Incoming Feed Items

On this special episode of After America, we explore the state of the Australia-United States relationship under the Whitlam government, the machinations at the time around the renewal of Pine Gap, and the previously untold account of Dr Liz Cham, former executive assistant in the office of Prime Minister Whitlam, who recalls handing over a mystery letter to an American official just before the Dismissal.

The interview with Liz Cham was recorded on Thursday 30 October.

A time for Bravery: what happens when Australia chooses courage is available for pre-order now via Australia Institute Press. Use the code ‘SAVE5’ to get $5 off.

Aiming Higher: Universities and Australia’s future by Professor George Williams is also available now.

Guest: Elizabeth Cham, fellow at the University of Technology Sydney and former executive assistant in the office of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam

Host: Emma Shortis, Director, International & Security Affairs, the Australia Institute // @emmashortis

Scripting and production support: Stephen Long

Sound design and mixing: Simon Branthwaite

Show notes:

When I sat down with the Venezuelan political activist and media producer, Ambar Garcia, in 2016, I was somewhat taken aback by her sombre prognosis: “If the social movements do not assume the necessary critique for repoliticising the process… then we will not be talking about ALBA in three years.” Unfortunately for those of us who saw great promise in this novel form of international socialism, Ambar’s statement now seems prescient. The search for signs of life within the ALBA-TCP yields a string of summits and agreements that are big on rhetoric and small on delivery of public policy or economic transformation. On the academic side, the flurry over this counter-hegemonic region has certainly tempered. Notwithstanding some recent achievements, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, even sympathetic observers note that “it is unclear to what extent ALBA, as an international coalition, still exists.”

A friend who works with high school students recently said to me, “I overheard a group of boys talking about ‘international Jewry.’” He was in disbelief to hear these seemingly mild-mannered kids express views that, not 20 years ago, would have been considered taboo.

What is going on with Gen Z?

I’ve written elsewhere that Gen Z is experiencing a kind of church resurgence. That remains true. But at the same time, Gen Z is one of the most polarized generations in American history.

In 2024, Gen Z—led in part by young activists like Charlie Kirk and Scott Pressler—shifted toward Donald Trump. He won 46% of Gen Z voters—56% of young men and 40% of young women. This led many to expect that a younger, more populist generation would shift the country rightward. But now, in 2025, the self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist Zohran Mamdani won 78% of the youth vote in New York City—67% of young men and 84% of young women. Far from being locked into any one existing political party, young people are more divided than ever.

One cause of this is what I call “Nomadic Progressivism.” Kids born between, say, 1997 and 2012 have been thoroughly inundated with progressivism and identity politics from birth. They came of age amid several key developments that shaped their moral and social formation:

Wändi Bruine de Bruin, Keshav Dogra, Sebastian Heise, Edward S. Knotek II, Brent H. Meyer, Robert W. Rich, Raphael S. Schoenle, Giorgio Topa, and Wilbert van der Klaauw

Unless the state and federal governments can agree to make big structural changes to the way they collect revenue and spend it on health, then millions more people will die sooner than they need to, live in more pain than is medically necessary and waste years of their lives navigating a broken system rather than doing something far more productive — like working, caring for their kids or simply gardening.

The problem is that we have left the problem to the state health ministers to negotiate solutions with the federal health minister and they are stuck in a zero-sum game.

In the current negotiations, every dollar gained by one state either comes at another’s expense or adds to the Commonwealth deficit.

The obvious solution is to find more revenue, but that’s usually a conversation for treasurers, not health ministers.

Trying to fix our public health system without talking about how to collect more revenue is like trying to cure heart disease while ignoring the need for better diet and exercise.

Systemic problems respond best to systemic solutions. And luckily there is a simple solution to the health ministers’ woes.

But before prescribing the cure, let’s first accurately diagnose the problem.

The states’ major source of revenue from the Commonwealth comes from the GST.

When John Howard and Peter Costello proposed the GST, they roped in state premiers to help sell the idea by promising that all of proceeds from the GST would flow to states to fund services such as health and education.

In it, he described exactly what we see happening today.

This will not be an attempt to cast Calwell as some sort of heroic prophet. The former immigration minister and leader of the Labor party, known as the architect of Australia’s postwar immigration framework, was racist. He harboured racist views against Asians and other people of colour, tried to extend the White Australia policy for as long as he could and, even after politics, continued to rage against non-European immigration and people.

If there was one thing Calwell did understand intimately, it was structural power and the politics that dictated it. He wrote of the Labor Party as being a “duality”:”

“It is a political party in the accepted meaning of the term; but, at the same time, whether in power or out of power, it is a mass movement. It is always a propagandist movement seeking to change society in accordance with its policy. This gives the Labor Party a continuity which no other party possesses, a continuity of purpose which persists whether it is in power or not. For the conservative parties, possession of power is an end in itself, because conservative parties have never thought it part of their duty to attempt to change society fundamentally.”

Of Robert Menzies, who he had observed from his entry into politics, Calwell wrote” “Menzies was enough of a realist to be a socialist when necessary”.

Government policies that incentivise property investment do so at ever increasing personal debt levels resulting in Australia evidencing the second highest level of personal debt after the Swiss. This means that Australian households while wealthy in net wealth and asset terms, carry far more risk than nearly all other individuals within advanced economies in the OECD notwithstanding the Swiss who evidence a much smaller development available land mass and population.  

It is therefore very important to consider the resilience of Australian households. Recent research from the RBA (2020) is instructive. The RBA research results suggest that risks arising from Australian household indebtedness are more subtle than sometimes conveyed (RBA, 2020). Most pertinently key market parameters, and factors, such as changes in the level of real income, nominal rate levels and household ownership of rental stock, account for currently household debt levels.

Prosper Australia submission to Inquiry into Local Government Funding and Fiscal Sustainability (House of Representatives Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport) – 19 November 2025 Introduction Prosper Australia welcomes the Committee’s examination of local government funding and the relationship between local government and other tiers of government. Our submission outlines three key points […]

The editors of the Journal of Australian Political Economy like to encourage and enable students to progress to publishing articles based on their work. Particularly for any student who has been writing a dissertation or thesis, getting an article published in a reputable journal like JAPE is potentially helpful in job-seeking and career development. It is also a personally fulfilling process.

The JAPE Young Scholar Award also provides a more direct incentive because a prize of $1000 goes to the Award winner. A further $1000 is payable when the resulting article is published.

The descriptor ‘Young Scholar’ does not set an age limit: rather it indicates that applicants should be in the transitional stage from student essay-writing to publishing an article for a more senior audience. Applicants may be of any age, but should be in at least their third year of undergraduate study in political economy or a related social science subject. They may have already completed their degree.

Students who are completing an honours thesis and would like the experience of doing further research during part of the following year (or the year after) would be particularly welcome to apply.

The winner of the Award will receive guidance about how to convert their work into a publishable form for a journal like JAPE.

Applications need to be submitted to the JAPE editorial coordinator, Frank Stilwell [frank.stilwell@sydney.edu.au], by 6 December 2025.

Listen to the full conversation on the Perspectives Journal podcast, available to subscribe on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Amazon Music, and all other major podcast platforms.

In November 2025, Between the Lines books published Women United: Stories of Women’s Struggles for Equality in the Canadian Auto Workers Union by Peggy Nash and Julie White. The co-authors were interviewed by Tricia Wilson, Director of Equity and Racial Justice at Unifor, at their November 13 book launch event held in Toronto.

This article is read by Eunice Wong, a Juilliard-trained actor, featured on Audible’s list of Best Women Narrators. Her work is on the annual Best Audiobooks lists of the New York Times, Audible, AudioFile, & Library Journal. www.eunicewong.actor

Text originally published November 10, 2025.

The charge that newly elected New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani is an “Islamist” has mostly been derided either as Islamophobic or mocked as Boomer bait. In response, many cite Mamdani’s commitments to various leftist social causes that are antithetical to radical Islam, such as his promise to use $65 million in taxpayer funds for “sex change” operations. And indeed, he seems to use his Muslim faith as more of a chit in the great progressive oppression game—“Muslim and brown: two points!”—than being genuinely dedicated to its tenets, let alone the fundamentalist version of it.

However, his campaign’s success is owed at least partially to what may be New York City’s first politically organized Muslim voting bloc. It represents what is likely the beginning of a new chapter in the city’s long history of ethnic retail politics.

Even in his transition period, Mamdani’s deep connection to this voting bloc is clear. For example, Hassaan Chaudhary, the political director for Mamdani’s transition and inaugural committee, was not only outed by the New York Post for anti-Semitism, which is par for the course in left-wing politics, but also for the more traditional Muslim skepticism of gay rights, which is decidedly not.

Three incidents from Mamdani’s campaign stood out as notable, showing his connections to this growing group.

Introduction The relationship between wealth and democracy has always been uneasy. In principle, democracy rests on political equality, the idea that each citizen’s voice carries equal weight. In practice, vast wealth inequality has created parallel economies of influence. Obscene wealth increasingly dictates who is heard, what issues are prioritised, and whose interests shape policy decisions. […]

The post Money, Media, and Lords appeared first on Equality Trust.

The Wrap with Amy Remeikis

Fifty-three years ago, Gough Whitlam swept to power with the slogan ‘it’s time’.

Looking at this Labor government, you now have to wonder what are they waiting for?

It’s past time for fair tax reform. Past time for an end to fossil fuel expansion. Past time for the government to start governing for people, and not vested interests.

And yet, as we enter the last sitting week for the year (unless Labor gets its way on the environment laws, in which case the government will probably try and drag everyone back for one more sitting), with Labor walking away from gambling advertisement reforms recommended by the late Peta Murphy, we have to ask again, what is it Labor is waiting for?

The gambling reforms are a perfect example of how hesitant Labor is to use power. Because what does it have to lose? The public supports it. Unlike the under-16s social media ban, there is evidence it will reduce harm. There are a multitude of ways for Labor to address the roadblocks of free-to-air television and media suffering a loss of gambling ad revenue, including by putting a levy on the gambling companies which trade in people’s hope and addictions. But they won’t do it.

And it’s a wake-up call for government. At precisely the time you would expect Australia to be building its ability to conduct cutting-edge public science, our premier scientific agency is sacking people.

CSIRO tried to characterise the cuts as “a renewed emphasis on inventing and deploying technological solutions to tackle national problems”, but it’s blatant cost-cutting. The news of the 350 full-time-equivalent researcher jobs being cut comes on the back of another 800 jobs being cut in the past 18 months.

Australians have always been fiercely proud of the CSIRO – and rightly so.

Few public institutions anywhere in the world can boast a track record like it. CSIRO is globally respected. From fast Wi-Fi, the polymer banknote, the Hendra virus vaccine, breakthroughs in radio astronomy, and world-leading climate modelling, CSIRO has repeatedly punched above its weight. The debt of gratitude Australians owe CSIRO for Aerogard alone can never be repaid.

Which is why it’s so alarming to watch its funding – and its people – bleed away.

The timing of these cuts couldn’t be worse. With the United States gutting its universities and medical research sector – Trump’s America has become a terrifying place to do science – Australia has a once-in-a-generation chance to attract some of the world’s top researchers. Instead we’re sacking researchers by the hundreds.

The Wage Price Index was released on Wednesday and is a measure of how fast wages are increasing.

It showed that wages increased 3.4 per cent over the past year, the same as the annual increase from last quarter.

An annual growth rate of 3.4 per cent is reasonable. The long run average is 3.1 per cent, so it’s slightly above average.

However, as the graph below shows, the growth rate in wages has fallen since it peaked at the end of 2023.

The Reserve Bank will certainly be happy, as it firmly believes that higher wages are a cost for businesses, who will push up prices in order to protect their profits. For the Reserve Bank, higher wages lead to higher inflation.

Is the cost-of-living crisis over?

Not so fast. Wages growth is only part of the picture. What people should really be focused on is what economist call real wages.

Real wages is a measure of how much stuff you can buy with your wage.

On this special episode of Dollars & Sense, Liam O’Brien from the Australian Council of Trade Unions and Dr Ingrid Burfurd from The Superpower Institute join Dr Richard Denniss to discuss taxing the gas industry more effectively.

This discussion was recorded on Wednesday 29 October 2025 at the Australia Institute’s Revenue Summit at Parliament House in Canberra.

A time for Bravery: what happens when Australia chooses courage is available for pre-order now via Australia Institute Press. Use the code ‘SAVE5’ to get $5 off.

Aiming Higher: Universities and Australia’s future by Professor George Williams is also available now.

Guest: Liam O’Brien, Assistant Secretary, Australian Council of Trade Unions // @lbobrien

Guest: Ingrid Burfurd, Carbon Pricing and Policy Lead, The Superpower Institute

Host: Richard Denniss, co-Chief Executive Chief, the Australia Institute // @richarddenniss