Federal Election 2019: Meet Rise Up Australia


Website: https://riseupaustraliaparty.com/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RUAParty/
Say no to Racism, Multiculturalism, Islamism, Socialism, Communism, Nazism
Keep Australia Australian
Themes: Right wing Christian conservative party.  Into individual liberty, except for things like euthanasia, abortion, being gay, etc.  Think that Muslims can’t be true Australians.  Economically regressive. Fond of freedom of speech and also censorship.  Logical consistency is not their best trick.
Upper House: NSW, NT, QLD, VIC
Lower House: Bendigo, Boothby, Casey, Chisolm, Corangamite, Dunkley, Hotham, Isaacs, Jaga Jaga, La Trobe, Lingiari, MacNamara, Mallee, Solomon
Preferences: Rise Up Australia has possibly the most nauseating How to Vote tickets so far.  They favour the Liberals, the Christian Democrats, the Australian Conservatives, Fraser Anning’s Conservative National Party, and the DLP as their top parties in every state except QLD, where the DLP doesn’t run.  After the DLP, we get United Australia Party, One Nation, the Great Australian Party and the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers.  In Queensland, we finish off the set with Love Australia or Leave.

Essentially, if it’s a horribly racist, extreme right-wing Christian party that loves guns, Rise Up Australia is all for it.  What a bunch of charmers.

Previous reviews

Policies & Commentary

Rise Up Australia bills itself  as ‘The Christian conservative patriotic party’, which is an interesting concept, since I don’t recall Jesus being particularly into patriotism (maybe they are followers of Simon the Zealot?), and on Facebook they lead with the somewhat baffling statement:

Say no to Racism, Multiculturalism, Islamism, Socialism, Communism, Nazism

Some of these things are really not like the other things.  I wonder if they have fallen for the ‘Nazis were socialists’ fallacy?  And I’m not at all convinced you can simultaneously say no to racism and multiculturalism, or at least, not with any real claim to logic.  However, their front page has a rotating banner of photos of their supporters, and these include quite a few people of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander appearance, as well as at least one person of Asian descent, so with a bit of luck, they will turn out to confine their racism to immigrants and actually have some decent policies for Indigenous Australians.  Hey, I can hope…

Their front page starts with their candidates, but there is a banner asking for donations to their Drought and Natural Disaster Relief account for farming communities, so that’s nice.

Oh, I see, and their tabs linking to values and policies just push you further down the page, where they have a question for us.

Do you love this country the way it is?

Well, that really depends on what you are defining as the way it is, now, doesn’t it.

They plan to protect Aussie Jobs, Aussie Ownership, the Aussie Way of Life and Aussie Customs, and to Keep Australia Australian.

We then get treated to a warning about what it would mean to have Sharia law practiced in this country.

Let me be clear.  I don’t want Sharia law practiced in Australia.  And I don’t think that there is the remotest likelihood of this happening, given that our Muslim population is something like 2% of all Australians, most of whom like our legal system the way it is, and some of whom (particularly refugees) undoubtedly came here to escape oppressive regimes in their own country.

I’m not going to bother sharing their scare tactics, because there is nothing here that you haven’t seen before.  And if there isn’t, I’m not going to promote it.

On to their policies.  I got all excited when it looked like they only have eight of them, but then there was a link to another page with LOTS MORE, and I may cry.

So I’m going to divert just for a moment to note that their About page is mostly about Danny Nalliah, whom you might recall blamed the Victorian bushfires in 2008 on the government’s recent  legalisation of abortion in Victoria.  Since he was the president of Catch the Fire Ministries at the time, I feel that this sends something of a mixed message.

Also, RUAP has a party song!  Oh guys, I am *way* ahead of you on this.  So far ahead.  You have no idea.

Right, I suppose I’d better face up to those policies.

Immigration, Multiculturalism and Refugees

RUA doesn’t like multiculturalism, but instead wants Australia to be ‘Multi-ethnic with one culture’.

A ‘multi-ethnic nation with one culture’ means that we have a melting pot that draws its richness from a blend of many ethnic groups. These groups may introduce a diverse range of cultural elements from their homelands but they are assimilated into Australian society as a whole. They don’t try to override Australian cultural traditions but strive to merely complement them. A fine example of this is Melbourne’s famous Lygon Street in which all Australians, male or female, from all walks of life can enjoy the best of Italian cuisine and a cosmopolitan cafe culture.

So, we want your interesting foreign food, just not your dirty foreign ideas.  Lovely.

Naturally, this rapidly turns out to be about Muslim immigrants, and an opposition to Sharia law (which apparently the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils has been trying to push on Australia).  Apparently, one can’t be Muslim and have true allegiance to Australia.

We love the Muslim people but oppose their texts (Quran/KOran) and Islamic doctrine and ideology because it is oppressive and incompatible with the Australian way of life. 

It’s very ‘love the sin, hate the sinner’, and the experience of friends of mine who have been on the receiving end of this kind of ‘love’ have generally found it… less than loving.


We stand robustly on the foundation of our Judeo-Christian heritage, which includes the Ten Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, the 1215 Magna Carta and the 1688 Bill of Rights.

I had to look up the 1688 (or rather, the 1689) Bill of Rights, which turns out to be mostly about limiting the power of the English monarchy, and also making sure we don’t have any Catholics in charge.  So ScoMo is OK, but Shorten is suspect because he only converted to Anglicanism as an adult.  And obviously, Barnaby Joyce, Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull were all far too Catholic to hold onto the leadership.

This explains so much about all those leadership spills.  The Coalition has clearly been trying to save us from ourselves, and to restore to Australia the freedoms legislated in the 1689 Bill of Rights.

But let’s be real, here.  RUA isn’t actually worried about Catholicism.  They are worried about Islam.

Practices consistent with sharia law, unsanctioned by the government, have already crept into Australia. ABC News reported in June 2013 that one man was jailed and another three given good behaviour bonds in Sydney for giving another man 40 lashes as a sharia law punishment for drinking alcohol.

So in fact, the system is working.  Someone tried to justify flogging on the basis of Sharia law, and our legal system said, er, no, that would be assault, and the man went to jail.  I don’t see a problem here.

RUA is big on freedom of speech (of which more later).

Under multiculturalism, you are branded an intolerant racist if you refuse the Muslims the right of their religion, namely the aspect of Sharia law, which halves the rights of women and encourages Jihad (violence to progress Islam). Consequently we are vigorously opposed to dual legal systems operating simultaneously, as there will undoubtedly be conflicts of interest. We aim to promote a society of harmony, freedom and tolerance.

Do you see the bait-and-switch, here?  You are branded as intolerant if you refuse the Muslims ‘the right of their religion’, which is Sharia Law.  Nobody is saying that it is intolerant to say, no thanks, we like our legal system as it stands, no Sharia for you.  But if you are going to run around telling everyone that all Muslims are secretly trying to change the laws on us (which, as we have seen recently, is the kind of rhetoric that gets people killed), then yes, you are either prejudiced and intolerant, or you are someone who knows better but is deliberately lying in order to inspire fear and hatred.  Neither of these are good things.

RUA likes immigrants!  Honest, they do!  Immigrants bring with them lots of nice things and awesome food!

Just not boat people who want to rort our system for financial gain.

They repeat the usual lies about asylum seekers deliberately destroying documents and coaching each other on how to make up better stories.  Most of these refugees are from Muslim countries, of course.  And ‘Administrative pressures to process high numbers of applicants with limited resources meant that there had been refugee claims without sufficient substantiation that had been approved.’  This is, of course, terribly unfair on genuine refugees.  Oh, and they want Australia to withdraw from the UN’s refugee convention.

*RUAP is committed to across-the-board reforms to the immigration system that includes a hard-line approach to false claims of refugee status and a requirement that settlers who are capable of working go onto productive employment rather than long-term welfare dependency.
We also support offshore processing and safe mandatory detention, with children given priority access, with an increase in resources to equip our officials in making sound assessments.
RUAP will ensure that those who are found to have manipulated the system, exhibited violent or aggressive behaviour, destroyed identity documents or are incompatible with the Australian way of life are refused entry.
*RUAP will strongly consider restricting, even preventing, migration from countries who are proving to be of a national security or terror risk, and we make no apologies for this hard-line approach. To use an old idiom, “Charity begins at home”; in other words, Australians are our first priority.

The implication that most asylum seekers are here to rort the system and go on welfare is just charming.  Also note ‘incompatible with the Australian way of life’.  Given their apparent conviction that all Muslims want All Shariah, All The Time, I’m pretty sure this is code for ‘Muslim’.

Ah.  Yes, it is code for Muslim, because look at this.

RUAP would formulate and legislate a refugee Policy that safeguards:

  • Australian national security.
  • A program to prioritize the resettlement of persecuted Christians, Jewsand non-Islamic minority groups above Islamicand communist refugees. (Currently Christians are the most heavily persecuted of all people groups)

Oh, for heaven’s sake.

Also, they aren’t racist, but those south Sudanese gangs are destroying Victoria.

RUA does not approve of the recent Medivac bill:

Although Rise Up Australia is highly compassionate to the needs of refugees, we also believe adequate medical and childcare can be undertaken offshore…

It’s nice that they believe that, but the treating doctors do not believe that, and I think the doctors are in a better posoition to judge.

Also, they want all migrants to work, but they mustn’t take jobs away from hardworking Australians.  Apparently, these are those very special migrants that both laze around on welfare *and* steal our jobs.

Oh, and New Zealanders should be able to get Australian citizenship more easily.  They are the right kind of migrants.

Economy, Employment and Banking

Rise Up Australia wants to basically get rid of all taxes, and replace them with a 2% debit tax, so that you are taxed on your expenditure, not your income, and a 5% goods and consumables tax (they don’t think people should be taxed for services).  The idea is that this makes it harder for large companies to rort the system.  I’d note that the downside of this is that it’s a regressive taxation system – if you are poor, you tend to spend all your money in every pay cycle, which means you get taxed on all of it, whereas someone wealthy enough to save does not.  And you also have rich and poor paying the same level of tax on goods and consumables, which again is regressive, because that 2% makes a bigger difference to someone on a tight budget.

They want to separate retail from investment banking, and they want to support local manufacturing, end foreign ownership, and encourage small businesses.

They want to create a JobLink program for unemployed people, where employees receive the amount an unemployed person would be getting on Newstart to employ and train them for 6-12 months, working three days a week, so that they could still look for jobs elsewhere.  That person would get… well, either exactly what they were getting on Newstart, or slightly more.  And they only get to break the contract if they find fullptime employment or become unable to work.  This sounds suspiciously like the current Mutual Obligation stuff with Centrelink, only potentially more exploitative for clients.  No thank you.


The RUA’s policy on ‘Clean Energy – Renewable Energy’ is very odd.

Whether we believe that that the Government is ‘shafting’ us by exporting excessive amounts of our oil causing a substantial shortage of natural gas, triggering high wholesale prices which in turn, push up our wholesale electricity prices where power stations have relied on backup power generation from gas. Or: If we agree with the thinking that the Renewable Energy Target is driving up power bills, it is at this stage irrelevant. Trends have shown that the cost of power will inevitably rise no matter what policies are put up, what procedures are endorsed or what Governments are in power.

This is a strangely defeatist attitude.  They feel that the best approach is not to exclude any sources of energy:

Wind, Natural Gas, Electricity produced by coal, and water. Solar energy from the sun, steam and even oil.

RUA has a lengthy policy document listing every source of energy they can think of.  They claim to care about clean energy, but somehow it turns out that coal and oil are good and solar is bad.  They actually lead with an article that complains about the lies being told about global pollution and carbon emissions and ‘what it is supposedly doing to our planet’.  They are unconvinced by wind energy, but very excited about Thorium as a source of energy, either by a thorium nuclear reactor or via a thorium stored plasma battery.  They also want to look at tidal and geothermal energy.

Essentially, this feels like the policy of a party that kind of sort of thinks that clean energy might be nice, but it’s too expensive, and solar panels are made in China, so maybe not.

Also, their climate change policy is that they don’t believe in climate change, so there’s that.

Personal Freedoms

RUA are basically the most inconsistent libertarians ever.  On the one hand, they are in favour of  freedom of speech, but on the other hand, their drugs and alcohol policies involve censoring TV shows that show unhealthy behaviour.  They don’t seem to want to censor the internet at this stage (though they are worried about exploitation of children  online), so that’s something.

The RUA believes that vaccinations should be a matter of personal choice, and they are against No Jab, No Pay, No Play.  You already know what I think about that.  They also believe in the right to bear arms, because of course they do.  Poor Johnny Howard meant well, but his laws have served ‘only to demoralize law abiding gun owners’ without increasing public safety.

But when it comes to freedom over one’s own body, that’s another matter.  The RUA are anti-abortion and anti-euthanasia, and they want to ban the burka.  By which they actually mean the niqab, but never mind that.  They couch this as being about freedom for women, but as usual fail to consider that a woman whose family really is forcing her to wear the niqab against her will is unlikely to let her leave the house without it – so banning the niqab in public would only serve to isolate her further.  (And if she is wearing it as a matter of personal choice, well, what about her freedom of speech, religion and expression?)

Children, Families and Education

The RUA feels that the  ‘Australian population at large need to be educated on the fact that domestic violence is never acceptable as a solution under any circumstance’.  But on the other hand, we need to ‘Teach children the effects of Divorce on families and what happens to the children in these families.’

So… if you are being abused by your partner and need to leave, your child will have learned at school about how they will be impacted terribly by divorce.  I’m sure that will really decrease their level of stress and trauma.


The RUA supports parents’ rights, in a section called ‘Rebellion’, which begins:

Rebellion takes many forms. It can start with a child in the home disobeying his parents, to a university student protesting against………everything, and even to a government removing its leader.

RUA supports the rights of parents to ‘smack their children’, so long as this is within ‘sensible, non-abusive guidelines’, which is the sort of statement that really requires a *lot* more detail than they are providing here.  I mean, I think that smacking children is inherently a bad idea (I was smacked as a child, and I don’t consider that abusive, but I do think it’s a poor parenting tool and we should do better), but given that there have been cases of children dying from abuse by parents who claimed to be following the instructions of a popular Christian parenting book, To Train up a Child (which contains, among other things, information about the size of switch you should use on a four-month-old baby), this kind of rhetoric coming from a right-wing Christian party rings alarm bells.

The Pearl childrearing books are very concerned about rebellious and disobedient children, so the phrasing of this section, and the fact that it is titled ‘Rebellion’, is very troubling indeed.

Oh, and also, since a lack of discipline inevitably leads to drug abuse and crime, they want

To work with the community sector to develop programs to pick up where there is a shortage of real discipline in the home, and provide mentoring to single parents where necessary.

… are these mentors going to explain how best to smack children?


RUA supports the right of all children to an education, and – wow! – they have a policy here that almost doesn’t suck!

Schools need to be funded equitably.  This applies to all schools. It makes no difference whether they are Government or Private. We will not differentiate between any type of private schools e.g. Christian Schools.  It is important that all schools can provide the same quality of education, regardless of whether they are in private, public or home-schooling.  People in rural communities should also be able to receive the same quality of education as well.  All country schools to have broadband / internet access.  All country schools to have telephone/video conferencing with other schools with a collaborative approach for handling problems and sharing teaching techniques. An education website should also be used for teacher feedback and suggestions for outcome improvements.  We will restructure the “My School” website and use it to identify struggling schools and give them extra assistance for greater outcomes and results.

Given their taxation policy, I have to wonder if ‘equitably’ means that they will give equal amounts of funding to private and to public schools, which… isn’t quite equitable given the access to resources that privates schools have.  But the rest is pretty good.

They support homeschooling, too, which makes me a little nervous given their views on parental rights.  Parents also possibly get to choose whether their children have access to sex ed at school, which is a bad idea.

We do not believe that certain sexual education should be in the school curriculum, for example, the Safe Schools Coalition Programs, including the Respectful Relationships programs. However, a standardised age appropriate, basic sexual education program should continue with the knowledge of the parents.

Their proposed history curriculum is the standard Western Civilisation / Judeo-Christian heritage / Magna Carta stuff, but they do add Aboriginal history to it, which is nice.

As mentioned, RUA opposes Safe Schools, which they feel is shrouded in secrecy and anyway, ‘studies have found that sexual orientation does not even rate among the top seven causes of bullying!’.  I would like to see those studies.  (And I do wonder whether a child bullied for such a reason would be likely to admit this to a researcher.)  Apparently, anti-bullying policies should be focusing on disabled kids, who have it worse.

I’ve written about Safe Schools before, so I’m not going to go into detail here, but will just continue with the delightful opinions currently being shared with us by RUA.

In Australia, we are a people that prides ourselves on our freedoms and ethnic diversity, yet our children are denied their individual religious, moral and cultural beliefs. Why?

… hang on, weren’t you saying earlier that some religious beliefs, specifically Muslim ones, were intrinsically un-Australian and should not be tolerated?  I’m pretty sure there was even a reference to the mistreatment of gay people in Muslim countries.  So if it’s unacceptable for Muslims to be anti-LGBTQIA+, why is it acceptable  for non-Muslim people?

Culturally we are against discrimination yet students who identify themselves based on their biological makeup, and who are heterosexual make up the majority of the student body yet have no voice.

Yes, it’s terrible.  There is so little heterosexual representation in our Parliaments, our court system and our churches.  How are we poor straights supposed to grow up without heterosexual role models?

Drugs, Alcohol and Mental Health.

RUA is worried about depression, and wants to ‘establish hope’ within individuals.  They propose a seven point plan.  Step 1 is access to assistance:

A. PROMPT ASSISTANCE AND STRENGTHENING PATHWAYS between the GP and (where applicable) hospitals’ CATT (Crisis Assessment and Treatment Team) and case managers, Counsellors, psychologists and psychiatrists and the ‘community connector’.B. COMMUNITY CONNECTORS: Government subsidized training program for volunteers to become ‘community-connectors’.  Community Connectors (or CC’s) can be offered and/or appointed to individuals assessed with depression, and those with possible precursors to depression.  Organisations such as GROW, ERMHA. Etc.  to issue CC’s with an increased focus on longer term relationship and 24/7 availability.

This is asking a lot of your volunteers.  I used to volunteer on a suicide helpline in three hour shifts, and it was incredibly draining.  I like the idea of making sure people with mental health issues have access to community support, but that doesn’t sound like a healthy model.

Step 2 is health – exercise, nutrition, and making sure there isn’t a medical cause for the depression.

Step 3 is not letting new immigrants into Australia unless they speak adequate English.  They want to assign Community Connectors to new immigrants and overseas students, too, which I think works better in this context – volunteering to befriend someone who needs help integrating into society is a very different task to volunteering to befriend someone and become their informal counsellor when they have mental health issues.

Step 4 is addressing mental health issues in young people:

Establish permanent programs in schools educating on healthy body image, healthy relationships, emotional health, etc that is age-specific similar to programs such as delivered by Angel Light Link and Values For Life 

Do those healthy relationships include LGBTQIA ones, though?  I wonder…

They also want to provide ASIST training (Applied Suicide Intervention Training) for school staff and mental health workers.  At last, a policy I can support wholeheartedly!  I’ve done this training, and it is incredibly empowering and helpful and I highly recommend it.

Step 5 is more funding for these programs, Step 6 is encouraging more volunteering, and Step 7 is mental support for health care workers.

This is actually a pretty decent policy, overall, although I feel compelled that it isn’t actually a seven step plan so much as a seven point plan.  The steps aren’t contingent on each other.

RUA has a related policy on suicide.  It is mostly notable for its emphasis on a stable family environment, which does nothing except for heap guilt on people whose marriages have fallen apart through no fault of their own, and also underline their general obnoxiousness on same sex relationships.

Oh, and the Community Carers need to be able to be available 24/7 for a week at a time in periods of crisis.  I repeat, this is an absolutely unreasonable burden to place on volunteers.  It’s hard enough to manage this sort of availability for family members or close friends, and presumably Community Carers do have other commitments in their lives.

RUA is worried about alcohol and drug  abuse, and want to raise the drinking age to 21, and have education in schools on the short- and long-term effects of alcohol and drug abuse, as well as banning TV shows that promote unhealthy drinking.

They want mandatory re-education and rehabilitation programs for crimes where drugs were a factor.  Also

Introduce/expand father support services in conjunction with community sector organisations to help fathers form healthy bonds with their children, where possible, and solidify the family unit as a whole.

I’m not entirely sure what this has to do with drugs and alcohol.

Farming and Animals

RUA is worried about our farmers, and they want to ‘Make Farming Great Again!’.  Dearie me. Essentially, they want protectionist policies – tariffs for imported goods, no taxes on Australian grown ingredients, restrictions on non-Australian ownership of Australian farmlands, lower mortgage interest rates for farmers, and a mandatory minimum milk price for farmers (as well as a mandatory maximum one for customers – clearly, supermarkets are not to be making serious money on milk).  This is all fair enough.

They are worried about water – can you say ‘Bradfield Scheme’, boys and girls? – and want to cut the cost of water to rural communities.  They want ‘Free water access, No water trades or having to buy water rights for water that is on your own property or flowing through your property,’ which is great for people upstream, not so good for those downstream.  And they want to figure out ways to save water, through novel irrigation systems

RUA is also against animal cruelty.

We believe there needs to be greater work done to legislate in the areas of battery hen farming, sow stalls, breeding practices, cosmetic manufacturing/labelling, bestiality legislation and research into the link between animal abuse and child abuse/domestic violence.

I bet you weren’t expecting the bestiality.  Also, they don’t like halal slaughter practices, or ‘voodoo ritual bloodletting’.  Wow.  This got wilder than I expected.

Oh boy, they have a whole policy on the Australian flag and instructions on Flying the Flag.

Have I got the Eurovision song for you.


The RUA is against Nazism, but their history of Nazism is a little odd, because it was apparently both formed in opposition to Communism and also it was socialist?  Anyway, they detest the ideology and want to criminalise it.  Ditto Communism, though they make a point of saying that Communism is not to be confused with Socialism, which is still wrong, but doesn’t actually need to be outlawed.

They are also heavily against Prime Ministers being kicked out by their parties.

Law and Order

RUA is big on authority, as you may have noticed.  They like mandatory sentencing, they want more respect for authority figures generally, and they want to deport migrants who commit crimes.

Indigenous Australians

Indigenous Australians have been much harmed by the early settlers, but ‘we believe our nation is genuinely sorry… and that today we have a sincere desire to see all Australians flourish together’.  Apparently, we shouldn’t focus on the negative ‘but rather we should thank God for the good and the blessing brought to this nation because of British occupancy.’

We do not deny that the First People of the Land have suffered many injustices because of the wrong behaviour towards their people from the governments of the past. However, having said this, RUAP believes, that before both or any people groups can really move on now there has to be true forgiveness on all sides, and recognition that we are endeavouring as a nation to right the wrongs of the past.

They want to recognise and acknowledge indigenous perspectives on history at schools, but from a perspective that brings ‘positive hope for the future, rather than a focus on the path…. The first people of the land should be encouraged to work side by side with all Australians under Godly values for the building of the nation together.’

RUA does, however, want indigenous political representation, and community leadership roles for indigenous people.  They want to consider training and teaching to allow Aboriginal Australians to conduct and develop their own businesses, and want to consider indigenous developments and projects, especially in outback regions.  There is a notable lack of mention of funding for any of this.

They are, however, at least committed to ‘Honouring the Indigenous people; the continual public acknowledgment of traditional custodianship and advancing Australia together’.

I’m not indigenous, and would not presume to speak for ATSI Australians, but it seems to me that this places all the emotional burden on Aboriginal Australians, while letting the descendants of settlers off very lightly.  And while it acknowledges the wrongs of the past, it makes no real attempt to put any of them right.  I don’t think that’s OK.

And that’s all I can really take for Rise Up Australia.  I realise that I’ve given some of these policies short shrift, but this has been very hard work.

In short, Rise Up Australia are far-right conservative Christians who don’t like Muslims or gay people, do like guns, are worryingly fond of authority and also have pretty regressive economic policies. They do have some good moments on mental health – though they fail to acknowledge the mental health burden their own beliefs and policies around refugees, Muslims and LGBTQIA+ people are likely to impose on people.

They are certainly candidates for the bottom of my ballot, but there is a LOT of competition down there.   I don’t know where they will end up.

Eurovision Theme Song as determined by me, very objectively

Oh, thank heavens, we are here at last.  Look, I am still very, very tempted by Flying the Flag – and if you didn’t listen to it before, you absolutely should now.

But no.  That’s not going to annoy them anywhere near enough, and RUA makes me so angry and so sad that I really want to pick something that will annoy them as much as they annoy me.  I’ve about run out of peace-themed anthems by Muslim singers, so I think I’ll go with the most LGBTQIA+-affirming Eurovision song I can think of.

Besides, it’s kind of appropriate.  They do seem to want Australia to Rise Up… like a Phoenix!  And I’m pretty sure they are the Wurst.

Rise like a phoenix
Out of the ashes seeking rather than vengeance
Retribution, you were warned
Once I’m transformed
Once I’m reborn.

6 thoughts on “Federal Election 2019: Meet Rise Up Australia

  1. “Establish permanent programs in schools educating on healthy body image, healthy relationships, emotional health, etc that is age-specific”

    Which is exactly what Respectful Relationships is…

    • Yes, but RUA are convinced that it’s all about making kids gay. Also, I have a feeling that ‘respectful’ in this context means respecting your partner enough not to have sex with them until you are married.

      • And probably then respecting your partner through strict patriarchal obedience after marriage.

        Tangentially, I just remembered the time when a former RUA candidate for McMillan told a candidates forum that his health policy was ‘don’t drink, don’t smoke, don’t take drugs, and don’t run around with bad women’.
        (He’s their candidate for Latrobe this time.)

  2. You mentioned being unsure why this section was in their drug & alcohol policy:

    “Introduce/expand father support services in conjunction with community sector organisations to help fathers form healthy bonds with their children, where possible, and solidify the family unit as a whole.”

    At a guess, two options present themselves:
    1. Helping fathers overcome addiction issues by teaching them to communicate with their families.
    2. An ideological belief that children turn to drugs/alcohol due to the lack of a guiding patriarchal figure at home.

    Somehow, the second option seems to be a better fit with their point of view.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.