DOES PAULINE HANSON NEED A FLU SHOT?

I'm not shaking the death rattle in Pauline Hanson's direction following the WA elections last weekend. One Nation's relatively poor showing was as much a reflection of Sandgroper annoyance concerning its intimate tango with the Liberal Coalition as it was with anything One Nation did or failed to do. In fact, One Nation may have been a victim of crossfire between a tired government and the voters. 

Pauline Hanson certainly wouldn't have improved her chances by being caught up in that ridiculous anti-vaccine controversy but, if the Trump phenomenon is any guide, reactionary nutters can say virtually anything these days and 'value-add' to their longer term prospects. 

The move to the right continues nationally and Hanson, whilst not personally beating a trail through the political undergrowth with a machete, is most definitely symptomatic of it. 

I believe that Hanson's virulence lies in the secret support that many people afford her. One Nation isn't something you actually admit to. But One Nation is something that you can covertly agree with. Its banner themes, of course, make for easy reading-

 

1. We should return to the past

2. Asian-background/ Muslim citizens eat babies

3. Welfare programs and recipients need to be trimmed

4. Charity begins at home. (At odds with the previous point but who says that it has to be consistent or make sense.)

 

I also reckon that much of this covert support comes from people like me, that is, boomer Australians. A significant minority of this sub-group partitions Oz into those who are 'real' Australians and those who aren't. Diversity is something that has to be avoided or endured rather than experienced and celebrated. And the behaviour of these punters reflects that predisposition.

 

Unfortunately, One Nation is going to be around for quite some time and, while the hushed support continues, it may even increase its political stocks.