Anning and Hanson Vie for the Australian Nationalist Vote
The chase for the nationalist vote in Australia this week heated up with Senators Fraser Anning from Katter’s Australian Party and Pauline Hanson from One Nation making bold public statements on key issues important to Australian nationalists.
Fraser Anning was first elected as a One Nation Senator to replace Malcolm Roberts who was ruled ineligible by the High Court due to holding dual citizenship. He famously defected from One Nation on his first day in the Senate, sat as an independent before joining Katter’s Australian Party.
He was considered just another crossbench Senator until his maiden speech where he lamented the demise of the White Australia policy and most noteworthy called for plebiscite on immigration as a ‘final solution’ to the issue. His willingness to confront the immigration issue head on and not mince words as well as not backing down in the face of media and political outrage made him a household name overnight with Australian nationalists.
Meanwhile his former leader Pauline Hanson said she was “appalled by Fraser Anning’s speech. We are a multiracial society and I’ve always advocated you do not have to be white to be Australian” and that it was “straight from Goebbels’ handbook”. She faced an extreme backlash from her supporters with many accusing her of betraying her base and pandering to the political establishment.
Much of Hanson’s condemnation would have been motivated by animosity to Anning personally over his departure from One Nation. But on reflection Hanson would have listened to the feedback she was receiving from her base and seen the rise of Anning amongst nationalists as a threat to One Nation winning another Queensland Senate seat at the next election.
So in the Senate this week Pauline Hanson gave notice to move a motion for the Senate to acknowledge that it is okay to be white and to deplore the rise of an anti-white racism in Australia. It’s okay to be white is popular saying amongst nationalists in the western world in the face of social justice warriors accusing modern day white people of being responsible for all of the world’s ills.
Hanson appeared on the Bolt Report to discuss her motion armed with current Australian examples of anti-white racism and that if Australia is all about equality then surely job and accommodation discrimination against whites is wrong.
Fraser Anning meanwhile although he has become most known for his views against immigration in the Senate veraciously attacked the Safe Schools program which has been defunded federally but is still taught in its original form in Victoria.
Anning hypothesized that “Fifty years ago, if a communist pervert had proposed that our nation’s children be forced to listen to sexually deviant propaganda, they would probably have been strung up. Today, this disgusting garbage is called the Safe Schools program”.
Anning went on to attacking the central tenant of the Safe Schools program the LGBT agenda “Whether you identify as a boy, or a girl, wearing different clothes, it makes no difference. Even if you start having bits chopped off, you are actually only deluding yourself”.
Leftists on social media where horrified and triggered to no end calling Anning and Hanson’s respective actions a white supremacist race to the bottom to see who could scrap the bottom of the xenophobia and bigotry barrel deep enough. What probably rattled them greatest was that fact that there is enough nationalists in Australia whose votes there are to compete for.
In the Queensland Senate race Anning who is up for election next year needs to obtain a full Senate quota of 14.3% and so does the One Nation candidate, Hanson’s own term does not expire until 2022. 14.3% is a sizable segment of the voting population in Queensland and in other states for that matter.
The major parties still do their most to disavow nationalists activists and politicians, Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten famously shook hands to jointly condemn Anning’s maiden speech. Although this contest is only between two minor parties its development shows that nationalist policies still have enough electoral appeal to elect politicians.
The question is now who will win over the nationalist vote at the election, will it continue to be Pauline Hanson who has been its face for the last 20 plus years or has a new star been born in Fraser Anning who is willing to go into policy areas Hanson is no longer willing to go? How the answer plays out will be interesting to watch.