Pauline Hanson wants a 'monocultural' society. But this version of Australia has never existed | Alan Atkinson
Guardian AU
β’Wed, 24 Jun 2026 15:00:49 GMT
π° What Happened
In this opinion piece, historian Alan Atkinson challenges One Nation leader Pauline Hanson's assertion that Australia cannot be multicultural and must exist as a "monocultural society." Atkinson argues that Australia has never been monocultural, except as an unrealised dream. He traces the nation's diversity back to the First Fleet itself, which he describes as "enormously diverse," and argues that multiculturalism has always been part of the Australian experience. He also draws on wider historical examples, noting that the British Empire was a pluralist arrangement from the 1760s, with different languages and legal systems operating across Quebec, southern Africa, and other colonies. The piece was published amid an ongoing national debate about multiculturalism sparked by comments from opposition leader Angus Taylor and Pauline Hanson.
π The Backstory
The debate over multiculturalism in Australia has reignited in June 2026, triggered by a series of political comments about national identity and cultural diversity. Pauline Hanson, leader of One Nation, has long advocated for reduced immigration and assimilationist policies. Her recent call for a "monocultural society" has been met with opposition from across the political spectrum. This piece by Alan Atkinson, a respected Australian historian, provides a historical counterargument to Hanson's vision, drawing on deep research into Australia's colonial and post-colonial history to demonstrate that cultural diversity is not a recent phenomenon but a longstanding feature of Australian society.
π― Why It Matters
This contribution to the multiculturalism debate provides historical depth to a politically charged discussion, grounding arguments about national identity in evidence rather than ideological claims. It matters because how Australia defines itself culturally has direct implications for immigration policy, social cohesion programs, and the political strategies of major parties grappling with the rise of One Nation and similar movements.
In this opinion piece, historian Alan Atkinson challenges One Nation leader Pauline Hanson's assertion that Australia cannot be multicultural and must exist as a "monocultural society." Atkinson argues that Australia has never been monocultural, except as an unrealised dream. He traces the nation's diversity back to the First Fleet itself, which he describes as "enormously diverse," and argues that multiculturalism has always been part of the Australian experience. He also draws on wider historical examples, noting that the British Empire was a pluralist arrangement from the 1760s, with different languages and legal systems operating across Quebec, southern Africa, and other colonies. The piece was published amid an ongoing national debate about multiculturalism sparked by comments from opposition leader Angus Taylor and Pauline Hanson.
The debate over multiculturalism in Australia has reignited in June 2026, triggered by a series of political comments about national identity and cultural diversity. Pauline Hanson, leader of One Nation, has long advocated for reduced immigration and assimilationist policies. Her recent call for a "monocultural society" has been met with opposition from across the political spectrum. This piece by Alan Atkinson, a respected Australian historian, provides a historical counterargument to Hanson's vision, drawing on deep research into Australia's colonial and post-colonial history to demonstrate that cultural diversity is not a recent phenomenon but a longstanding feature of Australian society.
This contribution to the multiculturalism debate provides historical depth to a politically charged discussion, grounding arguments about national identity in evidence rather than ideological claims. It matters because how Australia defines itself culturally has direct implications for immigration policy, social cohesion programs, and the political strategies of major parties grappling with the rise of One Nation and similar movements.