At this stage there are far too few of them the spend time writing such a long article about One Nation.

Here we go again, a dog whistler trying to associate 'conservatism' pejoratively with his cause to maintain the rage with a convenient scapegoat. Hanson is but another populist perverting 'populism' as a legitimate aggregation of their views.

Very well reasoned and articulated! And absolutely spot on.

The people that this pernicious propaganda appeals to!? Must have a combined IQ Just a tad south of the average ambient temperature, surely?

Not for nothing is it writ large, you can fool some of the people all of the time! Only 30% off voters understand politics. Another 30% understand economics. Even so, all elections are ultimately by the remaining 40% who understand neither! Go figure?

If I were very naughty and were to photoshop and place a military cap on the Senator's head then a toothbrush stache on her upper lip?
Then colour those piercing pale blue eyes brown?
Who would she starkly remind you of? Jahwol?

No names no pack drill.

Even so, the very suggestion should have one or two of them trembling in veritable rage and shaking their cages in unrequited outrage? And without a single word or condemnation spoken! Alt-right? Well if the cap fits?
Alan B.

The author is certainly a confused fellow. He says” these kinds of insulting articulations are not what can be covered by claims to free speech.”
Does this mean that only the insults of the politically correct miscreants are covered by freedom of speech?
Is pride in “aboriginality” acceptable? I have seen no complaints about it, reprehensible as it is.
Why is not pride in, or approval of, europeanality, or whiteness, at least as acceptabl? It certainly has more to commend it.

Rob Cover’s uneducated state indicates something deficient in the educational institutions he attended.
He also attracted approval from the perpetually wrong and confused Allan B.

LL. Is just labelling the best you can do?

No logical or reasoned and persuasive contrary Argument?

I, therefore, stand by my assertion of the average IQ.

Is tha is not only the best you can do bu your entire argument?

You couldn't even spell my name correctly with just one L! Kinda supports my argument? Doesn't it?
Alan B.

So how much of the popular vote does ON get ? 10 % ? About as much as the Greens' ? [Wow, now I've pissed off 20 % of the population].

As a believer in universality, in equality and equal rights, I'm concerned about claims on both sides, usually dog-whistled, that one group or another is better or worse than others: as far as I'm concerned, it's OK to be Indigenous, to be white, to be a left-handed person of great age, to be African, to be Polynesian, to be Chinese or Indian or Peruvian or Lithuanian [hello, dear Foxy], to be any bloody thing. Nobody is entitled to more rights than any others.

I'm not all that much in favour of affirmative action for any 'member' of any group, given that those measures often seem to back-fire and end up disadvantaging the people they're meant to assist. Maybe it's the residual Marxist in me but completely equal rights, opportunities and obligations seem to me to be the best option for everybody.

My special obsession is Indigenous rights, opportunities and obligations: currently, about the equivalent of half of, say, a 20-year-old Indigenous age-group commences university study each year. Around sixty thousand (out of an adult population of about 400,000) are university graduates. That's a bit better than the three thousand of thirty years ago. Numbers of graduates double every decade or so now, and that rate may accelerate, much to the consternation of Indigenous elites in their efforts to control the entire Indigenous population.

I really can't seen any better goal than to fight for complete equality for everybody, no more and no less. So any whinge from Hanson and ON is little more than a diversion from that goal. Likewise from the pseudo-left. You feel aggrieved that somebody else may be doing okay ? Suck it up.

Joe