In a classic literary skit, 1990s comedy duo Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie imagined how charismatic Adolf Hitler’s racist speeches could be if they were delivered in English. I asked if it was okay.
This is, of course, a joke without an answer, but there is little doubt that national characteristics such as history, public debate, and electoral systems have shaped the way politics is discussed in conceptually open societies. there is no.
Political actors who act across these informal boundaries invite controversy and condemnation. Violations can end careers.
However, such limits are by no means completely static and may now be breaking down altogether as the failures of neoliberalism and globalism foster a growing distrust of the old orthodoxy.
Increasingly, high-profile nationalist and populist movements in many countries are making a virtue of eschewing normal political etiquette in favor of divisive hyperbole.
In the age of digital global media, these xenophobic forces can also cross-pollinate.
For example, within New Zealand’s Luxon coalition government, far-right support for the revocation of Māori rights under the Treaty of Waitangi is emboldened by Australia’s refusal to recognize Indigenous peoples in its constitution.
In recent weeks, ultra-conservative Liberal MPs in two Australian states (South Australia and Queensland) have been involved in attempts to re-criminalize abortion.
The resurgence of the inflammatory debate, which had largely been settled in Australia, seemed to come out of nowhere. In fact, it probably came from post-Roe v. Wade America.
The rise of unpleasant populism
Such is the extent of President Donald Trump’s aggressive populism that he now publicly describes his opponent, Kamala Harris, as a “shit vice president.”
Mr. Trump’s viability as the Republican presidential nominee was unthinkable when he incited the deadly U.S. Capitol riot in 2021, but he has demonstrated a code of civility and even long-established laws. This indicates that it may be politically contested. This extends to the election results themselves.
In some democracies, Trump’s repeat performance and his bellicose disdain for the constraints of “elite” processes appear to have inspired a destructive new political chutzpah. Examples include the UK (Nigel Farage’s reforms), Austria (Herbert Kickle’s far-right Liberal Party), Germany (AfD), France (Marine Le Pen’s National Rally), and Argentina (radical liberal Javier Kickle’s National Rally). President Millais), and perhaps Australia.
Things are calm in Australia so far.
Australia’s institutional democratic structures, such as compulsory preferential voting, the Westminster parliamentary tradition, and the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), have a moderating influence on political debate. Successful competitors have typically focused their efforts on winning in the middle.
But as the primary vote share of major parties declines, new electoral opportunities on the periphery proliferate.
What makes Peter Dutton different?
Since ascending to the Liberal leadership, Dutton’s pitch to voters (including those whose party capitulated to independents in centrist communities in 2022) has been less centrist and more traditional. It is aimed at disaffected suburbanites who have allied with the Labor Party.
Like Mr. Trump, whose base of support is primarily white working-class voters, Mr. Dutton appears to be avoiding urban centers in favor of pursuing suburban and regional grievances. This includes blue-collar voters who are disillusioned with institutional politics and alienated by what Dutton perceives as Labour’s capture of elite cosmopolitanism and ‘woke’ politics.
Dutton, like Trump, has used threats to dissuade “woke” CEOs and “crazy left-wing” journalists at ABC and the Guardian.
Central to Dutton’s suburban strategy is a Trumpian disdain for institutions and “elite” overtones.
Even the AEC, widely regarded as one of the most trusted institutions in the country, was fair game for Dutton in the voice referendum debate. Ahead of the referendum, he suggested the election campaign had been “rigged” to favor “yes” views.
Rather than overloading the system or skewing it to favor a “yes” vote, just make it a fair process.
Instead of moderation, a clear us-versus-them position emerges. Dutton proposes solving climate and energy policy challenges with a radical and expensive switch to nuclear power. This is aimed at discrediting Labour’s “ideological” renewable energy investment program and alleviating the Coalition’s responsibility for decades of climate change denialism and inaction.
Mr Dutton, emboldened by his defeat in the Voyce referendum and his frontal attack on big business, appears to be hardening as the next election approaches.
He argues for deep immigration cuts, with rhetoric suggesting that immigrants cause high housing costs, traffic congestion, long GP wait times, rising crime rates and social disharmony.
Last Thursday, he confirmed a two-year ban on foreigners and temporary residents buying second-hand homes during his term as prime minister.
He said “Australians” were being “outbid”.
“This is the situation that many first home buyers are currently facing,” he said in a post on “I will make sure that the
Subtlety is not just one of Dutton’s tools of the trade. For example, while he summons moral clarity and expresses unconditional support for Israel, he rarely acknowledges the enormous loss of Palestinian and Lebanese lives.
His absolutism is so evident that he has withdrawn from his customary bipartisan position on the Government’s motion for parliamentary condolences for the victims of October 7, 2023.
The law, on the other hand, calls for the arrest of pro-Palestinian demonstrators for displaying flags, even though the law is aimed at banning incitement rather than preventing political expression.
Regarding China, Dutton painted Albania’s Labor government as “too weak” to stand up to China or prepare for a potential battle. He told Nine’s Karl Stefanovic in 2022:
“The only way we can maintain peace is by preparing for war and becoming strong as a nation, not cowering, bending our knees, and weakening.
Taken together, Dutton’s bullish oppositionism combines elements of Tony Abbott’s uniform aggressiveness and defiant Trumpism. This includes attacks on individual journalists and a preference for friendly interviews by media outside the capital.
Will it work?
Australian opinion polls paint a confusing picture. Meanwhile, Australians are wary of Trump’s vindictive and capricious nature. A recent poll in nine newspapers found that only one in five Australians supported the Republican Party as the next US president.
However, about half of all voters surveyed appear to want a coalition government that leans significantly to the right under Dutton’s leadership.
Will Donald Trump’s highly successful tactics work in Australia? Neil Redmond/Associated Press
Dutton’s bold actions may be a big part of his appeal, as is common with Americans. In an electorate with divided attention, competent procedural administration has a hard time overcoming the headline-grabbing clarity conveyed by strong language and simple solutions.
Whether campaigning against indigenous crimes in Alice Springs, advocating for lawsuits and the sale of major grocery retailers, or demanding absolute and unconditional loyalty to Israel, Dutton’s rhetoric Speak directly and intuitively.
The 2025 election will be fought over the cost of living and the government’s limited success in protecting ordinary voters.
Mr. Dutton is adding to voters’ anguish and cynicism about the effectiveness of politics that focuses on line and length to advance deep-rooted issues.
In short: Trumpism with Australian characteristics.
