One Nation has long claimed to represent the ‘working class’ – and that makes it a serious threat to Labor
- Written by: Weekend Times
Australian politics has long afforded an almost mythical status to certain categories of voters – usually a large group that feels disenfranchised but in fact wields a lot of electoral clout. Robert
Menzies, for example, spoke of the “forgotten people”, John Howard had his “battlers”, and Scott Morrison the “quiet Australians”.
Menzies initially referred to a “moral middle class” at risk of being ground between a working-class represented by organised labour and a self-sufficient upper class. Later adaptations of this myth under Howard and Morrison captured what had been traditional Labor voters in the outer suburbs. This encompassed workers who had felt left behind by Labor’s embrace of neoliberalism, and perhaps felt out of step with progressive values.
When Peter Dutton took over the Liberal leadership in 2022, he followed tradition by invoking Menzies’ “forgotten people” in Australian suburbs and regional Australia. While Dutton’s leadership ended in electoral disaster, Labor’s traditional territory is now under threat from a different party on the right – One Nation.
Electoral evidence from the 2026 South Australian state election suggests One Nation is a far greater threat to Labor in its heartland seats than the Coalition.
In this context, our research looks at how One Nation claims working class credentials and appeals to these voters Labor is at risk of leaving behind.
One Nation as the ‘battler’ party
Our research analysed nearly a decade of parliamentary speeches, voting records, media coverage and One Nation press releases to examine how Senators Pauline Hanson and Malcolm Roberts perform working-class identity.
In doing so, we focused not merely on their policies, but the stories, symbolism and language that Hanson and Roberts evoked in claiming to connect with and champion working-class people.
Despite Hanson leaning heavily into her small business background through her famous Ipswich fish and chip shop, her invocation of her family’s Labor history is less remarked on.
Hanson has noted her grandfather’s role as a trade unionist and member of the Labor Party executive in the 1930s. Roberts meanwhile, has suggested Labor giants such as John Curtin and Ben Chifley would “no doubt be One Nation leaders today”. He claims the party is
made up of often poorly paid, hardworking Aussies whose basic decency, quiet patriotism, strong moral compass and fierce work ethic define them as the heart and soul of our nation.
Here, One Nation is attempting to tap into Labor tradition, positioning itself as sharing “old Labor” values. That is, the party as it stood from the founding of the federal parliamentary party in 1901 until the early 1970s, when it upheld Hanson’s monocultural vision through discriminatory immigration policy.
Labor doesn’t love you any more – but we do
One Nation frequently attacks Labor for betraying workers. It casts the party as having been captured by the “globalist woke agenda” and cultural marxism. This line of attack ramped up during the COVID pandemic and has been complemented by a broader “war on woke” anti-elitist discourse in conservative media outlets.
But our analysis shows something broader. One Nation is attempting to position itself as the new party of the working class, using social, economic and political arguments to stake that claim.
1. Socialism, economic management and class struggle
One Nation attacks Labor’s economic record with strong anti-socialist rhetoric, claiming it fuels inequality and “class warfare” while undermining real wages.
Yet the party borrows the language of class struggle for its own ends, recasting the true fight as workers versus “extremist union bosses” and a corrupt elite, and positioning itself the party of job security.
2. Immigration, nativism and protectionism
One Nation’s working-class appeals are inseparable from its anti-immigration politics.
Migrants are framed as depressing wages, fuelling inflation and threatening social cohesion — echoing historical Labor justifications for the White Australia Policy. This in turn casts white, English-speaking workers as the “true” Australian working class.
3. Regional neglect
One Nation taps longstanding grievances in Labor’s regional heartlands, such as the Hunter in New South Wales and Gladstone in Queensland. It frames Labor as obsessed with renewables and hostile to coal mining communities.
One Nation has achieved consistently strong results in the the respective seats of Hunter and Flynn. This grievance messaging effectively taps into feelings of economic insecurity and resentment of political elites by cultivating a sense-of-betrayal directed at Labor.
Our analysis also finds One Nation’s success is enabled by Labor’s cautious agenda. Its focus on incremental reforms rooted in “thin labourism” rather than bolder reforms has helped to fuel resentment in its heartlands. Labor has also been wrong-footed at times by One Nation’s nativist appeals. As such, Labor has tended to treat migration as an electoral problem to be neutralised. This in turn can validate One Nation’s framing of the issue.
Emerging electoral contests
Much of One Nation’s surge in support has been driven by it capturing disaffected Coalition voters.
However, Labor still has significant cause for concern. One Nation has been directing rhetorical appeals at traditional Labor voters who are economically insecure and angry at political elites. Labor and the wider union movement are attempting to discredit One Nation’s working class credentials, by highlighting Hanson’s comments against maternity leave and work-from-home provisions.
This line of attack has sharpened in recent months, as Hanson’s relationship with Australia’s richest person has allowed senior Labor figures like Jim Chalmers to brand her “a wholly owned subsidiary of Gina Rinehart”.
Upcoming election contests may offer some insight just how threatening Hanson’s surging popularity is to Labour. November’s Victorian state election could see Labor defeated in a swathe of traditionally safe seats where the Coalition is not competitive. Labor’s performance in these electoral tests, will offer an insight into which party is the most appealing to Labor’s traditional base.
Emily Foley receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
Josh Sunman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
