Search

How do migrants evaluate democracy in Australia? While prior studies have examined migrant support for democracy in Australia, less is known about how migrants evaluate the performance of democracy, as captured by indicators on political trust and satisfaction with democracy. Would migrants have lower levels of political trust and satisfaction with democracy as a result of political exclusion, including under-representation in parliament? Or would migrants from less democratic countries, socialised in regimes where critical attitudes towards political authorities are discouraged, be more allegiant citizens with relatively positive evaluations of democracy? Using data from the 2010 to 2019 Australian Election Study surveys, combined with Freedom House regime classifications of migrant origin countries, we examine migrant attitudes towards Australian democracy. The results show that while migrants to Australia from other democratic countries have similar attitudes to those born in Australia, those from less democratic countries have higher levels of political trust and satisfaction with democracy. This suggests that despite political exclusion, migrants from less democratic countries are more allegiant citizens than those born in Australia or another democracy.

The racial and ethnic landscape in Australia has changed markedly since the beginning of the postwar migration period in which migrants arrived from Europe, and later from Asia in the late 1970s. While Australians with European ancestry have gradually made it into state and federal parliament, there has been less visibility for Australians of Asian descent. This article provides an overview of demographic migration trends and levels of Asian-Australian political representation in state and federal politics, drawing on data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics and parliamentary websites. In doing so, we reflect on why political representation of Asian-Australian populations appears to be lagging so far behind.

In terms of Asian Migrant and Ethnic Minority (MEM) representation, the Australian Parliament is one of the most unrepresentative when compared to other similar settler societies such as Canada and the United States. This article examines why the Australian Parliament still predominantly comprises members of parliament from British and European Backgrounds despite Australia’s rich multicultural heritage involving a long history of non-British and European migration. One of the main reasons put forward for the low participation of Asian migrant and ethnic minorities in the Australian Parliament is the lack of geographical concentration of Asian migrants and the declining importance of the ‘ethnic vote’, which in other similar settler countries has led to the selection and recruitment of MEM candidates to competitive seats. This article explores the geographical concentration of Asian migrants in competitive seats as well as voting patterns among Asian Australians using data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Australian Election Studies. In doing so, this research considers whether there is potential for the incorporation of MEM interests in the future through descriptive and substantive representation.

The sociology of citizenship is concerned with the social and economic conditions of citizens of a national community. Drawing on T. H. Marshall’s contribution to the theory of social citizenship this article argues that some groups of migrants and ethnic minorities in Australia, particularly those from non-British and European Backgrounds, face a number of social and institutional barriers which prevent them from reaching their full potential as members of Australia’s multicultural community. Evidence from the Australian Bureau of Statistics Census data shows different socioeconomic outcomes for migrants from British and European backgrounds compared with migrants from Asian backgrounds, despite having similar educational qualifications and length of time living in Australia. As such, it is argued that achieving social membership and inclusion continues to be a struggle for particular groups of migrants. A deeper commitment to the core principles of citizenship that is beyond mere notions of formal equality is needed if Australia is to address this important social issue.

In recent years much has been said about how new democracies are backsliding or have regressed since the turn of the century when hope and optimism about the future spread of democracy was widespread. However, ideas that democracy would spread were based on institutional and governance indicators rather than from the perspective of everyday citizens. When we look at public attitudes towards democracy during this period, we can see that such optimism was perhaps misplaced or premature. Drawing on findings from the AsiaBarometer and the World Values Survey, this research finds that public attitudes during this time were not overly convinced by democracy and certainly not yet satisfied with their government's performance in terms of providing basic democratic freedoms and independence.

The political trajectories in Southeast Asia are much more complex than neat theoretical models would suggest. In particular, the diverse experience of post-authoritarian states are far from linear – often moving forward, backward, and forward again, or stalling for a number of years. Political trajectories can thus be uneven and erratic, as exemplified by Thailand's military coups, graduating from hegemonic to competitive electoral authoritarian rule in Singapore and Malaysia and lingering within the zone of low-quality democracy as characterized by Indonesia's poor governance and neo-patrimonial dynamics. Indeed, since 2014, Freedom House no longer classifies Indonesia as ‘Free’, following the passage of legislation restricting the activity of civil society and the human rights violations against religious minorities. Similarly, Thailand lost its ‘Free’ ranking in 2006 and the Philippines in 2007.

This article explores the extent of authoritarian durability and public opinion towards democracy in Southeast Asia drawing on findings from the Asian Barometer. While Freedom House indicators rank many countries in the region as not free or partially free, a high proportion of citizens within the same countries report that they live in a democracy. Conversely, countries ranked as electoral or liberal democracies have high proportions of citizens who report that they do not live in a democracy. These findings reveal quasi-thermostatic concerns that, when satisfied, open the way for the expression of other concerns. Views about democratic experience reveal differing expectations about democracy among the general public. In general, the results suggest that a high proportion of citizens in Southeast Asia have a rather instrumental view of democracy that is underpinned by perceptions of good governance rather than democratic ideals. Still, while economic growth is considered to be very important, whe...

This work was also supported by the Economic and Social Research Council [grant number RES-239-25-0032].

This article examines the experience of political, social and cultural rights for Malaysia's ethnic minorities. Using a survey method, our research finds that while Malaysia has made substantial economic progress, lack of attention to political, social and cultural rights for ethnic minorities in Malaysia has meant that ethnic minorities have become increasingly dissatisfied with their experience of citizenship. Experiences of institutional and social discrimination within Malaysia's ethnically differentiated model of citizenship are common. Such experiences can lead to low levels of confidence in Malaysia's national institutions and have the capacity to undermine the kind of political support that is necessary for good governance and national stability.

Immigration in Australia is inherently a controversial topic. Events such as the MV Tampa affair cause increased media and legislative attention but increased legislative attention in the policy area do not always follow such dramatic events. We analyse media and legislative attention in the area of immigration and show increased activity in parliament around both dramatic events discussed in the media and also over more technical issues. Increased attention within parliament sometimes occurs outside of the gaze of the media.

The stability of the Australian two-party system has been a long-running feature of Australian politics. But a question outstanding in the literature is how different generations of Australians contribute to the stability of the Australian two-party system and how this has changed over time. In answering this question, this article sheds light on generational effects and party system change that better informs us about the sources of voting patterns over a long period of time. Further, this article draws on and builds on the international literature on generations and party systems.

In April 2013, Australia's population reached 23 million. Up to 60 percent of population growth in Australia comes from immigration and 40 percent of population growth comes from natural increase. It is therefore not too surprising that the issue of immigration receives a considerable amount of attention in the overall Commonwealth policy agenda. However, immigration policy is a complex policy area that is vulnerable to sudden increases in policy attention. Such increases in policy attention may be related to external shocks, wars or changing global economic conditions. This article charts some of the contextual factors, which result in high-salience punctuations and intense policy activity in the area of immigration.

Leadership change formed the backdrop to the 2010 Australian federal election, with the replacement of Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister by Julia Gillard, the country's first female Prime Minister. This article uses the 2010 Australian Election Study to examine patterns of voter defection between the 2007 and 2010 elections. The results show that the predominant influence on defection was how voters rated the leaders. Julia Gillard was popular among female voters and her overall impact on the vote was slightly greater than that of Tony Abbott. Defectors from Labor to the Greens disapproved of Kevin Rudd's dismissal from office. Policy issues were second in importance after leadership, particularly for those moving from the Coalition to Labor, who were concerned about health and unemployment. Overall, the results point to the enduring importance of leaders as the predominant influence on how voters cast their ballot.

The Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has recently announced plans to develop greater regional integration and cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. Historically, Australian opinion, however, has expressed some anxiety about forging closer economic, political and security ties with Asia. Using trend data from the Australian Election Study and the Lowy Institute Poll, this article examines changes in Australian public opinion on closer engagement with Asia and whether the Australian public is likely to support the Rudd government's push towards developing deeper regional diplomacy. The article finds a shift in opinion since the 1990s with a younger generation of voters who are moderately supportive of Australia's engagement with Asia.

Through an investigation of the idea of the stranger, this article seeks to blend theory with empirical research. It does this in three ways. First, it engages with a social theory of the stranger articulated in the work of Zygmunt Bauman. Second, it examines data from the Australian Election Study surveys between 1996 and 2007 in order to explore attitudinal changes towards groups of immigrants. The findings from this survey suggests that attitudes towards immigrants in general have fluctuated in Australia, despite the negative effects of economic globalization, the growth in neoliberal economic reforms and terrorist attacks in the West. Third, drawing on Bauman's theory of the stranger we provide an interpretation of these fluctuating attitudes through the idea of the hybrid stranger. Finally, we argue that a more nuanced understanding of these attitudes towards immigrants in Australia is possible when a theory of the stranger is informed by a discussion on the constitution of host self, the influence of the media, the role of government policy, and the impact of class and geography.

In many ways, Indonesia is regarded as one of the most important members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). It is for this reason that Indonesia’s embrace of democratization, as well as the West’s enthusiastic embrace of the world’s third-largest democracy, has led to raised eyebrows in the region. Calls within Indonesia for the development of a ‘post-ASEAN’ regional strategy are also causing disquiet within the region. What will become of ASEAN and all it stands for, Indonesia’s neighbours are apparently asking, if Indonesia’s increasing dissatisfaction with ASEAN leads to more aggressive overtures to the West and other non-ASEAN members such as China and Japan?

The latter years of the first decade of the twenty-first century were characterised by an enormous amount of challenge and change to Australia and Australians. Australia’s part in these challenges and changes is borne of our domestic and global ties, our orientation towards ourselves and others, and an ever increasing awareness of the interdependency of our world. Challenges and changes such as terrorism, climate change, human rights, community breakdown, work and livelihood, and crime are not new but they take on new variations and impact on us in different ways in times such as these.