Australia's politicians keep reaching for the racist dog whistle - here's why

By Nèha Madhok

Dog whistles work because they let a politician play both sides of the fence. They can tap into racial resentment as the source of economic anxiety, without ever explicitly saying it, writes Nèha Madhok.

---

Image source: SBS

Pieces like this one are free to read. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber so Cheek can continue paying writers for their insight and expertise.

---

I was six years old when Pauline Hanson gave her infamous maiden speech, warning white Australians that they were in danger of being ‘swamped by Asians’.

Later that night, when they thought I was asleep, I overheard my parents discussing whether we might need to leave Australia.

I remember lying there thinking, I can’t leave. This is the only home I’ve ever known.

Thirty years later, Australian politicians continue blaming migrants for all our problems. They never stopped. And it’s hurting all of us – not just people of colour who bear the brunt of racist dog whistles, but all Australians who deserve real action on cost of living instead of a punching bag.

Last week, I was on SBS Insight, and I listened to Australians describe their frustrations with the major parties. Everyone felt like they were promised a decent life, and it’s crumbling before them. But politicians are choosing to redirect that anger towards migrants, rather than the failures of their own governments to invest in public housing, hospitals, schools and infrastructure.

In his Budget reply speech, Opposition Leader Angus Taylor spent 30 minutes scapegoating migrants and permanent residents, proposing that non-citizens should lose access to welfare. Phrases like ‘Australians first’ and warnings about ‘mass migration’ were deliberate political signals designed to tap into racial resentment and economic anxiety.

When right-wing politicians talk about ‘migrants’, we all know who they really mean.

That’s how dog whistles work. Named for ultrasonic dog whistles that are audible to dogs but not humans, in politics, dog-whistling means using coded language that furtively signals to supporters while flying under the radar of public outrage.

Done well, a dog whistle sounds benign and reasonable; it has plausible deniability. Taylor chose to use coded language that feels emotionally familiar to his audience, but vague enough to avoid scrutiny. There’s nothing explicitly wrong with ‘Australian values’, and ‘burden to taxpayers’ sounds like any political soundbite. These phrases are designed to suggest threat without naming race.

Speeches like Taylor’s rarely mention substantial policy solutions. They are about creating a dichotomy of blame and belonging. Who gets to be ‘Australian’, and who remains a permanent suspect no matter how long they’ve lived here or how much tax they’ve paid?

Australia was founded on this kind of politics, starting with the White Australia Policy, which was enacted through the Immigration Restriction Act – a more bland and innocuous name.

Dog whistles work because they let a politician play both sides of the fence. They can tap into racial resentment as the source of economic anxiety, without ever explicitly saying it.

Angus Taylor has since been challenged by those who see the dog whistle for what it is, and he can insist he was just being reasonable, all while the audience he’s trying to reach understands the real implications. That’s why dog whistles work so well: you can be vague enough to deny being an explicit racist, and you can signal to your supporters that you understand their fears.

This style of politics corrodes social cohesion, teaching people to distrust their neighbours instead of questioning why one of the wealthiest countries in the world can’t seem to house people. These culture wars actively undermine good policymaking, and racism becomes a distraction from political accountability on both sides of politics.

The simplest way to spot a dog whistle is to ask yourself about the motivation behind it. A dog whistle loses its lustre when brought into the light; its power relies on ambiguity. Once we name the tactic, interrogate its claims and ask ourselves who benefits, the language loses its power.

For example, when Taylor said ‘Labor’s mass migration floodgates’, what is ‘mass migration’? Where is the evidence that migration and housing stress are linked? Why aren’t they talking about the tax concessions that allow investors to accumulate properties, or their own party’s lack of investment in public housing?

Most importantly, dog whistles fail when communities refuse to be divided. When people recognise that economic insecurity is being deliberately redirected by politicians downwards, towards migrants, instead of upwards, at the mega-rich who stand to benefit from investment property tax concessions. Once communities catch on to dog-whistling, it becomes much harder to manufacture resentment.

The economic frustrations Australians are experiencing should be taken seriously, but Australia deserves better than politicians who whip up racial panic in place of policy. We should be demanding leaders capable of addressing the actual drivers of inequality, ones willing to invest in the public good, and not give handouts to their tax-dodging big business mates while everyday working people struggle.

Our problems were created by politicians like Angus Taylor, those who choose to drum up resentment instead of presenting solutions. Racism won’t solve our issues.

---

About the author

Nèha Madhok (they/them) is a writer, political strategist, and content creator based in Sydney. Nèha co-founded Democracy in Colour, a racial justice organisation led by and for people of colour.