A nice insight, with which I broadly agree. A couple of comments
First, the analysis depends on treating the Coalition as a single party. That's correct, I think, but there is always the possibility of a breakup.
Relatedly, there are the repeated eruptions of breakaways on the right, going back to Hanson in (IIRC) 1998. They've done much less well here than in other countries. That's in part because the social base for such parties (rural, nativist, religious majority) is much smaller. But again that might change/
Maybe. It depends on Labor’s willingness to enter into formal coalition with the Greens. The hostility that Labor holds with respect to the Greens at a Federal level would seem to inhibit such a coalition
Mark, it can't be denied that there is such a (largely irrational) hostility on Labor's part towards the Greens. However, the traffic isn't all one way on that street.
Albanese is much reported as having a visceral hatred of the Greens. Does that go back to when he was Gillard's negotiator with them during the Gillard minority government? Is there anyone in Labor who would even entertain a Progressive Alliance with the Greens? The hard nose Right wingers like Marles and Farrell would soon put the kybosh on that. Been waiting over 30 years for Labor and Greens to get their shit together for the good of the country.
You're right: the hostility is real. All I'm saying that your primary vote stays in the low thirties (high 20s in Werribee the other day!) then unless you want to keep handing victories to the Libs as has happened in Tassie and, the other day, Prahran, then they might need a rethink about where that hostility is getting them (and us).
I don't think it needs a formal coalition, but agree, and even an informal alliance would be hard to envisage under Labor's current leadership. More fool Labor, unless they have some magic formula for getting their primary vote back into the 40s, which is the opposite of what Albanese is currently achieving. If, as political hardheads like to say, politics is all about arithmetic--it always sounds so macho to trot that out--then the arithmetic is clear.
Yeah why doesn't Albanese have the nous to act on that? Progressive Alliance has a nice ring to it! Not only Labor, Greens but it could include people like David Pocock and Allegra Spender et al. Maybe we will see it happen, Tim. Fingers crossed.
The statistical analyses I have undertaken of the Republic and Voice referendums tend to confirm the analysis of those results and the reasons for them that is presented here.
One question that arises from this article is what role the Greens are playing, and could play, in the non-Coalition alignment. I think that the recent electoral performances of the Greens can be accounted for in considerable part by a gap opening between the perspectives of actual and potential Greens voters and what is being offered by the Greens under the influence of their current activist core. In terms of the question of a "non-Coalition alignment" I think the Greens voter base would want them to be playing a role in that, and would be happy for that role to be on the left flank, but this would require the Greens to have some difficult conversations with some of the militant minorities that have converged around, and inside, the party's activist core in recent years.
The Greens are always in an awkward position but to some extent you can measure their success by the lengths Lab and the LNP go to undermine them. Everything from rhetorical hostility to the way they preference. The sort of bloc alignment I am talking about requires a rethink of all this by Labor that I don't think Labor (certainly not Albanese) is capable of. In the interum, the Greens have to do their own thing, become more diverse, and get better at being competitive outside the urban centres.
Across the longer term, I think the analysis of labour vs non-labour is intensely complicated by the influence of the DLP, but I concede that this is mostly historical nit-picking. I do think that the modern origin of the move away from the two party system begins with the Democrats in the seventies, and it's possible we would have seen it develop much sooner than it did if not for Chipp's prohibition against running in the lower house.
Reflecting on that, I'm actually kinda surprised no one is reviving "Keeping the bastards honest" as a slogan :)
The DLP point is well taken, but I think it fits the general frame. They were definitely part of a non-Labor bloc in terms of the two-party *system*. I was also thinking about the keep the bastards honest slogan, but I think we are beyond that. The only way to keep them honest (or honester) is to keep them in minority. "Keep the bastards diluted."
In particular though, I would like to thoroughly endorse your comment
‘True enough, but I think we overread this splintering of the conservative vote and give too much credence to the protest aspect of what happened in 2022. It underestimates the positive embrace of community independents in those electorates and the collapse of Labor’s primary vote.’
Honestly, this, and the beginning of an interview I heard when the essay was published were enough to make me decide not to read it.
Thanks, Louise. I think a lot of those who haven't actually seen the community work have this kind of bloodless analysis and just can't imagine the idea that that sort of participation is rewarding in its own right. Joyous even!
Although Big George's essay was flawed, it's still worth reading. He has some useful insights to offer (can't be more specific as it's some months since I read it).
How about we cut to the chase and say Progressive vs Conservative or Non Fascist vs Facsist? Just as Liberal does not describe the current pack of far right wing nut jobs, Labor does not describe the morass that is the current Labor Party. To say Labor is as outdated as thinking Albanese is still a Leftie.
Labor has needed a name change for yonks but that will never be envisaged while people like Albanese have such an antithetical hatred of the Greens. Call myself Progressive and get lumped in with the Treehuggers? No way!
Next election I am predicting will be in April and will be called after Albanese drops a saccharine sweetener of a Budget in March. How is it going to go? Will Australians be like the yanks and vote for TheStrong Man no matter how much on the nose or will they pick The Invisible Man with Community Based Independents/Greens providing the backbone so sorely needed in these increasingly non truth times?
Hopefully the latter, although I do think that the overall pattern of turning away from the majors may slow, or even reverse slightly, in this election. That said, it could fall out that way and still leave neither major able to form a government in their own right.
Something in that, Juda. But rather than worrying about the nomenclature, energy should be focussed on community-level organisation. Real-life engagement. As much as I spend my time theorising this stuff and trying to provide people with a way of thinking about what is happening, you can't theorise people into support. They have to figure it out on the ground amongst themselves.
True! I was a founding member of the Australian Democrats back in the day. The way Don Chipp organised and galvanised community support was incredible. He tapped into people's misgivings about both parties, kept his communications clean, clear and concise. And he was not a smart arse. He meant it about keeping the bastards honest.
It was a privilege to be part of that time. Bob Brown has that same 'keep the bastards honest' approach, in my opinion.
Thanks, Tim. I think the recently smuggled ‘Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024’ suggests the two major parties share your instincts.
Another terrific, well thought out article TD - you've started a tremendous debate which is constanty forcing me to question and analyse my thoughts around the duopoly - more 'skepticos' not sceptical. 'Coalition and non-Coalition division than one of Labor and non-Labor.' - I get it and I like it. Has me thinking what will be the piece de resistence written in the penultimate weeks leading up to an election that can't come quick enough. I'm assuming the last week will be an unedifying morass of drivel spraying from duopoly career politician as they fight for their pathetic careers.
The whole political class will double down on the need to preserve the systems that preserve them, peppered with horror stories about what will happen if you hand more control back to the people. We can rightly ignore their self-interested bleating, I think.
The Coalition and non-Coalition division is an interesting proposition. But one thing I don't understand is why the Nationals keep on hanging around. I appreciate that they receive more privileges through being in the Coalition and the Liberal Party needs them in order to get enough seats to win government. But they seem to have lost their historic roots and nobody minds ( I do have in mind the cartoon which shows a Nationals politician doffing his hat to reveal a miner's helmet underneath). There's some sort of tradition involved in dealing with them. They get the position of Deputy Prime Minister and even the Labor government will give them (Keith Pitt) the Ambassadorship of the Holy See.
But their willingness to support mining exploration in rich agricultural regions in Queensland could perhaps bring challenges to their sitting parliamentarians. Independents might emerge on this issue.
Could there be a division within the non-Coalition division which sets itself apart from the rest (at least what is now ALP)? There are a number of independents who want action on climate change but perhaps fewer, Greens and Socialists included, who support a greater, that is liveable, level of benefits to be paid to those who are unemployed and disabled
Cathy McGowan, per our recent conversation, is convinced the Nats are more at risk than ever to good local independents. But she also concedes they are brilliant and ruthless campaigners. Remember, they didn't lose any seats in 2022. The shift away from being a "country" party doesn't seem to have harmed them electorally, and they have consolidated their power within the Coalition since 2022, and really, since the merger in Qld. This might be of interest: https://www.crikey.com.au/2024/10/29/peter-dutton-lnp-coalition-taxpayer-money-waste/
I live in Noosa which has an Independant as state MP Most people preferred her over the ex mayor who was rejected as an lnp candidate so we hope that the local sitting MP will lose votes in favour of independants or Greens .Both parties are so keen on maintaining the old system that Labor will cut off its nose to spite its face and do an ugly deal with anyone who is not Green .Interesting times we live in 🤷🏾♀️
It's complicated, isn't it? Part of it is that the logic of party overrides the logic of governance, and so for insiders the game becomes less about governing in a particular way (leftist, progressive, socialist, whatever) and finding allies to do that, than it becomes about maintaining power structures that ensure a particular career path. That's the logic that needs to be broken.
I’m a volunteer with Dr Sue Chapman, community independent for Forrest WA. I do a lot of doorknocking. Dr Sue gets support from all kinds of different people. I think your sentence ‘centrism all the way through’ describes it best.
I also think doorknocking is essential for politics. So a callout to all readers who are in an electorate with a community independent candidate: please volunteer. It helps and is super interesting. Without it this article, as good as it is Tim, is a bit of a cerebral excersise.
See my comment above to Juda. There is no substitute for community engagement and doorknocking is key. There was a brilliant article by a Greens' campaigner that I quote in my last book and it might resonate with you, Gita: "Political ‘experts’ know a lot less than they think they do, and doorknocking works"
Thanks again Tim. On that beautiful, post-election Sunday in 2022 it seemed very clear to me that we now had a three-party system. "And two of those parties," I told people, "are left-wing." I made the obvious mistake of classifying Labor as "left". How Labor has mis-read this opportunity as a crisis and has attacked the Independents and the Greens and sided with the Coalition wherever possible, is one of the wonders of our age. Awarded a mark, 10 meters out from an open goal, they've turned around and booted the ball the wrong way.
I stood as a candidate in Grayndler in the 70's for the Socialist Party of Australia (SPA)
My experience taught me many things, chief among them was being in touch with the community, which your article emphasises.
The issues I found were about the hip pocket nerve and whilst this is perhaps still the main issue that the electorate are still seeing as the main issue, the msm are not as usual pointing to what Labor has done to alleviate the effects of inflation (which is imported because of our dependence on the US$) but that's a whole other issue.
Most voters tend to look through the prism of their own struggles to survive, depending on where you are in relation to one's own income, still reflects how one votes. "Will I be better off under Liberal, Labor, Greens or a local independent?
However, some voters look at the bigger picture and join a lot of dots.
Issues that don't appear in your article are some of the reasons why working class voters have voted with their feet, relates to the issues of 'foreign policy', 'a fair go for all', AUKUS and our loss of sovereignty.
Our treatment of First Nations People, asylum seekers and refugees. All the issues about Justice!
So, I know from personal experience in talking to 'traditional Labor voters' that on these questions they are telling me that "bread and butter issues are not the entire game"
Many like me, will vote for candidates who, whilst dealing with bread and butter issues, but at the same time, also want to stop Australia being the "junk yard or lap dog" for the USA.
Whitlam will be remembered for pouring the handful of sand into Vincent Lingiari's hands, for buying Blue Poles (best investment decision by any government, ever) and for bringing flushing toilets to the suburbs. He showed that it doesn't have to be one thing or the other. It can be both - bread & butter and high ideals. Both are beautiful things worth fighting for.
It is a decade or two since women became a majority of union membership. Was this through growth of women's participation, or decline of men's? Meanwhile Labor's vote keeps declining. Hard to disentangle the various factors, but the general population is much less tribal than it was.
A nice insight, with which I broadly agree. A couple of comments
First, the analysis depends on treating the Coalition as a single party. That's correct, I think, but there is always the possibility of a breakup.
Relatedly, there are the repeated eruptions of breakaways on the right, going back to Hanson in (IIRC) 1998. They've done much less well here than in other countries. That's in part because the social base for such parties (rural, nativist, religious majority) is much smaller. But again that might change/
Points well taken.
On point 2, I wonder what the trigger issue/s would be for that sort of realignment?
Maybe. It depends on Labor’s willingness to enter into formal coalition with the Greens. The hostility that Labor holds with respect to the Greens at a Federal level would seem to inhibit such a coalition
Mark, it can't be denied that there is such a (largely irrational) hostility on Labor's part towards the Greens. However, the traffic isn't all one way on that street.
Albanese is much reported as having a visceral hatred of the Greens. Does that go back to when he was Gillard's negotiator with them during the Gillard minority government? Is there anyone in Labor who would even entertain a Progressive Alliance with the Greens? The hard nose Right wingers like Marles and Farrell would soon put the kybosh on that. Been waiting over 30 years for Labor and Greens to get their shit together for the good of the country.
In certain electorates the ALP goes head-to-head with the Liberals, in others (like Albanese’s Grayndler) the only real opposition is the Greens.
Yeah, a lot of the hostility is exactly that competition.
You're right: the hostility is real. All I'm saying that your primary vote stays in the low thirties (high 20s in Werribee the other day!) then unless you want to keep handing victories to the Libs as has happened in Tassie and, the other day, Prahran, then they might need a rethink about where that hostility is getting them (and us).
I don't think it needs a formal coalition, but agree, and even an informal alliance would be hard to envisage under Labor's current leadership. More fool Labor, unless they have some magic formula for getting their primary vote back into the 40s, which is the opposite of what Albanese is currently achieving. If, as political hardheads like to say, politics is all about arithmetic--it always sounds so macho to trot that out--then the arithmetic is clear.
Yeah why doesn't Albanese have the nous to act on that? Progressive Alliance has a nice ring to it! Not only Labor, Greens but it could include people like David Pocock and Allegra Spender et al. Maybe we will see it happen, Tim. Fingers crossed.
The statistical analyses I have undertaken of the Republic and Voice referendums tend to confirm the analysis of those results and the reasons for them that is presented here.
One question that arises from this article is what role the Greens are playing, and could play, in the non-Coalition alignment. I think that the recent electoral performances of the Greens can be accounted for in considerable part by a gap opening between the perspectives of actual and potential Greens voters and what is being offered by the Greens under the influence of their current activist core. In terms of the question of a "non-Coalition alignment" I think the Greens voter base would want them to be playing a role in that, and would be happy for that role to be on the left flank, but this would require the Greens to have some difficult conversations with some of the militant minorities that have converged around, and inside, the party's activist core in recent years.
The Greens are always in an awkward position but to some extent you can measure their success by the lengths Lab and the LNP go to undermine them. Everything from rhetorical hostility to the way they preference. The sort of bloc alignment I am talking about requires a rethink of all this by Labor that I don't think Labor (certainly not Albanese) is capable of. In the interum, the Greens have to do their own thing, become more diverse, and get better at being competitive outside the urban centres.
Across the longer term, I think the analysis of labour vs non-labour is intensely complicated by the influence of the DLP, but I concede that this is mostly historical nit-picking. I do think that the modern origin of the move away from the two party system begins with the Democrats in the seventies, and it's possible we would have seen it develop much sooner than it did if not for Chipp's prohibition against running in the lower house.
Reflecting on that, I'm actually kinda surprised no one is reviving "Keeping the bastards honest" as a slogan :)
The DLP point is well taken, but I think it fits the general frame. They were definitely part of a non-Labor bloc in terms of the two-party *system*. I was also thinking about the keep the bastards honest slogan, but I think we are beyond that. The only way to keep them honest (or honester) is to keep them in minority. "Keep the bastards diluted."
I think you might be on to something Tim.
In particular though, I would like to thoroughly endorse your comment
‘True enough, but I think we overread this splintering of the conservative vote and give too much credence to the protest aspect of what happened in 2022. It underestimates the positive embrace of community independents in those electorates and the collapse of Labor’s primary vote.’
Honestly, this, and the beginning of an interview I heard when the essay was published were enough to make me decide not to read it.
Thanks, Louise. I think a lot of those who haven't actually seen the community work have this kind of bloodless analysis and just can't imagine the idea that that sort of participation is rewarding in its own right. Joyous even!
Although Big George's essay was flawed, it's still worth reading. He has some useful insights to offer (can't be more specific as it's some months since I read it).
How about we cut to the chase and say Progressive vs Conservative or Non Fascist vs Facsist? Just as Liberal does not describe the current pack of far right wing nut jobs, Labor does not describe the morass that is the current Labor Party. To say Labor is as outdated as thinking Albanese is still a Leftie.
Labor has needed a name change for yonks but that will never be envisaged while people like Albanese have such an antithetical hatred of the Greens. Call myself Progressive and get lumped in with the Treehuggers? No way!
Next election I am predicting will be in April and will be called after Albanese drops a saccharine sweetener of a Budget in March. How is it going to go? Will Australians be like the yanks and vote for TheStrong Man no matter how much on the nose or will they pick The Invisible Man with Community Based Independents/Greens providing the backbone so sorely needed in these increasingly non truth times?
Hopefully the latter, although I do think that the overall pattern of turning away from the majors may slow, or even reverse slightly, in this election. That said, it could fall out that way and still leave neither major able to form a government in their own right.
Something in that, Juda. But rather than worrying about the nomenclature, energy should be focussed on community-level organisation. Real-life engagement. As much as I spend my time theorising this stuff and trying to provide people with a way of thinking about what is happening, you can't theorise people into support. They have to figure it out on the ground amongst themselves.
True! I was a founding member of the Australian Democrats back in the day. The way Don Chipp organised and galvanised community support was incredible. He tapped into people's misgivings about both parties, kept his communications clean, clear and concise. And he was not a smart arse. He meant it about keeping the bastards honest.
It was a privilege to be part of that time. Bob Brown has that same 'keep the bastards honest' approach, in my opinion.
Thanks, Tim. I think the recently smuggled ‘Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Reform) Bill 2024’ suggests the two major parties share your instincts.
It was a bit of a giveaway, wasn't it, Peter?
Another terrific, well thought out article TD - you've started a tremendous debate which is constanty forcing me to question and analyse my thoughts around the duopoly - more 'skepticos' not sceptical. 'Coalition and non-Coalition division than one of Labor and non-Labor.' - I get it and I like it. Has me thinking what will be the piece de resistence written in the penultimate weeks leading up to an election that can't come quick enough. I'm assuming the last week will be an unedifying morass of drivel spraying from duopoly career politician as they fight for their pathetic careers.
The whole political class will double down on the need to preserve the systems that preserve them, peppered with horror stories about what will happen if you hand more control back to the people. We can rightly ignore their self-interested bleating, I think.
The Coalition and non-Coalition division is an interesting proposition. But one thing I don't understand is why the Nationals keep on hanging around. I appreciate that they receive more privileges through being in the Coalition and the Liberal Party needs them in order to get enough seats to win government. But they seem to have lost their historic roots and nobody minds ( I do have in mind the cartoon which shows a Nationals politician doffing his hat to reveal a miner's helmet underneath). There's some sort of tradition involved in dealing with them. They get the position of Deputy Prime Minister and even the Labor government will give them (Keith Pitt) the Ambassadorship of the Holy See.
But their willingness to support mining exploration in rich agricultural regions in Queensland could perhaps bring challenges to their sitting parliamentarians. Independents might emerge on this issue.
Could there be a division within the non-Coalition division which sets itself apart from the rest (at least what is now ALP)? There are a number of independents who want action on climate change but perhaps fewer, Greens and Socialists included, who support a greater, that is liveable, level of benefits to be paid to those who are unemployed and disabled
Cathy McGowan, per our recent conversation, is convinced the Nats are more at risk than ever to good local independents. But she also concedes they are brilliant and ruthless campaigners. Remember, they didn't lose any seats in 2022. The shift away from being a "country" party doesn't seem to have harmed them electorally, and they have consolidated their power within the Coalition since 2022, and really, since the merger in Qld. This might be of interest: https://www.crikey.com.au/2024/10/29/peter-dutton-lnp-coalition-taxpayer-money-waste/
I live in Noosa which has an Independant as state MP Most people preferred her over the ex mayor who was rejected as an lnp candidate so we hope that the local sitting MP will lose votes in favour of independants or Greens .Both parties are so keen on maintaining the old system that Labor will cut off its nose to spite its face and do an ugly deal with anyone who is not Green .Interesting times we live in 🤷🏾♀️
It's complicated, isn't it? Part of it is that the logic of party overrides the logic of governance, and so for insiders the game becomes less about governing in a particular way (leftist, progressive, socialist, whatever) and finding allies to do that, than it becomes about maintaining power structures that ensure a particular career path. That's the logic that needs to be broken.
I’m a volunteer with Dr Sue Chapman, community independent for Forrest WA. I do a lot of doorknocking. Dr Sue gets support from all kinds of different people. I think your sentence ‘centrism all the way through’ describes it best.
I also think doorknocking is essential for politics. So a callout to all readers who are in an electorate with a community independent candidate: please volunteer. It helps and is super interesting. Without it this article, as good as it is Tim, is a bit of a cerebral excersise.
See my comment above to Juda. There is no substitute for community engagement and doorknocking is key. There was a brilliant article by a Greens' campaigner that I quote in my last book and it might resonate with you, Gita: "Political ‘experts’ know a lot less than they think they do, and doorknocking works"
https://greenagenda.org.au/2022/06/political-experts-know-a-lot-less-than-they-think/
Great work Gita, I hope Sue Chapman wins in a landslide.
Thanks again Tim. On that beautiful, post-election Sunday in 2022 it seemed very clear to me that we now had a three-party system. "And two of those parties," I told people, "are left-wing." I made the obvious mistake of classifying Labor as "left". How Labor has mis-read this opportunity as a crisis and has attacked the Independents and the Greens and sided with the Coalition wherever possible, is one of the wonders of our age. Awarded a mark, 10 meters out from an open goal, they've turned around and booted the ball the wrong way.
I stood as a candidate in Grayndler in the 70's for the Socialist Party of Australia (SPA)
My experience taught me many things, chief among them was being in touch with the community, which your article emphasises.
The issues I found were about the hip pocket nerve and whilst this is perhaps still the main issue that the electorate are still seeing as the main issue, the msm are not as usual pointing to what Labor has done to alleviate the effects of inflation (which is imported because of our dependence on the US$) but that's a whole other issue.
Most voters tend to look through the prism of their own struggles to survive, depending on where you are in relation to one's own income, still reflects how one votes. "Will I be better off under Liberal, Labor, Greens or a local independent?
However, some voters look at the bigger picture and join a lot of dots.
Issues that don't appear in your article are some of the reasons why working class voters have voted with their feet, relates to the issues of 'foreign policy', 'a fair go for all', AUKUS and our loss of sovereignty.
Our treatment of First Nations People, asylum seekers and refugees. All the issues about Justice!
So, I know from personal experience in talking to 'traditional Labor voters' that on these questions they are telling me that "bread and butter issues are not the entire game"
Many like me, will vote for candidates who, whilst dealing with bread and butter issues, but at the same time, also want to stop Australia being the "junk yard or lap dog" for the USA.
Whitlam will be remembered for pouring the handful of sand into Vincent Lingiari's hands, for buying Blue Poles (best investment decision by any government, ever) and for bringing flushing toilets to the suburbs. He showed that it doesn't have to be one thing or the other. It can be both - bread & butter and high ideals. Both are beautiful things worth fighting for.
Very interesting analysis. Far better than the general ‘declining Lib / Lab’ narrative. A complicated landscape. Keep exploring.
It is a decade or two since women became a majority of union membership. Was this through growth of women's participation, or decline of men's? Meanwhile Labor's vote keeps declining. Hard to disentangle the various factors, but the general population is much less tribal than it was.
I so hope you're right.