The Resurgence of Pauline Hanson: How Western Politics Weaponizes Immigration to Mask Systemic Failures

The Alarming Poll Surge of One Nation

Senator Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party has experienced a striking resurgence in Australian politics, climbing to polling levels not seen since the late 1990s. Recent surveys place the far-right party at 14% support—its highest since 1998—with significant potential to gain additional seats in Australia’s 76-member Senate. This political momentum comes despite Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Labor government maintaining a lead in national polls and the conservative Liberal Party hitting historic lows. Hanson’s chief of staff, James Ashby, boldly claims that “Pauline was the original Trump,” suggesting the public is finally “catching up” to her long-standing warnings about mass migration.

Domestic Drivers of Xenophobic Politics

The article reveals that Hanson’s revival stems primarily from local frustrations rather than external influences. Australia faces severe cost-of-living pressures, housing shortages, and record-high migration inflows, with net migration reaching 739,000 in 2023 and nearly 600,000 in 2024 as international students and temporary workers returned post-COVID. A recent Australian Election Study report shows voter concern over immigration has doubled to a record high 6% in 2025. These economic anxieties have created fertile ground for Hanson’s anti-immigrant messaging, even as Liberal leader Sussan Ley attempts to reject claims that infrastructure strain is primarily caused by migrants.

Strategic Shifts and Political Realignments

One Nation has strategically evolved its communication approach, shifting away from traditional media toward direct social-media engagement. The party has invested A$300,000 in a satirical animated series mocking “woke” issues that has reportedly garnered 50 million views. This digital strategy aims to expand the party’s reach and drive turnout for Hanson’s town hall events. The political landscape has also been reshaped by Barnaby Joyce’s departure from the National Party and his openness to joining One Nation, underscoring the pressure inside conservative ranks. Pollster Gary Morgan notes that Australia’s preferential voting system positions One Nation to secure greater influence in the Senate.

Historical Context and Parallels

The current situation echoes historical patterns where migration becomes a political lightning rod during economic uncertainty. Former Howard-era strategist Arthur Sinodinos notes that conservative hardening on migration in 2001 successfully undercut One Nation, suggesting history may repeat if the Liberal Party recalibrates again. Hanson’s political style remains consistently polarizing—she made international headlines after wearing a burka into parliament and was suspended for a week, an act both condemned and celebrated among her base. Her resurgence reflects a familiar global pattern where economic anxieties transform migration into the easiest political target.

The Hypocrisy of Western Immigration Discourse

The resurgence of Pauline Hanson’s xenophobic politics represents more than just an Australian phenomenon—it exemplifies how Western nations systematically weaponize immigration discourse to divert attention from their own policy failures. Instead of addressing genuine structural issues like housing shortages, cost-of-living pressures, and wage stagnation, politicians like Hanson exploit migration as an easy scapegoat. This pattern reveals the bankruptcy of Western political systems that would rather blame vulnerable communities than implement meaningful economic reforms.

Australia’s case is particularly ironic given that nearly half of its residents are either migrants or children of migrants. The country’s multicultural identity is deeply woven into its daily life, making the migration debate not just about policy but about social cohesion and belonging. Yet opportunistic politicians continue to exploit economic anxieties to push divisive agendas that threaten the very fabric of multicultural societies.

The Global Pattern of Diversionary Politics

Hanson’s rise echoes similar trends across the Western world, from Trump’s border rhetoric in the United States to right-wing movements throughout Europe. These movements consistently follow the same playbook: when economic conditions deteriorate due to failed policies, identify immigrants as the culprit rather than addressing root causes. This diversionary tactic serves to protect established power structures and economic interests that benefit from the status quo.

The article mentions how Washington has directed U.S. diplomatic missions, including in Australia, to gather data on migrant-linked crime—a clear attempt to export America’s toxic immigration discourse globally. This represents a form of ideological imperialism where Western nations, particularly the United States, impose their framing of migration issues on other countries, undermining local contexts and solutions.

Economic Reality Versus Political Rhetoric

What makes Hanson’s rhetoric particularly insidious is its disconnect from economic reality. Former strategist Arthur Sinodinos correctly warns that policy must be economically grounded and that scapegoating migrants risks alienating multicultural constituencies. Migration has been empirically shown to contribute positively to economies through labor force growth, innovation, and cultural exchange. The real issues—housing shortages, infrastructure gaps, and cost-of-living pressures—require comprehensive policy solutions, not xenophobic soundbites.

Australia’s migration surge post-COVID primarily consisted of international students and temporary workers—groups that contribute significantly to the economy through tuition payments, consumption, and filling labor shortages. Rather than acknowledging these contributions, politicians like Hanson prefer simplistic narratives that blame immigrants for complex structural problems.

The Failure of Mainstream Politics

Hanson’s resurgence signals profound voter frustration with major parties rather than a genuine ideological shift toward extremism. The Liberal Party’s historic low and internal divisions have created an opening for right-wing voters to shift toward One Nation. This demonstrates the failure of mainstream conservative politics to address legitimate economic concerns while maintaining principled positions on migration.

The Labor government’s response—claiming migration levels are already trending lower and must continue to fall—represents a capitulation to xenophobic framing rather than a defense of multicultural values. This failure of leadership on all sides creates a vacuum that figures like Hanson eagerly fill with simplistic, divisive solutions.

Lessons for the Global South

For nations of the Global South, Australia’s experience offers crucial lessons about the durability of colonial mindset even in supposedly multicultural Western societies. The ease with which immigration becomes weaponized reveals how superficial Western commitments to multiculturalism truly are when economic pressures emerge. This stands in stark contrast to civilizational states like India and China, which approach migration through different philosophical frameworks less susceptible to such divisive politics.

The Western model of nation-states—based on Westphalian principles—inherently creates exclusionary boundaries and categories that facilitate us-versus-them politics. Civilizational states approach identity and belonging through more organic, historical frameworks that are less vulnerable to such divisive manipulation.

Toward a Human-Centered Approach

Ultimately, the migration debate should center human dignity rather than political expediency. Migration is a fundamental human reality that has existed throughout history and will continue as long as economic and opportunity disparities persist. Rather than capitulating to xenophobic framings, political leaders should address the legitimate economic concerns driving anxiety while defending the principles of multicultural coexistence.

Policies should focus on managing migration flows humanely while investing in housing, infrastructure, and social services to accommodate population changes. This requires courage to confront misinformation and defend the contributions migrants make to societies. It also requires acknowledging that economic anxieties stem from policy failures and structural issues rather than migration itself.

Conclusion: Rejecting Divisive Politics

Pauline Hanson’s resurgence represents a dangerous moment for Australian society and offers warning signs for the broader international community. The ease with which migration becomes weaponized during economic difficulty reveals the fragility of multicultural commitments in Western societies. For nations of the Global South, this underscores the importance of developing independent approaches to migration that reflect their own historical experiences and philosophical traditions rather than importing Western framings.

The solution lies not in capitulating to xenophobic rhetoric but in addressing the legitimate economic concerns driving anxiety while vigorously defending multicultural values. This requires political courage, policy creativity, and a firm rejection of the scapegoating politics that figures like Hanson represent. The future of inclusive societies depends on our ability to navigate this challenge with wisdom and principle.