One Nation’s recent by-election victory in Secret Harbour highlights a continued surge in support for the populist party amid a broader context of social disconnection and political dissatisfaction in Australia. While some attribute the win solely to anger and exclusionary politics, others point to a deeper yearning among voters for belonging and a shared sense of identity.

The rise of One Nation aligns with global trends in which populist movements gain traction during periods marked by social isolation and diminishing community engagement. Recent survey data reveal that a significant portion of Australians have never joined any formal organisations, underscoring a broader disengagement from collective participation. This decline in communal ties coincides with technological developments such as the gig economy, personalized digital environments, and emerging applications of artificial intelligence, which can intensify social atomization.

One Nation’s messaging taps into this sentiment by positioning the party as a unifying force for “the common people” against perceived elites, contrasting itself with progressive groups it accuses of promoting division. This narrative echoes historical frameworks like those of the Australian trade union movement, which also began as a response to social and economic dislocation, focusing on worker solidarity and political influence. However, union membership and influence have declined markedly since their peak in the mid-1970s, due in part to structural changes in the economy, aggressive union-rights rollbacks, and shifts toward contract-based employment.

Despite reduced membership, a majority of Australians continue to regard unions as important advocates for workers’ rights, with about 60 percent acknowledging their value—far outstripping current membership levels. The union movement is currently undergoing leadership changes, with figures such as Sally McManus and Michele O’Neil set to pass the mantle after nearly a decade of activism. This transition occurs against a backdrop of advancing technological disruptions, including the expanding use of AI in the workplace, which presents new challenges related to wages, job security, worker surveillance, and intellectual property.

Early legislative debates in Australia are already addressing concerns over these issues, though critics note that Pauline Hanson’s parliamentary record largely aligns with business interests rather than workers’ protections. Unions, along with other social institutions—including the Catholic Church, gender advocacy groups, and environmental organisations—are mobilizing to shape policies around AI governance and labour rights, indicating the emergence of a more inclusive, non-nativist coalition.

Observers stress the importance of renewing collective engagement as a form of resistance to fragmented and top-down power structures. Renewed participation in organised groups is seen as vital for citizens to regain influence over political and economic decisions, particularly as rapid technological change accelerates. This grassroots approach, inspired in part by the principle of subsidiarity highlighted by Pope Leo in recent teachings, advocates for power originating from community and workplace networks.

Ultimately, the future of Australian politics may depend on the ability of institutions like unions to provide a genuine alternative to populist parties whose platforms often rest on grievance rather than substantive advocacy for workers and communities. Failure to cultivate stronger, more inclusive social ties risks leaving common ground to factions driven by exclusionary rhetoric and aligned with entrenched economic powers.