The Attractive Partisan Warfare
Today could be considered both a great and shameful day. It has been reported that all children have been removed from Manus Island and the detention centers therein, with the final departures heading to America. What I wish to do in this article is reflect on the political contingencies which were required for this policy of internment to come about. In all honesty, I wish to reflect on which specific contingency which I find most enthralling. Not the lying by Mr. Howard for this was obvious opportunism and a-moralism. Rather, I wish to look at the role of partisanship and the glorification or necessity of partisanship in our current political climate. I wish to focus on this specifically for I believe partisanship played the most significant role in bringing about extreme policies such as offshore detention.
Partisanship seems to be at an all-time high. With many governments stuck on intractable differences slowing the process of democracy and the creation of legislation. From America and Britain to Hungary and Australia, extreme or hyper-partisanship seems to be in style. Political discourse has also altered to accommodate this attraction with partisanship. One way in which this can be seen is the resort to ad-hominem attacks so often used by many parliamentarians. Discussion has moved from vilification of one’s ideas and policies to a complete discrediting of that person or their organisation / political party. Through the changing of these attacks one can notice it forces the boundaries of political debate ever further out. This is due to a couple of things — firstly, there is now no distinction between centrist and reasonable policy choices and extreme, almost dangerous policy decisions when it comes to our enemies; for due to the reliance on ad-hominem attacks all policies put forth by ‘x’ group is extreme regardless of the content. If one observes the U.S political happenings one can witness this. The Republicans are, dare I say, forced to oppose any democrat move and the same goes vice versa. The recent Supreme Court Appointments are a shining example of this, going back to Obama.
Partisanship has therefore not just infected and debilitated the political discourse but has damaged policy-making procedures. From a breakdown in any form of bi-partisanship on policy creation to a discrediting and needless obstructionism from opposition, grinds the gears of democracy to a halt. Yet, as the title of this essay perhaps gives away, partisanship is also an attractive game. It did not come about from luck or a set of extremely coincidental contingencies. But rather, partisanship is a useful tool within the politician’s handbook. Divide and Rule is an often touted saying and yet it still holds true in this modern age. This is especially true of states which do not hold compulsory voting. Partisanship can save a sinking politician and it can also assist a failing government. If a government lacks the purpose, majority, or ingenuity to pass legislation it can begin an attack on the opposition as obstructionist and blame the opposition party for all ills of government. It is an attractive offer and crucially requires far less thought and planning than running a total campaign. It allows laziness and a lack of rigor. Most crucially though it allows and propagates the demonization of the other and this is truly dangerous in a democracy.
Allow me to return to Australian politics and specifically our off-shore detention centers. One of the many contingencies for this policy came about due to the flailing of the Howard government during a down-turn in popularity. After governing for an awfully long time, the Howard government had fallen out of favour with the voting public, and this required something to rile up emotion and bring about support in a way that they hadn’t yet. This led to the children overboard scandal. An awfully embarrassing and shameful moment in Australian politics wherein John Howard asserted that mothers and fathers had been throwing their children overboard from the boats they had used to come and seek asylum to save weight or resources. The inhumanity of this lie is something that Mr. Howard will have to live with himself, though it is indicative of the extremes in which partisanship can drag policymaking. Soon after this, Labor won the federal election under Kevin Rudd in 2007. During this time, the beast of partisanship reared its ugly head. Through smear and fear campaigns, led by the falsely unequivocal Tony Abbott, the Coalition begun its long descent into nothing more than Hyper-Partisanship with no policy initiative at all. Rather, campaigns of fear and division ruled with the inability for bi-partisanship on all but the fewest of issues.
Hyper-Partisanship seems to come about when a politician or political party is on its last legs. Their policy initiative bucket is depleted, their attractiveness to the general public too aged, and their ability to continue to oil the wheels of government over. Partisanship is the oasis in a desert, the promise of an easy drink from the glass of victory. But in truth, it is a poison chalice not just for themselves, nor their party but rather the country as a whole.
Brendan Alder
