Why do some people seem to think it’s a good idea to take political advice for our team from those over there clearly on the other team who loathe our politics? When put that way it seems a pretty obviously stupid idea, doesn’t it? That group over there has fundamentally different core values to us over here about cultural issues, how best to structure the economy, the optimum role government ought to play in the economy and in limiting speech, what a woman is, immigration policy, net zero, etc. On the vast preponderance of those issues, and a whole lot more again, their political stances and first order beliefs differ significantly from ours.  And yet some who purport to be on our team – including an awful lot of political advisors to our team – appear to want to take and rely upon their advice about what we should do.

Put in that blunt way, the whole idea of doing what one’s political opponents suggest seems daft, doesn’t it? And yet. And yet. Across the Anglosphere that’s what we see repeatedly as regards conservative political parties. Those on the political left are constantly saying that this or that conservative political party is too conservative, too right-wing. Maybe call them ‘far right’ for rhetorical effect. Say they need to be more like us. More left. More in favour of left-wing things. So they say we should give up the fight on all culture-related issues (including men in women’s sports, locker rooms and prisons; free speech and online censorship; what’s taught in schools; DEI and the whole idea of quotas and affirmative action; and so on).  They tell righties to stop arguing against net zero. To stop pointing to Australia’s precipitous decline as regards productivity (the factor that correlates to society’s long-term wealth better than any other by far).  To give up mentioning the related scam that is ‘working’ from home. Meanwhile, they continue to say, it’s simply ‘far right’ to value patriotism and one national flag or to criticise performative, patronising welcomes and acknowledgements to your own country.

Unbelievably, a fair chunk of supposed conservatives buy this snake oil.  They take their cues (and if they were Peter Dutton’s campaign advisors then they also took their election policies) from those on the political left who have fundamentally different political beliefs.

Why?  Why?  Why?  I think there are two main reasons. One reason has to do with the established political parties of the right in much of the Anglosphere and the sort of politicians who now dominate them. They are careerists. They started their involvement in politics in university. Few have held jobs in the private sector or even outside the wider political solar system. Values and principles and putting in just a few good years as a politician in order to accomplish actual outcomes are foreign concepts to them.  They like intrigue and factions. Virtually nothing is more important to them than personal advancement (for proof of which look at nearly all self-described ‘classical liberals’ not named Ron de Santis during the two and a half thuggish, civil liberties crushing, lockdown Covid years). Like cuckoos these careerists have to differing extents taken over the nests of once conservative political parties. A good few, deep-down, hold out-and-out left-wing views – these careerist politicians actually do like DEI, quotas, the whole rent-seeking subsidies world that comes with genuflecting before the net zero God, even large scale immigration. Basically, they’re in the wrong party. (Think Malcolm Turnbull, but also all his acolytes.) Yet over the last few decades they have managed to take over much of the party structure and hierarchy. Values-free and often disliking the actual conservatives in their own party more than they dislike lefty MPs or even the Greens, these types push non-conservative policies (and non-classical liberal ones too, if we’re being honest) because lefty views happen to align with their own metropolitan druthers. Put more succinctly, those demanding conservative parties ‘move left’ are often pushing on an open door. Certainly that has been the case as regards Australia’s Liberal party, at least since the party room opted to knife Tony Abbott – and this is true even more so at the state level where the Libs (even in office in Queensland) are a flat-out mess.

Now in some Anglosphere countries there have been antidotes to this spineless, pusillanimous, value-free takeover of the right. In the US Donald Trump has remade the entire Republican party. I think ninety-plus per cent of what he’s done has been incredibly good. He’s fought for and delivered on free speech, closing the border, transgender lunacies, fixing the military, fighting back against and trying to crush DEI and affirmative action, government waste and pulling out of bad international agreements. But to the point here, since 2016 the Trump ‘America First’ wing has taken over the Republican party from the former chamber of commerce, open borders, outsource-manufacturing Mitt Romney wing. The latter is nearing extinction. Meanwhile in Britain the remedy has come from a once-in-a-century new party, Reform, which seriously threatens the continued existence of the world’s oldest political party, the UK Conservative party (which to my mind richly deserves this fate). And in Canada? Well, there the party membership picks the leader and that allows for a Pierre Poilievre to be chosen, a man who had zero chance of being picked by his own party room. In Australia, none of those three options has happened. I think, personally, that the Canadian option is the most likely route to reform and recovery here.

Now, above I mentioned two main reasons why conservative parties buy the snake oil of ‘you gotta move left’ prescriptions.  The second one is the staggering, monumental skew of the legacy media towards favouring the political left. If you care what the ABC or Canada’s CBC or Britain’s BBC thinks then you will think ‘we gotta move left’. And be clear. The left-leaning bias of these public broadcasters – and heck, forget them and just look at the rest of the legacy media – beggars belief. Did you know that in the US the Media Research Center just looked at statements and stories made by journalists, anchors, reporters and experts on the main networks in Trump’s first 100 days and found that 92 per cent were negative. By contrast, for Joe Biden’s first 100 days, 59 per cent were positive. These were the same people telling us Biden was at the top of his game and mentally fit as a fiddle right up until his disastrous debate. No mention of petrol prices halving since top Biden prices. Trump is getting more negative coverage than North Korea’s dictator. Team Trump knew this would happen. They pay no attention to the legacy media, mocking them and calling them out as the propaganda arm of the Democrat party. That works. Forget what you’re reading elsewhere; the most accurate pollster of 2024 has Trump’s approval in positive territory for this last month, his best result by far.   Likewise, Pierre Poilievre and Nigel Farage have figured out too that the legacy media hate all conservatives and they ignore and mock it.

Meanwhile here in Australia Team Dutton seemed to base the policies it took to the election on how the ABC would receive them. That, readers, is the path to perdition for any conservative party. Ignore the legacy media. Call them out as patently partisan.  Mock them. And win.