#hanson — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #hanson, aggregated by home.social.
-
Where's the love?
It's not enough
It makes us fight again and again and again
Where's the love?
Give it up -
#AusPol #Hanson #OtherStuffGenerally
Me, when I see a picture of Pauline Hanson on social media
“The Scoops Are Coming"
-
@jessta
#AltText4You
Flyer advertising new location for a protest planned by Campaign Against Racism and Fascism.The protest is on Monday (no date) at 5 pm Text Reads "Pauline Hanson is coming to Melbourne to launch One Nation’s candidates for Victoria
LET’S SHOW HANSON SHE’S NOT WELCOME”The updated location for protest is Victoria Road Reserve Hawthorn East
-
#Hanson #VicPol #MediaBan #IPA
ABC News, Guardian, and Age not welcome at #OneNation pressers.
can Whine Nation turn Victoria into the Deep South? According to them, Victoria is both financially AND morally bankrupt
perish the thought 🙄
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-08-03/one-nation-victoria-candiates-revealed/106989410
-
CW: Islamaphobia, Hate Speech, AntiSemitism, ACAB, and Pauline Hanson.
I’m sure NeoNazi’s won’t latch on to this at all as precedent to say the same thing about Jewish groups amongst others. #AusPol #Hanson #HateSpeach #ACAB #AFP #Islamaphobia
-
Where's the Love, Man?
-
Wishful thinking, or hopeful oucomes? Maybe credible outcomes no matter the stupidity of an electorate…
“One Nation will never be able to turn resentment into a credible policy – and if the Coalition continues following it deeper into an imported culture war – both will end up withering on the vine for a long time to come.”
Read more”:
https://www.newpolitics.com.au/p/the-road-to-nowhere-hansons-empty#AusPol #PHON #LNP #Junkets #RightWingNutJobs #TaxTheRich #Antifa #Mckenzie #Hanson #Gina #tRumpism #Beetroot #ManBitesDog
-
——
“I have never advocated for the White Australia policy,” Hanson saidyeah… nah, she’s just bereft it’s gone 🙄
and here’s a Hilarious line out of context, thanks Tess Ikonomou;
(City News)——
"Mr Joyce yelled “sit down” at something happening off camera, midway through a sentence.
“Sorry, it’s the dog,” he said.
———the figures vary, cos Gina does a little chopping and changing from time to time, but let’s say she owns or controls about 1.2% of Australia’s land mass.
for very many reasons, land is a great source of wealth, income, leverage etc and one would hope it is taxed accordingly.
thus, when Pauline defends her new bff, it’s hard to feel sympathy:
"“This is a woman that’s done it tough … and you think that she’s come with a silver spoon? She didn’t,” Senator Hanson said on Tuesday.
“She had to borrow everything and was flat out in the very start to pay the bills. She’s built up that company.
“A very smart, clever woman and even now to this day … who gives jobs to thousands of Australians? Who pays one of the companies’ biggest taxes in the state?”
— this seems, to me, to be a truly skewed view of reality.
i mean… cry me a river
-
@Su_G
that would be stretching $2 a day a long way 🤔someone mentioned donations to me recently, and i said there is probably some bot farm cranking out small donations —but the number of dinatiins would be implausible
-
@oscarjiminy
yeah… people have an intense dislike of annabel crabb for some reason, but i think she does an important job of giving people enough rope…
not that i can sit through the show, i’m too intolerant of people i dislike 😆 -
@oscarjiminy
the problem with that is that she likes to be a martyr, and as her conviction was overturned it would be playing right into her hands… even if she is probably innocent in much the same way that someone pardoned by trump is innocent
-
This article contains the best metaphor ever for Hansonism
https://theshot.net.au/uncategorized/hanson-is-just-the-tip-of-the-oligarchs-far-right-iceberg/
-
4/x
#Auspol #Hanson #Hewson #AustralianInstitutions
In terms of practicalities, it is hard to see how a new funding model separating the ABC’s city and country audiences could work. The ABC supports all of Australia and to further constrain its funding would seriously restrict its capacity to produce news across the country, along with Australian drama and children’s television. This would also put a real strain on its community emergency broadcasting, and local news and radio would likely suffer.
It is unfortunate that some bitter and twisted members of the Coalition are also calling for the privatisation of the national broadcaster. Do we really want an Australia where local voices and creativity are swamped by the global streaming and technology giants – a further Americanisation of our country?
Most importantly, in relation to the institution of our media, never should we see a leader threaten journalists for daring to pose a legitimate question. Hanson’s treatment of Guardian Australia reporter Sarah Martin was a conspicuous example of her vindictiveness towards the media, as was her banning the ABC from press conferences. All this is a direct lift from the Trump playbook. In her National Press Club question time, Hanson ducked a request to hold daily pressers during the next campaign.
There are also crucial questions to be explored about what Pauline Hanson would do with the Fair Work Commission. In a cost-of-living crisis, she has attacked struggling workers. She claims to represent ordinary Australians and yet has opposed all recent increases in the minimum wage and industrial relations reforms that have clearly benefited them. Meanwhile, her wage has increased significantly, despite her continuing failure to fully attend to her Senate duties.
It is also hard to understand Hanson’s opposition to childcare, especially as a single mother. Undoubtedly, the system needs reform and improvement. There is a widespread public belief that it is easily abused and exploited and that it still falls short of helping those families in most need. Carers and early-childhood educators are mostly women and are often underpaid by profit-making centres.
Finally, among the most disturbing features of the Hanson circus for me is her constant brandishing of the term “patriot”. Whatever Hanson’s disenfranchised, disappointed and disillusioned constituency may be, true patriots they are not. Just like Donald Trump, she has appropriated the term to alienate anyone who does not share her very narrow and wildly underdeveloped vision for our country. Her irresponsible use of this term is simply divisive: it is destructive nationalism.
Our country needs to be united. Real patriots – if this term is so important, it must be understood – want a country that strives to be better for all Australians, not just a select few. Hanson’s vision is dangerous.fin
-
3/x The value of our institutions cont
And though they are all influenced by the experiences in Europe and the US, where surging migration has become a serious issue, these scenarios are not replicated in Australia. We are an immigrant nation. More than half our population is born overseas or has at least one parent born overseas. One of our major policy successes since World War II has been our development of a tolerant multicultural, multiracial, multireligious society that is the envy of many other countries – and the benefit to Australians is a richness of experiences, opportunities and lifestyle. This needs to be recognised and seen as a work in progress to be nurtured, not undone by silly calls for a monoculture.
First-generation migrants will have significant sway in the outer metro and city seats that Hanson hopes to win – and many of them will not be receptive to her message, including her anti-Muslim rhetoric. Moreover, though her remarks on immigration may be “raw meat” to her base, she can’t push too hard – business owners and farmers in regional communities in particular need the workforce.
One of Hanson’s most Trumpian approaches is her vilification of the media. She has threatened to abolish SBS and to partly privatise the ABC, charging people in the cities a subscription fee while maintaining free services to regional Australia.
We have a commitment to free speech and a strong independent public broadcaster in the ABC. Our media represents our commitment to the truth and accountability.
The attack on SBS is supposed to signify an end to multiculturalism, as Hanson sees the service encouraging reliance on languages other than English. Hanson wants to demonise those who speak other languages in their homes, and who educate their kids accordingly. This dig at the broadcaster is also to the detriment of the Australian viewing public who, like my family and me, would miss SBS’s excellent programs and entertainment – including the World Cup soccer.
Hanson’s threat regarding the ABC is just cheap politics. ABC News is the market leader for genuine and reliable news, while her preferred outlet, Sky News, operates more as an unregistered political party. It runs explicit agendas, throwing its weight behind the Coalition in recent federal polls, increasingly ineffectually as their champions Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton have disappointed them. I assume Hanson is hoping to shift Sky’s support to One Nation. She may well achieve this, with the support of her new chief policy adviser, mining magnate Gina Rinehart, whose companies are also significant funders of Sky News events. -
5/x
In the past two years, there have been opportunities for the political class to deal with her in a serious fashion. A few, such as independent candidate Michelle Milthorpe and journalist and Saturday Paper columnist Paul Bongiorno, recommended the obvious, as did I: refuse to preference or negotiate. This strategy has been used against radical-right parties in parts of Europe. The evidence on whether this contains or entrenches an “us against the system” narrative is mixed, although the demise of Viktor Orbán in Hungary shows how it can be done with a laser focus on corruption, lies and false nationalism. Many have recommended understanding and addressing the underlying grievance without the racialised framing. Both Milthorpe and Bongiorno’s analyses of regional disaffection point towards key issues: housing, health access, mobile coverage. If the material grievance gets addressed directly, the diversionary appeal has less with which to work.
Sustained local presence of incumbents and hopeful candidates between elections, which Milthorpe argues is necessary to push back the tide of resentment, could relieve some of the rage of the new converts to One Nation. I doubt this alone will defeat the emotional freight of communities ignored for too long and attended to only during campaigns. Hanson’s appeal now is not just the cookers, the alienated and gullible Australians, but also those who believe the two-party system has failed them.
Hanson was legitimised by John Howard’s refusal to censure her, by the decision to negotiate with her and finally do preference deals. Her politics has been borrowed by the Coalition and left largely unchallenged by a cheapened media. Now, she is being supercharged with money from Australia’s richest person. It’s possible no single act could have stopped her across the past 30 years, although many individual acts have made it worse. Much needs to be done in the next two years to stall her rise. As the Irish statesman John Philpot Curran said: “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”fin
-
4/x
During the 1998 election, Coalition, Labor and minor party preferences kept her from winning the seat of Blair, despite her topping the primary vote. This is the exemplar of democratic mechanics successfully containing her. Also in 1998, Tony Abbott established the “Australians for Honest Politics Trust”, a funded legal campaign that helped trigger One Nation’s organisational collapse but also handed Hanson the grievance story she has run on ever since.
In 2003, she was convicted of electoral fraud and served 11 weeks in prison. The conviction was unanimously quashed on appeal. This was a cautionary case against legal overreach, which in this instance produced a martyrdom narrative rather than containment. In less than a year, she was a finalist on Dancing with the Stars.
After Hanson’s return to the Senate in 2016, the major parties made a decision to negotiate with her, voting with her on welfare cuts and trying to trade company tax cuts for her support. This is arguably where normalisation through ordinary deal-making took hold. From this point, it became unlikely that Hanson could be contained. The wheels were turning on the car crash that has since arrived in polling.
In 2018, Hanson put a motion in the Senate, a very rare instance of her doing the work expected of a senator. The motion itself was a proto-fascist stunt, an assertion of the American white supremacist phrase “It’s okay to be white”. Coalition senators voted for it, and then they called it an administrative error, reversing it once the backlash had landed. The correction was made only after the fact and only under real public pressure. It gave us a preview of the success One Nation is enjoying today, aided by a hapless and now disintegrating Coalition.
The media has a role in this, too. They have treated her as entertainment and consistently given her a platform. They have failed to fact-check her in real time, allowing her lies to hang around unchallenged. She has a natural talent for what American Republican political strategist Steve Bannon described as “flooding the zone with shit”. This is now amplified by a well-funded, sophisticated online campaign of advertisements, animated video series, memes and other propaganda, spread exponentially by her supporters, many of them from the United States and other countries, by bots and the algorithmic surge that has overwhelmed ordinary political debate in Australia. She continues on in that hurt, tremulous voice, reading as if from a hillbilly encyclopaedia about her fears of “Asians”, “immigrants”, “Aborigines”, “multiculturalism”, “lazy workers”, “late-term abortions” and so many other conspiracy theories and irrational interpretations of modernity. -
3/x
None of this happens for free. Mining billionaire Gina Rinehart has put Hanson on private jets to Mar-a-Lago and the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, hosted by the American Conservative Union. This year she gave One Nation a $1.5 million campaign plane and helped organise millions in other donations. Her own donations to the party, which will remain uncapped until the end of this year, will not be revealed until February. Rinehart’s fortune traces to her father, Lang Hancock, who in 1984 proposed dosing Aboriginal communities’ water supplies to sterilise them so they would “breed themselves out”. Nobody is suggesting Rinehart shares that view today, although it is fair to say that an extractive fortune, built in an industry with every reason to resent Indigenous land rights and the institutions that enforce them, is now bankrolling a political program aimed at dismantling those same protections.
How did it come to this? How could one in three Australian voters prefer Hanson as prime minister? At any point in the past three decades, could something have been different? Could she have been stopped?
In 1996, the mechanism that should have stopped Hanson worked to an extent but was too late. The Liberal Party disendorsed her once her comments on Aboriginal welfare became a problem, yet by then the ballots had been printed with her name on them as the Liberal candidate. The real failure was upstream: preselection vetting didn’t catch what she’d already been saying as an Ipswich councillor. That’s the most concrete “preventable” point in the story: a more careful candidate-screening process, applied earlier, plausibly would have kept her off the ballot in the first place. Beyond that, her win in Oxley was part of a broader Coalition landslide over which local party machinery had little control.
The more consequential and deliberate choice came after she won. Then prime minister John Howard declined to censure her and described her rise as evidence that a “pall of political correctness” had lifted. That was deliberate. As a sitting prime minister with real authority over his own party’s tone, he chose not to isolate her. Many historians treat this as the bigger missed opportunity, not the preselection mess. After Howard’s exploitation of her nativist hatreds to shape his own policy towards asylum seekers, there were several attempts to prevent her becoming legitimate, and then, from 2016, the Coalition capitulated entirely. -
2/x
In her first speech to parliament, in 1996, Hanson warned Australia was being “swamped by Asians” who “form ghettos and do not assimilate”. In 2006, she said African immigrants brought disease and were of “no benefit to this country whatsoever”. In her 2016 speech, after being elected to the Senate, the formula returned unchanged except for its target: Australia was now in danger of being “swamped by Muslims”. In February this year, she told an interviewer she had “no time for radical Islam”, whose adherents “hate Westerners”, and said she could not accept there were “good Muslims” – a claim so far over the line that she partially apologised, then immediately undercut the apology by insisting she was “not backing down”. Transgender Australians are the newest addition to the list, accused in her press club speech of running an ideology that has “penetrated almost every regulatory authority” to “redefine humanity”.
Each target is different, yet the operation performed on each is identical: identify a minority, declare it the cause of national decline, demand the dismantling of whatever protects it. Hanson has called for the abolition or defunding of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, the Human Rights Commission, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, the Therapeutic Goods Administration, the ABC, SBS and the United Nations. Each has been named an enemy not for any proven failure but simply for existing to protect someone other than the “mainstream Australians” for whom Hanson claims to speak.
Then there is the leader cult. This is not a metaphor but a clause in a party’s constitution. In August 2017, One Nation’s governing document was rewritten so Hanson would serve as president “for as long as she may wish”. She was given the power to hand-pick her successor, who would serve indefinitely before any return to internal elections. A former party president, who had warned in 2014 that the change “could be seen as dictatorial”, later told a national newspaper he had greeted the final draft with a mock Hitler salute. Hanson herself explained that she dissolved the party’s original branch structure because ordinary members caused her “trouble”.
What stops all this short of fascism proper is that Hanson has never proposed abolishing parliament. She stands for election and accepts her Senate suspensions within the chamber’s own rules. Yet a movement that observes democratic form while gutting its substance is exactly what political scientists studying global authoritarianism say is hardest to identify in time. These movements rarely provide one unmistakeable transgression that would make refusal easy. -
1/x
Can Pauline Hanson be stopped?Marcia Langton is an Aboriginal writer, a descendant of the Yiman people of Queensland. She is professor of Australian Indigenous studies at the University of Melbourne.
27 June, 2026 The Saturday Paper
——————
Pauline Hanson’s populist and mostly false declarations have changed little in 30 years. They are her personal grievances writ large for an audience hungry to attribute their own grievances to particular races and religions. The normal process through which her “policies” would be held to account by journalists and other politicians has largely failed. Even if it is self-evident that what she “promises” cannot be implemented, not without cruel and unconstitutional measures, not to mention catastrophic economic repercussions, her electoral base has at least tripled.
Hanson has built a myth of her martyrdom. Hers is a victim pageant and many of the main players in the media seem to be transfixed. At the National Press Club last week, she delivered a 90-minute rave with barely a murmur from journalists who had the opportunity to question her sustained catalogue of lies and misinformation. Hanson has only ever had to ignore and outlast outrage, and outrage burns out on a predictable schedule.
Last week, Hanson said the thing she has been building towards for three decades: Australia, she announced, must be monocultural. No differences, not even slight ones, managed at the margins. Her vision was for one culture, one umbrella, the rest negotiated away or defunded into irrelevance. It was delivered in her familiar, folksy exasperation, the voice of a woman who has “had a gutful”. That tone is doing a lot of work. It is the reason a program that would otherwise read as a textbook case of proto-fascism is instead received as some kind of common sense.
Proto-fascism is defined as a movement that borrows fascism’s characteristic moves. It depends on scapegoating ethnic and religious minorities, organising around a leader whose personal authority overrides party democracy, and treating pluralist and international institutions with open contempt. It differs from fascism only in that it lacks fascism’s revolutionary ambition to abolish the constitutional order itself. Measured against Hanson’s record, the fit is not loose or rhetorical; it is almost exact, and has been since her days as a councillor in Ipswich. -
Niki Savva
'The combination of arrogance and ignorance displayed by Hanson at the club and her subsequent ludicrous attempts to clean up should have demolished the fantasy that after 30 years of grasping and griping, bigotry and outright racism, One Nation was fit to govern...The performance did stall her rise and revive the government, yet unsurprisingly...One Nation continues to threaten to obliterate the Coalition'
-
The internet doing what it does.
Someone mentioned Pauline Hanson’s first husband, and when I went looking for more information, found a page that seems to be telling us some serious facts about Pauline Hanson.
-
stead of piggy backing off other folks' posts (and pissing everybody off) i guess i should just try to articulate cold
on hanson and all the attention she's getting, folks reevaluating, pegging her for potential prime minister etc
think it fair to ask how much of trumpism's about trump? folks look at the mess and the pattern they see is the party and the base, the democrats in disarray, and figure it's about trump, his personal appeal (as distinct from his 'agenda') and figure on his having a kind of messianic charisma
nothing new in this (re flyover country ect) but as with hanson i reckon it fair to lay it square at the feet of the failings of our norms and institutions in so far as what we've been promised (how we've been given to understand the substance of those norms and institutions) and what they've delivered in the round
-
A Journey From the Senate to Prime Minister
17 Dec, 1967 — Harold Holt disappeared at Cheviot Beach.
Whether he was dead or on his way to China, the position of PM was now deemed vacant.John Gorton, Senator for Victoria, was leader of the Liberal Party, and had the confidence of the majority in House of Representatives. (McMahon did not)
Gorton was sworn in as PM on 10 January 1968.
He resigned from senate 1 February 1968 to contest the by-election for Holt's old House of Representatives seat of Higgins
On 24 February he won the seat comfortably.Although he was still technically a senator when he was sworn in as prime minister, this was supposedly a non-issue because neither house of parliament was in session between his swearing in as prime minister and his resignation from the Senate.
——-
Could Pauline Hanson become Prime Minister from the Senate?Perhaps the most important questions are:
👉🏻 can she demonstrate she has the confidence of the House?
👉🏻 can she find enough H of R candidates to stand at a general election who would not only be successful, but also remain loyal to her long enough for her to remain PM while she moves from the Senate to the House?As much as I loathe Hanson’s values, and doubt her judgement on anything, I understand why so many people admire her.
People trust that she is exactly who she says she is.
She is a known entity in a way few career politicians, and few politicians bound by cabinet loyalty, can ever be.
What people see is what they trust they will get with her - and better the devil they know.As much as Hanson cannot possibly be the solution to anything, for a frightening number of voters, it’s the other major players in australian politics who are the problem.
I doubt Hanson would ever resign the Senate now — she’s cruising towards a nice fat pension, and is doing well where she is.
I’m sure she believes that with someone trustworthy in the House (perhaps her daughter) whine neurone can build on her legacy, but I’m not sure fans will automatically give her the same level of credit and trust they currently give to her.
-
vowels are everything in accents
the accent of a kiwi (especially someone from the south island) features vowel sounds i cannot imitate at all
when watching tv i identify the canadian actors by their vowel sounds; for example,
“about” is invariably pronounced “aboat”even my worst typos are comprised of bizarre vowel sounds
i remember reading a novel 500 years ago — i think it was one of edna o’brien’s — and though i recall none of the plot points, there was a running gag of telephone calls with someone who strangled her vowels. after several calls, the main character finally snapped and said “i hope your vowels move” before hanging up.
Pauline hanson always sounded to me like she is choking on her bile, or as if she has “the morbid sore throat”, but i will accept “saying her vowels backwards” as a good description. At least it would match the direction of her brain.
-
“ The only woman in Australia who says her vowels backwards”
😃😁😆
https://theshot.net.au/uncategorized/trash-talking-pauline-at-the-press-club/
