Senator the Hon Arthur Sinodinos AO
Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science
Parliament House ACT 2600

Dear MinisterArthur

We write in relation to your recent statement that Pauline Hanson’s One Nation is “more sophisticated” than it previously was, in response to a branch of the Liberal Party engaging in unprecedented preference deal with the party. In particular, we seek clarification on how, exactly, One Nation is now more sophisticated than in the late 1990s.

Is this enhanced sophistication reflected in the party’s view of single mothers, given a One Nation candidate’s view that they “are women too lazy to attract and hold a mate”, expressed in the prestigious conservative publication Quadrant?

Or has this greater level of sophistication been demonstrated in the party’s foreign policy views — such as the One Nation candidate who seeks a restoration of white rule in South Africa

Perhaps the sophistication lies in One Nation’s view of LGBTI Australians? There’s the candidate who claims LGBTI Australians are out to destroy families. Or the candidate who says a society that supports same-sex marriage — which now includes much of the Western world — is “degenerate” and that same-sex marriage is “undermining civilisation and making our culture more like African-American culture with its 70% illegitimacy rate”?

(We note, by the way, that referring to children born to unmarried couples as “illegitimate” stigmatises every child of de facto couples in Australia.)

There is also a One Nation candidate who claims “same-sex marriage will open the door to compulsory homosexual teachings in homes, schools and churches, thereby confusing children, students and congregations because heterosexuality will not be recognised as normal” — although we admit that the image of a sexually confused congregation perhaps represents a sophisticated sense of humour. 

Same-sex marriage proponents are also, according to another One Nation candidate, using Nazi mind control programs to change people’s views on the subject — which we’re prepared to allow would be a “sophisticated” psychological weapon.

We’re also unclear on what is “sophisticated” about claiming the 9/11 attacks were fake, given 9/11 truthers have been around so long their lies have become internet memes — although apparently the fake nature of the 9/11 attacks is not official One Nation policy even though the candidate who claims they were fake is still running under the One Nation banner. Perhaps he believes the hijackers used a Nazi mind control program.

Arguably, these are all merely the views of One Nation candidates, rather than the views of its elected officials. We note, however, that your Queensland Senate colleague Malcolm Roberts claims that abortion is a UN plot, that global finance is controlled by wealthy Jewish families via “privately owned central banks” and that they are behind the “hoax” of climate change; indeed, that “Goldman Sachs already controls much of the world reportedly on behalf of the Rothschilds.” As a former bank executive, we understand you would be in a strong position to assess the accuracy and, for that matter, the “sophistication” of such claims. However, we note that none of these conspiracy theories from Roberts are particularly new — indeed, despite One Nation’s strongly protectionist economic policies, Roberts has to import all his conspiracy theories from foreign sources.

Pauline Hanson has also claims that the Family Court system makes men murder women and children out of frustration — is this perhaps a sophisticated analysis of family law and domestic homicide?

Or is it, perhaps, that Hanson’s greater sophistication lies in switching the focus of her hatred and bigotry from Asian Australians to Muslim Australians since the 1990s, reflecting an innovative, agile ability to shift the target of racist demonisation as fashion dictates?

Yours sincerely,

Crikey

Peter Fray

Support journalism that makes things better, not worse.

Rupert Murdoch had never had a US president in his pocket before Donald Trump landed there in 2016.

This week, we explored the relationship between the two men and why Murdoch should be held to account for the making of Trump.

Where do you start with dismantling the media empire that delivered us a phenomenon like Trump?

Here’s one thing you can do: Support the journalism that makes things better, not worse.

Subscribe to Crikey today with the promo code MADEMEN and get 50% off an annual membership.

Hurry, 48 hours only.

Peter Fray
Editor-in-chief of Crikey

JOIN NOW