Dozens of studies on Hanson and Hansonism have been published. One of the reasons they rarely got public airing is that denigrating the 'elites' who wrote the studies was a big part of Hansonism, and of Howardism as well.

Hopefully we've moved on from the kind of politics that relies on sinking the boot into minorities, elite or otherwise.

“Feeling threatened by strangers is rooted in our survival instincts.”

Many Australians seem to deny this instinct, thinking that to acknowledge that they are human means that they are ‘racist’. It is this denial of human instinct and adherence to the artificial concept of political correctness that will eventually see Australia and all Western countries go under.

While there will be people who would talk about ‘change’ and the fact that we no longer mark out or scent our territory, human instinct cannot be changed. Only the way we go about protecting ourselves from ‘strangers’ has changed.

Prediciton in the media today - white people will be in the minority in America by 2050.

David Holden’s “change of consciousness” cannot overcome basic instincts. Brainwashing and weakness of character can suppress natural instinct; and the weak of character, in order to protect their new ‘beliefs’, then become very hostile towards those who are able to resist.

"Prediction in the media today - White people will be in the minority in America by 2050".

Lets see! 20% of the world population is white, and as the indigenous people of America are not white. That sounds a fair balance.!

The obvious lesson from Hansonism is that a significant proportion of the Australian electorate is both stupid and racist. Fortunately, they remain a minority, albeit a noisy and hateful one.

Brian Holden: "Xenophobia is the natural state to be in and a change in consciousness is required to step out of it"

Quite so. I think that "change in consciousness" is known as 'civilisation', and it is usually achieved in individuals via the process of socialisation, including education. It is evident that those unfortunate Australians who supported Hansonism had limited exposure to those civilising processes.

Xenophobia the natural state to be in? What garbage! The implication is that most people are racist like Pauline Hanson. It also assumes that the concept of race - an artifical construction - is somehow part of human nature (whatever that is).

Hanson only won Oxley in 1996 because she was still listed as the Liberal candidate on ballot papers after she was disendorsed at the last minute. In 1998 she lost her seat after redistribution. Since then she has been unable to win a seat even in the Senate where winning is easier than in the House of Representatives. Moreover, she was never able to shift the ALP's core constituency - she did more damage to the Liberals and the Nationals by splitting the conservative vote (Richard Court pointed this out when he lost the WA premiership in 2001).

In the end she turned out to be another opportunistic hack with a minority following and less successful than those perennial losers the National Party.

Maybe the lesson is that if you want to do time in the big house then aspiring politicians should follow her lead.

The obvious lesson from Hansonism is that a significant proportion of the Australian electorate is intolerant and racist. This was shown by the leftist media who actually hate free speech and are often intolerant of truth. Many of the professional protesters would not even allow another point of view other than their own to be presented. We saw a lady who was not well educated with some good and bad things to say. The 'champions' of free speech would not even allow people to go along and listen. The leftist intolerance was probably the greatest thing learned by Pauline Hanson who had more in common with them than they realised.