Tuesday, June 30, 2026

One Nation doesn't exist

Embed from Getty Images

Recent polls for federal politics have seen One Nation rise in the polls to become the default Opposition, displacing the Liberal/National coalition. Discouragement with the ability of the Coalition to deliver on anything that the public wants have led the public to deliver a protest vote to One Nation of such a proportion as to make them the prospective alternative government.

The theory that Pauline Hanson could be our next Prime Minister has a number of problems, not least of which is the fact that she would have to shift from the Senate to the House in a specific seat. One of the other main problems is the requirement of an alternative government to provide options for a full shadow cabinet. Perhaps it is forgiveable in the short term, given ON's current Parliamentary members are so sparse compared to their poll numbers. Structurally, though, the problem came to a head this week in the wake of Hanson's "monoculture" rant during her National Press Club address. Three polls this week showed Labor clawing back three points from both ON and the Libs, and Hanson's personal ratings dropping by a lot more. That's enough evidence to judge that there's a real shift in electoral judgement.

(Sorry for the throat-clearing prose telling you what you already know... it's painfully habitual, from my journalism training. I haven't yet learned how to just dive in with spicy takes like a true blogger, even after all these years. I will put it in italics in future, so you can skip it.)

There is no such thing in Australia as a "monoculture". When pressed, Pauline Hanson threw up the names of Paul Hogan and Norman Gunston as examples of the culture she likes. Paul Hogan, to his eternal credit, answered by calling Pauline Hanson a "pelican". This peculiarly Australian insult is not particularly well-defined, but I see it as being this: a weird white bird with a big mouth, stinking of fish.

Right-wingers can't identify any part of Australian culture they like. They may mention Dave Hughes, but they don't like his comedy, just when he gobs off about taxes on socials. They can't even bring themselves to cite Barry Humphries, who was a similar late convert to scrofulous right-wing whinging but wore womens' clothing so that's right out. A similar thing is happening in America right now, where even Milli Vanilli rejected Donald Trump.

The next argument I get on this point is that Australian culture is actually our freedoms and laws. Bullshit! If Pelican meant democracy, she would have said democracy, not culture. What these idiots actually hate is Muslims, so they pretend Sharia law is going to crawl from under their beds and enslave their children.

One Nation's polling numbers were the softest yet seen in Australian politics. It is a protest vote, not serious. At the first moment when Hanson's silliness endured a skerrick of critical scrutiny, it was shown to be contentless.

Does that mean ON can't win an election? Clearly not. Trump got elected twice. The party may get into a power-sharing arrangement with the Libs in Victoria later this year, if current poll trends hold up in November.

It does mean, nevertheless, that ON can't govern. Its fervent cultists think that is a feature, not a bug. I have faith that a significant majority of voters don't want to burn everything down DOGE-style, but would prefer to see leaders who can solve problems instead of creating them.

Tuesday, June 16, 2026

There is no deal

Embed from Getty Images

Welcome back to Loaded Dogma, an Australian political blog. I have not posted for ten years. I will try not to leave ten years until the next entry.

I have been moved to blog again because I wanted to get out in full my theory as to why the Iran war is not going to end any time soon. In the spirit of Hemingway, I will try to use brief and spare language.

Donald Trump believes in bilateralism. This is at the heart of his Art Of The Deal manifesto, albeit mostly ghostwritten and not made explicit in the text. This is why his people continue to fail at the Middle East peace process in general, and ending this war in particular.

The Iran war is a three-cornered contest: Israel, Iran and America. Trump's preferred negotiating technique is not to get all three parties in a room. It is not even two combatants in a room. His people talk to Pakistan, the Iranians talk to Pakistan, and they come to separate agreements with different text, with Israel not part of the process.

That is great for creating instant headlines and generating short-term media hits, as Trump is enjoying right now. A deal has been agreed upon, shout the headlines and newscasters. Except... there is no "deal".

There is a list of demands and concessions that the US agreed to. There is a similar but different list Iran agreed to. There is no "deal" that merges the two. Newspapers and TV are lying on Trump's behalf. They are mugs.

Baudrillard (pictured) would recognise this terrain. The peace deal is a simulacrum, existing in media coverage but not actually on paper anywhere, let alone agreed to by warring parties. Trump wants it to be hyperreal in the Baudrillardian sense, but over time the glimmer fades and we realise its ephemerality.

We as witnesses are not searching for truth here; we yearn for solidity. None presents itself.