The Dangerous Alliances of South Australian Politics: A Commentary
In the murky waters of Australian politics, alliances are often forged in the shadows, driven by pragmatism rather than principle. The recent decision by South Australia’s Liberal opposition to preference One Nation over Labor in the upcoming state election is a case in point. On the surface, it’s a strategic move to maximize electoral gains. But if you take a step back and think about it, this alliance reveals far deeper fissures in Australian politics—ones that challenge our values, test our tolerance, and raise questions about the future of democratic discourse.
The Pragmatism of Preferences
Let’s start with the mechanics. Preferencing is a tactical game in Australian elections, where parties recommend how voters should rank candidates on their ballots. The Liberals’ decision to place One Nation above Labor is, first and foremost, a calculated gamble. One thing that immediately stands out is the irony here: One Nation’s leader, Cory Bernardi, has repeatedly criticized the major parties as a “uni-party” unworthy of support. Yet, the Liberals are now effectively endorsing his party, despite Bernardi’s refusal to return the favor.
Personally, I think this speaks volumes about the desperation within the Liberal Party. With polls showing One Nation gaining ground—sometimes even surpassing the Liberals—this move feels less like a partnership and more like a survival tactic. What many people don’t realize is that preferencing isn’t just about winning seats; it’s about sending a message. By aligning with One Nation, the Liberals are signaling where they stand in the ideological spectrum, and it’s not a pretty picture.
The Bernardi Factor: A Study in Extremism
Cory Bernardi is no stranger to controversy. His comments linking gay marriage to bestiality, made over a decade ago but recently reaffirmed, are not just outdated—they’re dangerous. What makes this particularly fascinating is how the Liberals are willing to overlook such extremism for political gain. When Liberal leader Ashton Hurn claims she “didn’t see those comments” because she’s too busy, it feels like a convenient dodge. In my opinion, this isn’t just a failure of leadership; it’s a betrayal of the moderate values the Liberal Party once claimed to represent.
Bernardi’s remarks about Muslims are equally troubling. His assertion that “good Muslims” are incompatible with Australian values is not only factually wrong but deeply divisive. From my perspective, this kind of rhetoric doesn’t just alienate Muslim Australians—it undermines the very fabric of multiculturalism that Australia prides itself on. What this really suggests is that the Liberals are willing to court extremism if it means holding onto power.
The Broader Implications: A Slippery Slope
This alliance raises a deeper question: What does it mean for Australian politics when mainstream parties cozy up to the fringes? Labor’s decision to preference One Nation last (except in seats contested by disgraced former Liberals) feels like a principled stand, but it’s also a strategic one. The Greens and SA Best have rightly condemned Bernardi’s comments, but their outrage, while justified, feels almost expected.
What’s more interesting is the silence from moderate Liberals. Are they complicit, or simply powerless to stop the party’s rightward shift? If you take a step back and think about it, this isn’t just about South Australia—it’s a microcosm of a global trend where centrist parties are increasingly forced to choose between principle and power. The Liberals’ embrace of One Nation could be a harbinger of things to come, not just in Australia but in democracies worldwide.
The Human Cost: Voices from the Community
A detail that I find especially interesting is the response from Muslim leaders like Ahmed Zreika. His invitation to Bernardi to visit a mosque and engage in dialogue is both a challenge and an olive branch. It highlights the disconnect between the rhetoric of politicians and the lived experiences of communities. Zreika’s question—“Have you met a Muslim before?”—cuts to the heart of the issue. It’s a reminder that dehumanizing rhetoric has real consequences, and those consequences are felt by real people.
The anger expressed by SA Best’s Connie Bonaros is equally poignant. Her frustration isn’t just about the comments themselves but about the normalization of hate speech in political discourse. In my opinion, this is where the real damage lies. When extremism becomes acceptable, it’s not just the targeted groups who suffer—it’s democracy itself.
Looking Ahead: The Future of Australian Politics
As the March 21 election approaches, the Liberals’ alliance with One Nation will likely become a defining issue. But what happens after the votes are counted? If the Liberals succeed, will they double down on this strategy? And if they fail, will they learn from their mistake, or will they blame the moderates for not going far enough?
One thing is certain: Australian politics is at a crossroads. The decision to preference One Nation over Labor isn’t just a tactical move—it’s a moral one. Personally, I think the Liberals have made a Faustian bargain, trading their soul for a few extra votes. The question is whether the Australian electorate will let them get away with it.
Final Thoughts
If there’s one takeaway from this saga, it’s that politics is never just about policies or polls—it’s about values. The Liberals’ alliance with One Nation forces us to ask: What kind of society do we want to live in? One that embraces diversity and tolerance, or one that amplifies division and fear? In my opinion, the answer should be obvious. But in the messy, often ugly world of politics, nothing is ever that simple.
