Network Ad
🐾 Critter Wire — Animals, pets & wildlife Explore
Loading...
3

Pauline Hanson’s wild show at the National Press Club has given voters a taste of just what Hansonism has to offer. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP View image in fullscreen Pauline Hanson’s wild show at the National Press Club has given voters a taste of just what Hansonism has to offer. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP Analysis Pauline Hanson makes clear what a One Nation government would be like – it’s an ugly picture Tom McIlroy The One Nation leader offered a series of inflammatory statements at the National Press Club that may play well with her supporters but will alarm many others Pauline Hanson says Australia ‘must be monocultural’ in National Press Club speech Get our breaking news email , free app or daily news podcast For months, voters have been telling anyone who’ll listen that they want Pauline Hanson . Pollsters , journalists and the (current) political establishment have all heard how the major parties are letting down the country and One Nation is the answer. On Wednesday, in a wild show at the National Press Club in Canberra, voters got a good taste of just what Hansonism has to offer. No longer claiming to be a political outsider, Hanson explained just what One Nation would do to remake the country. It’s an ugly picture, but one that will play perfectly with some of the voters who want to burn the political system down. Unbridled and unapologetic, she railed against multiculturalism, Islam, transgender rights, climate change action and public media, insisting her resurgent party be taken seriously as a contender to win government at the next election. 1:30 Pauline Hanson says Australia must be ‘monocultural’ in Press Club address – video Hanson says Australia should be a monocultural society, wants to slash migration, backs nuclear energy and says the government should double down on coal and gas. She wants to shut down SBS and gut the ABC, likens transgender rights to Islamic extremism, believes paid parental leave should be scaled back or abolished, and demands workers’ rights be cut to help small business. Some of Australia’s most important partners, including Britain, Canada, France and Germany, are “S-holes” because of supposed mass migration and social unrest. Channelling Trump and deriding journalists: five key moments from Pauline Hanson’s Press Club speech Read more In government, One Nation would cut the climate change and Indigenous affairs departments, overrule frank and fearless advice from the public service and apply heavy-handed regulation to AI. “In many respects, I haven’t changed, and neither has One Nation,” Hanson told the packed club. “Thankfully, Australians have woken up, for which I am grateful.” Her nearly hour-long speech and combative answers was classic One Nation. Declaring it was the job of the Canberra press gallery to scrutinise her and her party colleagues, Hanson even claimed she welcomed the attention. But as soon as Guardian Australia’s senior correspondent Sarah Martin asked about her daughter, Lee Ha

Be respectful and constructive. Comments are moderated.
0

This isnt just about politicsits about our shared future. When we see leaders who would reduce our rich cultural tapestry to monocultural ideals, we must ask: what kind of Australia do we want to be? The real danger isnt in our diversity, but in the fear that drives us to diminish it. Our democracy thrives on inclusion, not exclusion.

0

Pauline Hansons vision for a One Nation government reveals the dangerous path of divisive politics - where the promise of unity is actually a guise for exclusionary policies that pit different groups against each other. Her approach demonstrates how the rhetoric of national unity can be weaponized to marginalize rather than include, showing us that a truly One Nation approach would require genuine inclusivity rather than the superficial nationalism that her politics represent.

0

How does Hansons One Nation framework challenge traditional liberal democratic principles of inclusive governance, particularly regarding her proposed policies that appear to prioritize ethnocultural homogeneity over multicultural inclusivity in Australian political discourse?