Pauline Hanson has emerged from her political time out with a vengeance. Due to the votes of some 600,000 Australians, her one nation party managed to score four seats in the senate and become Australia’s fourth largest party. She has already used her newfound power to rile many feathers, so while we still do not know what she will actually accomplish, it is safe to assume that for the next four years she will remain a central and polarizing figure in Australian politics.
Image result for Australian flag flying
Hanson provides voter choice
I am not a Hanson supporter, but I am thankful to her and her party for giving a voice to many Australians who would otherwise lack the means to have their true political beliefs heard. It is this firm respect for voter choice that made me disappointed in the behaviour of the Greens Party recently. When they chose to walk out on Pauline Hanson’s maiden speech, they also, indirectly, stated that the views of 600,000 Australians do not even warrant a hearing. The Greens Senator Richard Di Natale further escalated the tension by adding that this move was done to reach out to decent Australians. A statement, that again, indirectly trashes the supporters of One Nation. People who care about the direction of our great nation, as the Greens party allegedly does, should also care about the concerns of all Australians, even if they believe those concerns are unwarranted, or worse, distasteful. If politicians refuse to hear the voice of opposing politicians in the confines of senate, then what hope do we have of ever finding peace between two conflicting views?
Hanson supporters have voter agency
Along with my beliefs in voter choice, I also believe in voter agency. Voter agency can be summarized as the belief that voters are capable of deciding for themselves how they feel about a certain topic. And when they do, their views should not be belittled by assuming it was the result of a deficient mind or extreme gullibility. So when the statistic came out that 49% of Australians wanted a ban on Muslim immigration, there was a lot of speculation about how anti-Islam sentiment could became so widespread. People like Shalailah Medhora and Race Discrimination Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane, were very quick to attribute the rise of Anti-Islam views to the rhetoric of Pauline Hanson and her One Nation Colleagues. They refused to consider, even for a moment, that perhaps Pauline Hanson’s siren call isn’t actually that strong. That perhaps, voters feel this way for reasons unrelated to her. In just the last two years, the situation in Western Europe has provided a steady stream of evidence for people to be concerned about Muslim immigration and integration. Although I would be one of the 51% who does not advocate a ban on Muslims, I can see why others would. But more importantly I think it is disingenuous of people to attribute anti-Islam sentiment to the rhetoric of one party and her supposedly gullible base, while ignoring all the other possibilities.
Other possibilities?
And as the Guardian pointed out in a lovely cartoon, there are other reasons. For example, Australia could, on the whole be an extremely racist society, irrelevant of Pauline Hanson’s existence. To back up this assertion they cited a poll taken several decades ago that showed 51% of Australians opposed coloured immigration. There were no polls taken at the time about whether Australians opposed all immigration, so we will never know whether it is the colour of people they objected to, or simply immigration on a whole. But what is interesting about this poll is it was taken in 1943, at the height of the most brutal war Australia has ever been in. We were principally the targets of the Japanese, who, at the time, were considered coloured. The news of Japan’s torture methods had reached Australian shores, and we were also under huge economic strains (as most countries are in war time). Is it a surprise that Australians would not be fond of Immigration at that point in time, let alone coloured immigration? I find it unbelievable that a war time poll can be used to explain the current concerns Australians have about Muslim integration.
Pauline Hanson, her supporters, and the 49% who advocate a ban on Muslim immigration, should not have their views discarded or reduced, just because it upsets peoples’ sensibilities. Hanson is still an elected politician, and her supporters are still Australian voters; they should be heard and debated with, no matter how deplorable they sound.