Picture: graphic incorporates Antony Green photo By Tasmanian Electoral Commission – https://www.tec.tas.gov.au/education/Assets/galleria/2014StateElection.html, CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=155790450
As my husband and I settled down on my lounge for election night, we expected a close tussle. We were armed with our usual election night snacks and a glass of red wine. It was 7:30pm and the first booths had come in, showing a swing to Labor. But, as the booths for South Australia and Western Australian were coming in, things looked dire for the Liberal party. I hadn’t even finished my glass of wine at 8:10pm when election analyst Antony Green was saying “I can’t see how the Liberals can win from here.” By 8:20pm it was all over, Labor had swept to victory. The electoral map of Sydney printed in the Sydney Morning Herald is an eye catching red from the oceanside to the mountains.
During the coverage there was a lot of talk about values. The Liberal pundits on the ABC election panel kept saying that the Liberal party had to go back and reconsider their values. Similarly, in his victory speech Anthony Albanese said, “today the Australian people have voted for Australian values” and that Australians had voted for “fairness, aspiration, and opportunity for all” and for “strength in adversity and kindness to those in need.”
Both parties had gone into the election with the usual focus on the economy. Labor were initially behind in the polling because of the cost-of-living crisis. The Liberals were touting their nuclear energy plan and promising a reduction in electricity prices. But somewhere in the weeks after the election was called, it became an election about values.
Though complex, the Liberal party’s loss seems partly driven by a voter backlash against Trump-style politics—a trend also seen in Canada. But in Australia, the economic impact of the tariffs hasn’t been that substantial. Before the election campaign, it appeared that the world was experiencing a revival of right-wing nationalism.
Although the Liberal party have been from their inception a centralist party, Peter Dutton at times seemed to use a Trump style playbook for this campaign. In emulation of Donald Trump’s DOGE, Mr Dutton named Jacinta NampijinpaPrice as the shadow minister for government efficiency. But as Mr Trump’s whirlwind of executive orders came into effect and Australians saw the share market along with their super funds plunge in value, parallels to the US administration became a liability. Values along with policies to support them became important in the electorate. Any kind of nod to right-wing extremism, from racism to divisiveness, became a turn off to the electorate. This could be because millennial and gen Z voters now outnumber baby boomers and they have different values to their grandparents and parents, as well as different tolerances for certain kinds of rhetoric.
But it wasn’t just the Liberals who lost seats in this election, but also the Greens. This is a party that prides itself on being in touch with young people and representing their views. Yet this did not deliver seats to them, even though their primary vote was stable.
It seems to me that if a party puts ideology before the needs of Australians or the practicalities of getting the job done, then Australians aren’t interested. What I mean by ideology is a structured system of political or social ideas that represent a worldview. Values, on the other hand, are core beliefs that guide decisions. Ideologies incorporate values but allow less flexibility in action. So, on the one hand, the Greens demonstrated a lack of comprise on good policy put up by the Labor party, especially on energy and the environment, and, on the other, the Liberal’s nuclear energy policy, which included abandoning renewables, appeared to be a commitment to an outdated ideology that saw renewable energy as a fringe leftist concern.
The other thing I think is going on is that Australians are over “the dog whistle” (coded political language for minority groups in the electorate) and the demonising of the other side. The Labor party’s positive election campaign going into the election held them in good stead, even though they slipped into the negative campaigning towards the end of the election.
The call for respect for Mr Dutton by Mr Albanese in his victory speech was really telling. I’m guessing that more respect from politicians towards each other was showing up in the research as an important value. And this is where Labor had it all over the Liberals in their campaign because Labor went into the election well prepared with coherent policies well-explained and costed.
The analysis is telling us that Mr Dutton’s campaign was not well-prepared and there was no detail behind the policies announced. They were relying on negative campaigning, which did not work. It no longer cuts through. The last observation I’ll make here is that gimmicks don’t work either. Mr Bandt with his giant toothbrush may have had a point but it’s hard to take seriously a leader willing to do this with an important portfolio such as health.
So what can Christians learn from the election?
Well firstly, Australians appeared to have prioritised other Australians over themselves. What I have been seeing from voters, especially women voters, is concern about their children and grandchildren and what kind of Australia they are growing up in. They are worried about the environment and housing. The emphasis on kindness and compassion that was emphasised by the Prime Minster really resonated with the electorate.
The earlier WADR article, which canvassed Christian leaders as to what they thought voters should prioritise, emphasised core Christian values of selflessness, care, compassion and kindness, and these are in harmony with the mood of the electorate. If churches were to demonstrate these values, then I think we would gain the attention of people in our neighbourhoods. But the lesson from the election is that this can’t be gimmicky but has to be rooted in genuine care and compassion. We will lose people if we are only paying lip-service to these values.
And this brings me to ideology. Of course, as social groups, denominations have sets of ideas and ideals. But the warning of the election is that if churches set the denominational ideology above the care and compassion for people, then Australians will turn away. We can’t emphasize care and compassion, while at the same time sending “dog whistles” to those in our congregations who are committed to denominational ideology no matter what. Engaging in coded messaging while cloaking ourselves in values that we aren’t living out will mean that Australians seeking assistance with the spiritual dimensions of their lives with quickly sour on Christianity on closer examination. Similarly, any name calling or harsh criticism of fellow Christians from other denominations will not go down well. And as always, any kind of siding with a political position, left or right, by a church or Christian leader continues to be a turn off for Australians. As Johnathan Hughes and I talked about in our earlier article, Christians can provide political commentary but advocating for one party over another is not taken well.
Lastly, the Liberals have traditionally appealed to middle class women and have built their dominance on this, but they have lost them. So too the evangelical church risks its future if it does not pay heed to the concerns and aspirations of Australian women.
In summary, now is a good time to be considering the values of Jesus, making plans to enact those values in our communities, and clearly communicating the love and inclusion of Jesus and his church. It is a good time to be a Christian in Australia, as we can show a different way.
Dr Lyn Kidson is an independent scholar in New Testament, and her PhD was on 1 Timothy. She usually works in academic administration, primarily for the Australian University of Theology, and regularly speaks and writes on the New Testament, early Christianity, numismatics (coins), and gender.
thewadrproject.com 