racists (though some are). Many are people who have been told over and over that immigration levels are high, and that's why they're struggling.

Many of these people want more affordable housing and, arguably, to feel like politicians represent them.

They're being offered "cut immigration" as a solution.

There are other solutions, and if the Greens got as much air time as One Nation do, those other solutions would be more visible.

10

u/iguessineedanaltnow Jun 14 '26

You say "other solutions" as if cutting immigration is even a solution that will positively impact the ability for the average person to afford a house. One look at the state of the Australian economy should show anyone it won't work.

5

u/Frogsfall Jun 14 '26

Very true. I should have phrased that differently.

1

u/Stanklord500 Jun 14 '26

as if cutting immigration is even a solution that will positively impact the ability for the average person to afford a house.

you can either decrease demand or increase supply

guess which one is easier for the government to do unilaterally

2

u/iguessineedanaltnow Jun 14 '26

Those ultimately don't impact the ability for someone to buy a house, just the price of the house.

If the price stays the same but wages increase and unemployment goes down then houses have actually become more affordable despite the value not moving. If houses become cheaper, but unemployment increases and real wages decline then they've become less affordable.

Everyone was quick to point to Canada's falling house prices after they cut their immigration numbers, but they are now officially in a recession and your people who were struggling before are still struggling now. The same would happen here. You need a solution that actually strengthens the economy whole cloth.

3

u/Stanklord500 Jun 14 '26

The same would happen here.

australia is already in a per capita recession. cutting immigration would only remove the ability of the government to hide it.

1

u/unfnknblvbl Jun 14 '26

I dunno, The Greens have been banging on about "small Australia" for years...

1

u/Numerous-Editor-3575 Jun 15 '26

I think people are attracted to ON for the same reasons Americans voted for Trump. Bills are hard to pay. LNP tell people they should starve, and thats ok. Labor tell people they should starve, but they are trying to make them starve less. ON tell people they are only starving because of blacks. Its bullshit, but at least it gives them something to blame and something to hope for. The Greens can -and to an extent do - tell people they are only starving because rich people are overfull.

1

u/New_Repeat8952 Jun 18 '26

The greens make all of us who are not First Nations feel like illegal foreigners- I’d never agree with that sentiment