Australia, often celebrated as a land of opportunity and natural beauty, is also a nation defined by its multicultural ethos and history of resilience. Despite recent challenges, including divisive political rhetoric from organisations and figures like One Nation, Advance, Senator Ralph Babet and elements within the Liberal Party, Australia remains a fundamentally tolerant society. As a Jewish Australian, I have experienced the warmth of this nation’s diversity firsthand, particularly through the shared meals and conversations at my Sabbath table, where differences are set aside in favour of unity. While Australia is not without its flaws – antisemitism, racism and social tensions persist – progress has been made in addressing some of these issues. However, to preserve and strengthen our social cohesion, we must reject fear-based narratives, embrace our multicultural reality and open our doors to new arrivals. This post argues that Australia’s strength lies in its diversity and tolerance, but divisive political rhetoric risks undermining this legacy, necessitating a renewed commitment to inclusivity.
Australia’s Multicultural Foundation
Australia’s identity as a multicultural nation is not a recent development, but a core feature of its history. Since the arrival of the First Fleet in 1788, waves of migrants have shaped the country, from British and Irish settlers to post-World War II European migrants and later arrivals from Asia, the Middle East, Africa and beyond. The 2021 Census revealed that over 27% of Australians were born overseas, with nearly half having at least one parent born abroad. This diversity is visible in our cities, where languages like Mandarin, Arabic and Punjabi are spoken alongside English, and cultural festivals – Diwali, Lunar New Year, Eid – dot the calendar.
As a Jewish Australian, I am part of this tapestry. Jewish communities have thrived in Australia since the early 19th century, with synagogues in Sydney and Melbourne standing as testaments to our integration. My own experiences reflect this: at my Sabbath meals, guests from varied backgrounds – Christian, Muslim, Hindu, atheist – join together, united by shared food and conversation. These gatherings embody Australia’s potential for harmony, where cultural differences enrich rather than divide.
Australia’s multiculturalism is supported by policies that, while imperfect, have fostered inclusion. The abolition of the White Australia policy in the 1970s marked a turning point, signalling a commitment to non-discriminatory immigration. Programs like the Adult Migrant English Program and settlement services for refugees demonstrate an institutional effort to integrate newcomers. These policies have tangible outcomes: studies, such as the 2018 Scanlon Foundation’s Mapping Social Cohesion report, show that 85% of Australians believe multiculturalism has been good for the country and 80% feel a strong sense of belonging.
Yet, this positive picture is not universal. Antisemitism, though not systemic, persists – incidents like the 2019 act of religious intolerance on a Melbourne mosque, the recent attack on a Melbourne synagogue or online hate speech are reminders of ongoing challenges. Similarly, Indigenous Australians face entrenched disadvantage, with gaps in health, education and incarceration rates. These issues highlight that tolerance, while widespread, is not absolute. Australia’s strength lies in its capacity to confront these problems openly, through dialogue and policy reform, rather than allowing them to define the nation.
The Rise of Divisive Rhetoric
Despite Australia’s multicultural successes, recent years have seen a rise in divisive political rhetoric that threatens social cohesion. Figures and movements like One Nation, Advance, Senator Ralph Babet and certain Liberal Party members, such as Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and until recently, Peter Dutton, have at times employed language that prioritises short-term political gains over long-term unity. Their approaches, often rooted in fear of “the other” or appeals to cultural homogeneity, risk deepening societal divides.
One Nation, led by Pauline Hanson, has long been a lightning rod for controversy. Since the 1990s, Hanson’s platform has targeted immigration, particularly from Asia and Muslim-majority countries, framing it as a threat to Australian identity. Her 2016 Senate speech warning that Australia was being “swamped by Muslims” echoed earlier claims about Asian migration, reinforcing a narrative of cultural erosion. While One Nation’s electoral success is limited – gaining 4.3% of the Senate vote in 2022 – its influence lies in amplifying fear-based discourse, which resonates with a small but vocal minority. The 2019 Christchurch mosque shooting, perpetrated by an Australian, underscored the dangers of such rhetoric, as the shooter’s manifesto echoed anti-immigrant sentiments similar to those espoused by One Nation.
Advance, a newer political movement, similarly thrives on division. Emerging in 2021, Advance campaigns against “woke” policies, multiculturalism and progressive values, often targeting transgender rights and immigration. Its slick social media presence and funding from conservative donors have amplified its reach, particularly among younger voters disillusioned with mainstream politics. While Advance positions itself as defending “Australian values,” its rejection of diversity alienates communities that contribute to the nation’s richness. The movement’s rhetoric, like One Nation’s, risks normalising exclusionary attitudes, even if its direct electoral impact remains modest.
Senator Ralph Babet who was elected under the banner of the now defunct United Australia Party, represents another facet of this trend. Babet has used his platform to critique multiculturalism and progressive policies, often framing them as threats to social order. His 2023 comments on X, questioning the integration of certain migrant groups, drew criticism for their inflammatory tone. While Babet’s influence is limited by his party’s small footprint, his rhetoric contributes to a broader climate of polarisation, where nuance is replaced by simplistic us-versus-them narratives.
Within the Liberal Party, figures like Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and Peter Dutton have also, at times, leaned into divisive language. Price, a prominent Indigenous senator, has criticised aspects of multiculturalism and Indigenous welfare policies, arguing they entrench division. While her perspective stems from a desire to address practical issues, her rhetoric can alienate those who see multiculturalism as a strength. Dutton, as Opposition Leader until mid-2025, frequently emphasised border security and immigration restrictions, framing them as necessary to protect Australian values. His 2023 comments linking immigration to housing shortages, while raising a legitimate policy concern, were criticised for scapegoating migrants rather than addressing systemic issues like planning and investment. Dutton’s recent shift toward more inclusive rhetoric suggests a recognition of the need for unity, but the legacy of his earlier approach lingers.
The common thread among these figures and movements is their reliance on fear-based narratives that pit groups against each other. Whether targeting immigrants, minorities, or progressive policies, their rhetoric simplifies complex issues into binary conflicts, ignoring the reality of Australia’s diverse society. While such strategies may yield short-term electoral gains – One Nation’s Senate seats, Advance’s growing online following, or the Liberal Party’s appeal to conservative voters – they risk long-term damage. Social cohesion, once eroded, is difficult to rebuild. Studies, like the 2020 Lowy Institute’s polling, show that trust in institutions and social harmony declines when leaders amplify division, with 64% of Australians expressing concern about political polarisation.
The Long-Term Costs of Division
The consequences of divisive rhetoric extend beyond immediate political cycles. By framing multiculturalism as a threat, these narratives undermine the social trust that underpins Australia’s success. Trust is the glue that holds diverse societies together, enabling cooperation across cultural lines. When leaders sow fear, they erode this trust, fostering suspicion and resentment. The 2019 Scanlon Foundation report noted a slight decline in social cohesion, with 15% of Australians reporting experiences of discrimination based on ethnicity or religion, up from 9% a decade earlier. While Australia remains cohesive overall, these trends signal the need for vigilance.
Divisive rhetoric also risks alienating new arrivals, who are vital to Australia’s future. Migration drives economic growth – migrants contribute 30% of GDP, according to the 2020 Productivity Commission – and addresses demographic challenges like an aging population. Yet, when political figures demonise immigrants, they discourage integration and deter skilled migrants from choosing Australia. A 2022 Monash University study on migrant womens’ experiences found that 25% of recent arrivals felt unwelcome due to negative media and political discourse, impacting their willingness to settle long-term.
For minority communities, including Jewish Australians, the impact is personal. Antisemitic incidents, while rare, often spike during periods of heightened social tension. The 2020 Executive Council of Australian Jewry reported 331 antisemitic incidents, a 10% increase from the previous year, linked partly to polarised debates around immigration and global conflicts. As a Jewish Australian, I feel the weight of these incidents, but I also recognise they do not define Australia. The broader community’s support – evident in interfaith initiatives and public condemnation of hate – reaffirms the nation’s tolerance.
Indigenous Australians, too, bear the brunt of divisive narratives. Rhetoric that pits Indigenous rights against national unity, as seen in some of Price’s comments, oversimplifies complex issues like reconciliation and the Voice to Parliament. The 2023 referendum’s defeat, with 60% voting “No,” reflected not just policy disagreements but the success of fear-based campaigns that framed the Voice as divisive. This outcome deepened distrust among Indigenous communities, with 70% of Indigenous respondents in a 2024 ANU poll expressing pessimism about reconciliation. Healing these divides requires rejecting zero-sum narratives and embracing shared goals.
The Role of Sky After Dark and Murdoch Media in Profiting from Division
The Murdoch-owned media, particularly Sky News Australia’s “After Dark” programming, plays a significant role in amplifying divisive rhetoric, despite its limited audience. Sky’s evening shows, hosted by figures like Paul Murray, Peta Credlin and Andrew Bolt, often target multiculturalism, immigration and progressive policies with inflammatory commentary, creating an echo chamber for hard-right views. This content prioritises sensationalism, framing issues in ways that stoke fear and division rather than fostering dialogue. The broader Murdoch media empire, including News Corp’s The Australian and The Daily Telegraph, similarly amplifies conflict, with coverage of immigration and Indigenous issues often emphasising discord over solutions.
This approach is driven by profit, as outrage-driven content boosts engagement through clicks, subscriptions and viewership. By platforming figures like Pauline Hanson and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, Sky After Dark legitimises divisive narratives, aligning with movements like One Nation and Advance. The 2019 Christchurch shooter’s manifesto, which echoed anti-immigrant themes promoted on Sky, highlighted the risks of such rhetoric. Murdoch’s business interests, such as News Corp’s REA Group profiting from Australia’s housing market, further entrench divisive narratives, as seen in coverage linking immigration to housing shortages without addressing systemic issues like planning.
While Murdoch media claims to represent “mainstream” Australia, its influence is waning, as evidenced by Labor’s 2025 election win despite News Corp’s Coalition support. This suggests Australians are rejecting divisive tactics. To counter Murdoch’s impact, we must support independent journalism and media literacy, ensuring diverse voices are heard and divisive profiteering is challenged, fostering a media landscape that prioritises unity over polarisation.
Embracing Our Multicultural Reality
As a Jewish Australian, I believe Australia’s path forward lies in embracing our multicultural reality with open hearts and open doors. My Sabbath meals, where guests from all walks of life share stories and laughter, are a microcosm of what Australia can be. These gatherings are not about erasing differences but celebrating them, finding common ground in our shared humanity. This spirit of hospitality and dialogue is a model for the nation.
To counter divisive rhetoric, we must reject preconceived notions and engage with others authentically. Fear of “the other” often stems from ignorance – studies, like the 2019 Australian National University’s social attitudes survey, show that contact with diverse groups reduces prejudice, with 80% of respondents reporting positive experiences from intercultural interactions. Inviting a new arrival to a meal, attending a cultural event, or simply listening to someone’s story can dismantle stereotypes and build bridges.
This approach aligns with Australia’s history of grassroots multiculturalism. Community organisations, like the Australian Multicultural Foundation and Welcoming Cities, facilitate integration through language classes, cultural exchanges and mentorship programs. These initiatives succeed because they focus on connection, not assimilation. My own community’s interfaith dinners, where Jews, Muslims and Christians discuss shared values, are another example. These efforts show that tolerance is not passive but an active choice to engage.
Politically, leaders must prioritise unity over division. While policy debates are essential, they should be framed constructively, focusing on solutions rather than scapegoats. The Liberal Party’s recent shift under new leadership, emphasising economic inclusion and social harmony, is a step forward. Figures like Dutton, if they are able to moderate their tone, can play a role in rebuilding trust. Similarly, moderate voices within Indigenous and migrant communities, like those advocating for practical reconciliation or integration, deserve amplification.
Education is another key pillar. Schools should teach not just Australia’s history, but its multicultural present, fostering pride in diversity. Programs like Harmony Week, which promotes cultural respect, can be expanded to include year-round curricula. The 2021 OECD report on social cohesion found that countries with strong multicultural education, like Canada, report higher levels of social trust. Australia, with its similar demographic profile, can learn from this.
Finally, we must address systemic issues that fuel division, like economic inequality and housing stress. When resources feel scarce, fear-based rhetoric finds fertile ground. Policies that ensure equitable access to jobs, housing and education – such as increased funding for public housing or vocational training for migrants – can reduce tensions. The 2023 Grattan Institute report on housing affordability emphasised that addressing supply shortages would ease pressures often blamed on immigration, undercutting divisive narratives.
A Call to Open Our Doors
Australia is not perfect, but it is not antisemitic or intolerant by nature. Its multicultural fabric, woven from countless stories of migration and resilience, is a source of strength. My Sabbath table, where Australians of all backgrounds unite over shared meals, reflects this reality. Yet, the rise of divisive rhetoric from One Nation, Advance, Senator Babet, elements of the Liberal Party and amplified by Murdoch media’s profiteering, threatens this harmony, prioritising short-term gains over long-term cohesion. The costs – eroded trust, alienated migrants and fractured communities – are too high.
As a Jewish Australian, I urge my fellow citizens to set aside fear and embrace our multicultural reality. Open your doors to new arrivals, engage with their stories and build connections that transcend difference. Australia’s future depends on our ability to reject division and choose unity. Let us gather around the table, as I do each Sabbath and rediscover what it means to be Australian: diverse, tolerant and stronger together.
