The Great Divide: The Australian Elites Versus the Rest of Us, By James Reed

The Australian Population Research Institute (TAPRI) released a report in February 2025 titled "The Divide Between Elites and the Electorate: Australians Get Ready to Vote – Report No. 1," authored by Katharine Betts and Bob Birrell. This report presents findings from a December 2024 survey of 3,023 Australian voters, highlighting significant disparities between the perspectives of political elites and the general electorate on economic policies, progressive values, and immigration.

Key Findings:

1.Economic Policies:

Rejection of Neoliberalism: A majority of voters oppose the prevailing neoliberal economic agenda, which emphasizes free markets and minimal government intervention. Instead, there is strong support for government initiatives to protect local industries and address economic inequalities.

Support for Manufacturing and Tariffs: Many voters advocate for revitalising Australia's manufacturing sector, even if it requires implementing tariffs to shield local industries from global competition. This sentiment reflects a desire for economic self-sufficiency and scepticism toward unchecked globalisation.

Housing Initiatives: 61 percent of respondents favour government subsidies for constructing new housing, indicating widespread concern over housing affordability and a belief in proactive governmental roles in addressing this issue.

2.Progressive Values:

Scepticism Toward "Woke" Agendas: The report reveals that a significant portion of the electorate is critical of progressive social policies, often labelled as "woke" agendas. For instance, only 11 percent believe that individuals born male who identify as female should be permitted to compete in women's sports.

Perception of Elite Detachment: Over 60 percent of voters feel that political elites disregard their views, leading to a sense of disenfranchisement and belief that decision-makers are out of touch with the electorate's concerns.

3.Immigration Policies:

Opposition to High Immigration Levels: A growing majority, 73 percent of voters, oppose the "Big Australia" strategy, expressing that the country does not require more people—a notable increase from 65 percent two years prior. This opposition is linked to concerns over urban overcrowding, strained public services, and housing affordability.

Preference for Local Workforce Development: 67 percent of respondents prefer addressing labour shortages by increasing wages and enhancing skills training for local workers rather than relying on skilled migrants. This reflects a desire to prioritise domestic employment opportunities and reduce dependency on immigration for economic growth.

Implications: The report suggests a widening gap between the policy positions of political elites and the preferences of the general electorate. This disconnect may influence upcoming elections, as major parties risk alienating voters by adhering to neoliberal economic policies and progressive social agendas that lack popular support. The findings indicate potential for political shifts if parties fail to realign their platforms with the electorate's priorities, particularly concerning economic nationalism, immigration control, and traditional social values.

In summary, TAPRI's report underscores a significant divide between Australia's political elites and its voters, with many Australians advocating for policies that prioritise national interests, economic protectionism, and a cautious approach to social change.

The Australian Population Research Institute February 2025 The divide between elites and the electorate Australians get ready to vote – Report No. 1 Based on the Tapri survey of voters in late December 2024 by Katharine Betts and Bob Birrell:

https://tapri.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Elites-vs-the-electorate-report1-2025-finalV2.pdf

"In the last year or two there has been a trend in some European nations and the US for many voters to reject the agenda embraced by the neoliberal, globalising elite. The new Tapri survey explores whether there is any parallel to this trend among Australian voters. The survey drew on a random sample of 3023 Australian voters and was conducted between 12 December and 23 December 2024. The results show that a majority of Australian voters do not support the prevailing neoliberal economic agenda. Nor do they embrace the progressive values and immigration policies often associated with that agenda. The political implications of this disjunction will be explored in a follow-up second report.

Conceptualising the neoliberal, global elite/electorate divide

There is much information about the electorate, but less about who composes the elite. We refer to them as the men and women who are behind the successful spread of the neoliberal economic agenda across much of the developed world, including Australia, since the 1970s. This agenda did not come out of the blue. It reflected the interests of multinational manufacturing and financial interests. These interests wanted an end to the governance arrangements which allowed workers to win increased wages, even as inflation and unemployment reached high levels following the global economic downturn of the late 1970s. In Australia, the key backers of this agenda were commodity producers. Neoliberalism is a doctrine mandating the primacy of market forces. It includes the opening up of global markets in which there is free movement of capital, finance, people, and goods and services. Neoliberalism has also been accompanied by a progressive value set endorsing the virtues of internationalisation and population diversity, both of which values were expected to help win voters' acceptance of the globalising agenda. Neoliberalism could never have taken hold without the aid of an economic technocracy keen to proselytise on its behalf of, or for, those politicians who were willing to take on the vested interests bedded into the previous more protected global order. We deal with the politicians shortly. The technocracy refers to those professionals with economic training who have been sponsored by the neoliberal globalising elite to endorse their neoliberal agenda. Since the 1980s in Australia, this policy package has been dominated by advice from The Treasury and Reserve Bank, and from most market and academic economists, as well as think tanks like the Grattan Institute and most variants of the media which are directed at the university educated. The economic technocracy makes its judgements according to the success of incumbent governments in curbing inflationary outcomes and in allowing maximum room for business to operate profitably. To this end, governments are advised to leave production decisions to private enterprise. Any government action to enter the marketplace is derided as 'picking winners'. Governments must not protect businesses from market pressure, such as by tariffs or other forms of special treatment.

Governments must also minimize subsidies that shield consumers from the competitive marketplace. In effect, the technocracy counsels austerity. This may of course mean pain for many voters, as with high interest rates or unemployment.

What about the politicians constituting the governments implementing these judgements? Where do they fit? Are they part of the elite? Obviously, these politicians are important. However, we see them more as agents of the elite rather than as part of it. In this light, politicians are seen as opportunistic career professionals. Their careers depend on persuading enough voters to vote for them so that they can to win seats and gain, or retain, government power. …