(Contributed)
If opinion polls tell the truth, the One Nation party commands between15% and 18% of Australian voters. This gain has come at the expense of the regular Coalition parties, with voters opting for a ‘harder’ and ‘genuine’ conservatism because the Coalition is seen as weak and vacillating.
It has been long said that One Nation has actually functioned as a ‘satellite party’ of the Coalition. That means One Nation operates as a self-organized, self-motivated, self-funded organisation with its own programme. It says it is not a machine of the big parties which ignore the little person. However, it is a party that functions as a vote gatherer which ‘preferences’ backwards to the Coalition, votes on all major issues with the Coalition in parliament and considers itself officially a ‘harder’ and ‘truer’ version of conservatism. It corrals people who may be dissidents against the system and it operates as a block against groups that may wish to challenge the establishment. It is a defence guard for establishment ideology and politics. It pretends it treats with the conservative Coalition for concessions and thereby serves the people. In street talk – it’s a fraud.
This satellite status is confirmed by Pauline Hanson encouraging the ‘defection’ of Barnaby Joyce from the Nationals to One Nation. It seems he assuredly will ‘defect’. We might ask: what road to Damascus would Joyce be on when he decides to become a new man? Or would he stay the same man, because he just changed his brand, while the soap powder in his packet remained the same stuff?
The Coalition
Australian political history records that from the mid Fifties to the early Seventies, Australian ‘conservatives’ mobilized themselves as the so-called Coalition.
Of course, most folk recognize the Liberal Party and the then Country Party (later National Party) as that Coalition. However, it is usually missed that there was a de facto third partner, the Democratic Labor Party (DLP). This party was formed as a split from the Labor Party, one that followed US foreign policy goals and which saw communism as such an enemy that it required a special party to campaign against it in Australia. Of course, its preferences went to the Liberal and Country parties and it served them as Hanson does the Liberal and National parties today.
So, given the official conservatives are on the nose with people at present, the idea of a three party Coalition is not unimaginable. It would prove our point absolutely. One Nation is not a challenge to the establishment, just a servant of it.
Developing the illusion
Last weekend some rallies were held on the matter of immigration. Entitled ‘Put Australia First’ these meetings allowed Pauline Hanson, Tommy Robinson English Ziopatriot via video link, a welter of minor speakers of varied non European origin, reps of small multiculti parties and so on, a platform. The positioned themselves as the vanguard fighters against the demographic change in our country. Of course, the rallies focused on immigration numbers and Muslim migrants. The demonstrations showed that taking Islam out of diversity leaves diversity, that cutting immigration numbers still leaves immigration, that uniting this ‘Right’ creates confusion for a growing number of Australians on how to proceed with the related matters of immigration and identity. Do they defend the multiracial society with ‘Aussies values’, or do they seek to implode the false society? Big questions arise!
Andrew Hastie and his so-called Hard Right (sic) supporters in the Liberal Party sniff the wind. Before too long Hastie with topple the Liberal leader and espouse a patriotic conservatism (sic). He would reach out to One Nation. The revived Coalition would present itself as a type of British Reform Party, a type of Spanish Vox, a type of Brothers of Italy, more conservative dross dressed up as listening to people and forcing change.
As Pauline travels about with Gina Rinehart to US conservative conferences and espouses Australian trade and investment and salutes the flag and offers to curb immigration, her support from many areas grows and it shores up the Coalition. She doesn’t say what people are thinking, she thinks people should say what she says.
Do we ‘support’ One Nation?
The role for One Nation here is a crucial one for the success of (globalist) conservative rule. Yet, there is one danger which always exists when a satellite is operated. There is always the risk that some who tout for it, may believe it all to be real. And when the moment comes for some ‘change’ to occur and it just doesn’t, they become restive.
So, what should Australia First nationalists do? As we build on the ground and grow our resources, we should accept that the path to building a popular movement partly comes of others’ failings. We should say we are the future and make that plain. We cannot necessarily stop the advent of a new three party Coalition and its rise to government. Therefore, some might say, we ‘support’ it. Not really. Let us say: we support this rise of One Nation in the same way a rope supports a hanging man!
