Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

One Nation's Electoral Support: Economic Insecurity versus Attitudes to Immigration

One Nation's Electoral Support: Economic Insecurity versus Attitudes to Immigration While acknowledging that our study represents “a considerable advance on other studies of One Nation, its electoral support and social foundations“, and “correctly identifies the importance of conservative social attitudes of One Nation supporters“, Turnbull and Wilson take issue with three things: one of our key findings, based on the 1998 Australian Election Study (AES), that the vote for One Nation was driven by attitudes to immigration (among other things) rather than by a sense of economic insecurity; our argument around the fundamental difference between explaining the One Nation vote and distinguishing it from the vote secured by any of the other parties; and our refusal to cringe before the “comparative evidence about neo‐populist parties“ or to defer to the superior wisdom of that political scientist extraordinaire, Australia’s present Prime Minister, John Howard.17 None of the points they make in relation to any of these things is even partly persuasive; for the most part, they are marred by errors of logic, fact, or interpretation. Each, however, is important ‐ or potentially so. They merit, therefore, a response. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Australian Journal of Politics & History Wiley

One Nation's Electoral Support: Economic Insecurity versus Attitudes to Immigration

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/one-nation-s-electoral-support-economic-insecurity-versus-attitudes-to-30u8HnOBCt

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Department of History, School of Political Science and International Studies, The University of Queensland and Blackwell Publishers 2001
ISSN
0004-9522
eISSN
1467-8497
DOI
10.1111/1467-8497.00242
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

While acknowledging that our study represents “a considerable advance on other studies of One Nation, its electoral support and social foundations“, and “correctly identifies the importance of conservative social attitudes of One Nation supporters“, Turnbull and Wilson take issue with three things: one of our key findings, based on the 1998 Australian Election Study (AES), that the vote for One Nation was driven by attitudes to immigration (among other things) rather than by a sense of economic insecurity; our argument around the fundamental difference between explaining the One Nation vote and distinguishing it from the vote secured by any of the other parties; and our refusal to cringe before the “comparative evidence about neo‐populist parties“ or to defer to the superior wisdom of that political scientist extraordinaire, Australia’s present Prime Minister, John Howard.17 None of the points they make in relation to any of these things is even partly persuasive; for the most part, they are marred by errors of logic, fact, or interpretation. Each, however, is important ‐ or potentially so. They merit, therefore, a response.

Journal

Australian Journal of Politics & HistoryWiley

Published: Dec 1, 2001

There are no references for this article.