site banner
magic9mushroom  If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me  6d ago (text post)   926 thread views

Australian Federal Election, 2025

So there's an Australian federal election today (the polls in the Eastern states close in 20 minutes), and apparently we have top-level posts for Five Eyes federal elections.

So, here's a top-level post for the Australian federal election. Polls are predicting a Labour landslide (thanks Obama Trump, we really needed all that friendly fire), but we live in the age of Shy Tories so one can never be 100% sure.

I just voted; below the line all the way (I would have voted above the line, except for the whole "I like the Nationals a lot more than the Liberals" thing), and I didn't even get to eat democracy sausage afterward. So now I'm cranky and miserable, though that might also be because I've been up for 24 hours or so.

One Nation didn't actually show up at the polling place I went to, which was odd; they did last time, though it moved a few streets over.

I think I voted lower on the Libertarian Party than I otherwise would have due to not realising they were the Liberal Democrats and/or vaguely recalling something about a joint ticket with Clive Palmer. Whoops.

I rate myself as like a 3/10 on engagement this election; I'm usually more active about pushing civil defence, even if it's basically yelling at a brick wall.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

For what it's worth, there's pretty much zero likelihood that the Coalition would have slashed immigration either. The Coalition tend to go hard on illegal immigration while increasing legal, skilled immigration. It is effectively bipartisan consensus that Australia needs large-scale immigration, and they don't even disagree that much about the criteria for it (i.e. they like skilled professionals). Immigration fights tend to be around the edges, about illegal immigrants, refugees, and asylum seekers - an incredibly small proportion of the total.

It is effectively bipartisan consensus that Australia needs large-scale immigration, and they don't even disagree that much about the criteria for it (i.e. they like skilled professionals).

I have to agree with this. Liberals said that they would reduce immigration by 100000 a year only and still faced backlash:

"But the significant reduction risks backlash from businesses, industry groups and farmers who rely on migrant labour. The opposition leader has also been forced to defend his support for immigration after facing an audience question at the first leaders’ debate about “demonising migrants” in political debate."

I had a chat to a non-Indian IT friend in a private server and he told me he had come across multiple uber drivers handing out resumes (which they kept in their car). They were desperate to qualify for PR under Australia's points based system before their time ran out.

The pipeline for those guys was apparently: Foreign student comes to Australia and pays full price for an IT Masters degree from Australia's massive university sector > Student gets 3 years after completion to find employment or leave > Student takes IT job for vastly reduced rate (A$60k) in order to qualify for permanent residency, suppressing salaries for heritage Australians > New batch graduates every year, saturating the industry > Govt campaigns on 'skills shortages' in IT

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats