Key Arguments in the Article

 The passage you highlighted from The Wentworth Report reflects a growing sentiment in Australian politics regarding the perceived gap between public opinion and government policy on immigration.

The author, Nathan Porter, argues that mainstream parties have avoided direct democratic engagement on the "quantity and quality" of migration, and he suggests that social or legal pressures now discourage open debate on the topic.

Key Arguments in the Article

  • Democratic Deficit: The author contends that major decisions regarding Australia's demographic and economic future—specifically immigration levels—have been made without a direct mandate or "vote" from the citizenry.

  • Economic Impact: The text links high immigration levels to practical struggles for everyday Australians, such as the inability to afford housing in the cities where they grew up.

  • Political Shift: Porter explains his move from the Liberal Party to One Nation, claiming that the latter is the only party willing to treat these concerns as "economically rational" rather than "unsophisticated" or "racist."

  • The "New Class" Influence: The article suggests a "New Class" of political elites has taken over the Liberal Party, leading to a "comfortable consensus" that ignores the concerns of the "forgotten people."

Context on the "Illegal to Question" Claim

While the author uses the term "illegal," this is often a rhetorical way to describe:

  1. Social Stigma: The fear of being labeled "divisive" or "dangerous" for questioning mass migration.

  2. Hate Speech Laws: Concerns that legislative frameworks intended to prevent discrimination might be used to stifle legitimate economic or social debate regarding border policy.

The article concludes that parties like One Nation are growing because they lean into these specific issues—immigration, national identity, and sovereignty—which the author feels are being ignored by the "natural party of government."

Would you like me to look for recent economic analyses or polling data regarding Australian public opinion on immigration levels?  It sounds like you’re expressing a deep frustration with how fundamental decisions about Australia’s future are made and the perceived social or legal limits on discussing them.

The blog post you are reading highlights several core arguments regarding this sense of a "democratic deficit":

  • Lack of Direct Mandate: The author, Nathan Porter, argues that significant shifts in immigration levels—what he calls the "quantity and quality" of migration—have occurred without a clear, direct vote or public consensus.

  • The "Illegal" to Question Claim: When the text says it is "illegal to question" these policies, it is largely referring to the social stigma or the potential for being labeled as "racist" or "divisive" for raising economic concerns about migration. It also touches on fears that modern laws might be used to suppress such political debates.

  • Economic Consequences: The article explicitly links these high migration levels to the housing crisis, noting that many Australians feel they can no longer afford to live in the cities where they grew up.

  • Political Disconnection: The piece strongly suggests that the major political parties have formed a "comfortable consensus" that ignores the concerns of the "forgotten people" in favor of elite or "New Class" interests.

This perspective is a major driver behind the growth of parties like One Nation, which position themselves as the only groups willing to treat immigration as an "economically rational" topic rather than a taboo one.

Would you like me to look for current polling data or economic reports that compare public opinion on immigration levels with current government targets?  It sounds like you feel that the democratic process has been bypassed on one of the most significant issues facing the country—the scale and composition of immigration—and that expressing these concerns now carries a social or legal risk.

This sentiment is a central theme in the article you are reading, where the author, Nathan Porter, argues that "mass migration is making Australians poorer" and that the "natural party of government" has abandoned the "forgotten people".

To provide more context on these concerns, here is a look at recent data regarding public opinion and government policy in Australia as of early 2026.

Public Opinion vs. Government Policy

Recent polling suggests a significant gap between the current Permanent Migration Program settings and public sentiment:

  • Public Support for Cuts: As of late 2025, several polls indicate a strong desire for reduced immigration. A Newspoll found that 64% of voters want fewer immigrants, while the Lowy Institute reported that 53% of Australians believe the current intake is "too high"—a level matching record highs from 2018.

  • Support for a "Pause": Polling from the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) in October 2025 showed that 71% of Australians agree the country should temporarily pause immigration until infrastructure like housing and schools can catch up.

  • Government Targets: Despite this pressure, the Australian Government announced in September 2025 that the 2025–26 permanent Migration Program will remain at 185,000 places, maintaining the same levels as the previous year.

The "Illegal to Question" Concern

The claim that it is "illegal" to question these policies often refers to broader shifts in the legal and social landscape:

  • New Legislation: In early 2026, the government introduced new laws targeting "conduct which is hateful, dangerous, and divisive". While framed as a measure against bigotry, critics—including the author of your article—argue these powers could be weaponized to stifle legitimate debate on migration.

  • The "Double Standard": The article argues that when the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) discusses migration's impact on housing using technical terms, it is "economic analysis," but when citizens use plain language to express the same concern, they are labeled "divisive" or "dangerous".

Economic Impact on Housing

The RBA and other economic commentators have noted that shelter remains a prominent driver of inflation. The IPA estimated a housing supply shortfall of nearly 180,000 homes between 2022 and 2024, directly attributed to migration-driven population growth.

Would you like me to find more details on the specific 2026 laws regarding "divisive conduct" and how they might affect political speech?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Validity, safety, usability, and user experience of virtual reality gamified home-based exercises in stroke

  Hatem Lazem + 7 authors Helen Dawes 2025, Clinical Rehabilitation ... 1 Citations Saved Open in: +4 more Objective: This study adopted a novel approach to exploring the content validity, safety, usability, and user experiences of different games for telerehabilitation purposes from the perspective of physiotherapists and stroke survivors. Design A cross-sectional content validity and usability study. Setting Lab and online. Participants: 23 participants were recruited: 11 neuro-physiotherapists and 12 chronic stroke survivors. Outcomes Content validity and safety were assessed using a bespoke state evaluation questionnaire. Usability was evaluated using the System Usability Scale (SUS) and the User Experience Questionnaire (UEQ). House of Quality analysis was conducted to identify the priority aspects for improvement. Results: Physiotherapists perceived the usability of the games as good to excellent for three games (median SUS = 80%) and poor for two games (SUS < 68%). Three ...
Read more

How Did I Become Me?

Image
Don H Harris e n p r t d s o S o h 5 g a l g f h 1 6 u a l 0 6 8 h t 1 f 3 f 8 6 4 5 7 u 6 c 0 3 c 5 5 6 1 a u 1 l f f l h u m 7 1 9   · Shared with Public How Did I Become Me? I didn’t wake up one day fully formed. I became myself through a thousand tiny moments—some loud, some quiet, some I didn’t even notice until years later. But the very first moment that shaped me wasn’t mine alone—it was shared. I came into this world with Lonnie, my identical twin. We were a matched set from the start, but our beginning was anything but simple. We faced twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome before anyone had a name for it, let alone a treatment. There was no protocol, no textbook solution—just a local doctor with steady hands and a gut instinct that saved our lives. His skill, not science, gave us a chance. That moment—before memory, before breath—etched something deep into me: a sense of survival, of gratitude, and of connection that runs soul-deep. Growing up with Lonnie wasn’t just having a ...
Read more

The Cacopathy of time is the wind in our sails to a future location causing Cacophony of ideas.

Image
  Why is hate hate, and racism racism? Male creates female, and right is left along the way? Up is still down down under, and death is life after you live. The world of self is a world of others, and others are selves alone. Destruction is construction after you clear the lot. And babies are the future, yet to begin. One can go east until one is in the west. One goes up until he comes down.  Killing babies and destroying your neighbor's house is not sound but Cacopathy. Going back is not sound.  Never fear change, change fears you. You are a creator, and you create. Going around and around will make you dizzy, unless you're a ballerina. Worship women, for they create your tomorrow. A woman who cheats is lost and not yet found. A hungry child will tell you so. If you owe a bill to a bill collector, give him the old washing machine. Not your wife or life or child or wisdom. After a while, they will be washing your clothes. The lord knows your wife needs a break. And for goo...
Read more