Australian Journal of Politics and History: Volume 47, Number 4, 2001, pp. 512-515. © Department of History, School of Political Science and International Studies, The University of Queensland and Blackwell Publishers 2001. The Two Faces of Economic Insecurity: Reply to Goot and Watson on One Nation NICK TURNBULL and SHAUN WILSON University of New South Wales Goot and Watson’s article on One Nation 1 represents a considerable advance on other studies of One Nation, its electoral support and its social foundations. They correctly identify the importance of conservative social attitudes amongst One Nation supporters. However, we take issue with the strong conclusion reached by the authors, which more or less rejects the argument that One Nation has emerged out of the growing economic insecurity of its supporters. 2 We do not agree that this conclusion is either the unambiguous finding of their own analysis or a conclusion that can be reached without considering a wider range of factors. Our criticisms fall into four areas: Economic Insecurity and the Anti-immigration Scale The most important and controversial argument made by Goot and Watson is that “the basis of One Nation’s mobilisation did not lie in concerns about economic insecurity so much as in opposition to ‘new class’ values, particularly around race”. 3 However, we do not think this conclusion is sustained from their own evidence. To prove their point, Goot and Watson analyse data from the 1998 Australian Election Study. Using this data, the authors construct scales to determine the support base of the Australian Labor Party, the Liberal-National Coalition, the Australian Democrats and One Nation respectively. Goot and Watson note that: “Where One Nation respondents are strikingly distinct […] is in their attitudes: anti-immigrant, anti-Aboriginal and alienated from Australian democracy. They were not distinct, however, in their level of concern about economic insecurity.” 4 From this, Goot and Watson think that they have located the central variable explaining support for One Nation. Two comments can be made about this line of argument. The first relates to one of the scales which Goot and Watson use to sustain the distinction between conservative values and economic insecurity. Two of the questions that made up the anti- immigration scale, which is apparently a measure of conservative values, in fact pertain directly to economic insecurity (“Immigrants are generally good for Australia’s economy” and “Immigrants take jobs away from people who are born in Australia.”). 5 1 Murray Goot and Ian Watson, “One Nation’s Electoral Support: Where Does It Come From, What Makes It Different and How Does It Fit?” Australian Journal of Politics and History 47, no. 2 (2001). 2 “We cannot even say that One Nation is a magnet for the unemployed or the economically insecure” ibid. p.185; see also pp.186, 187. 3 Ibid. p.159. 4 Ibid. p.167. 5 The other questions in the scale asked about the rate of immigration, the effect of immigrants on the crime rate and on Australia’s openness to new ideas and cultures.