The 2025 Canadian and Australian Elections

The 2025 Canadian federal election, held on April 28, and the 2025 Australian federal election, held on May 3, both have similarities that are worth exploring, despite some of their significant differences in electoral system and political parties. In both cases, sitting centre (Liberal Party of Canada) to centre-left (Australian Labor Party) governments had struggled in polls prior to the election against their right-wing rivals, the centre-right to right-wing Conservative Party of Canada and the Liberal National Coalition in Australia. In both cases, two very clear issues dominated the election campaigns: (i) cost of living and (ii) the effects of Donald Trump as the re-elected president of the United States.

In Canada, the ruling Liberal Party rebounded from being behind the Conservatives in opinion polls for many months, gaining an 11% swing and picking up 17 seats. The Conservatives, too, made gains, however, increasing their vote by 7.5% and picking up 24 seats. However, not only did they lose the election, but their leader also lost his seat. What was important for the Liberals was, with their first-past-the-post voting system, was the drive from left-wing parties to the Liberals; Bloc Québécois declined by 1.35% and lost 11 seats, the leftist New Democratic Party dropped a remarkable 11.5% and lost 17 seats, and the Greens lost 1% of the vote and a seat. In a system that doesn't allow preferential voting or proportional representation, voters choose to vote strategically. The final result meant that the Liberals won a historic fourth term and won the highest vote share for any party in forty years. If Canada had preferential voting, it can be estimated that the two-party preferred vote would have been 55%-45%.

In Australia, the result was even more dramatic. The governing Labor Party, seeking a second term, had been behind in the opinion polls to the Liberal-National Coalition for at least a year. However, by the end of the election campaign, Labor gained 2% of the primary vote, and won an additional 17 seats. The LNP opposition lost 3% and 15 seats, including that of its leader, Peter Dutton. The Greens' vote remained steady, but they nevertheless lost 3 of their 4 seats. On a two-party preferred basis, Labor won 55% to 45%, the is the best Federal election result for the Australian Labor Party since 1943 and the worst ever result for the LNP coalition since they were formed. In the course of the campaign, Labor was able to offer a fairly solid social-democratic programme that wouldn't scare the horses, a pretty good record, whilst the Coalition was clearly wedded to the Trump agenda, as well as advocating the interests of mining corporations through an incredibly expensive nuclear plan, along with flip-flopping on major policy decisions. There was also an increase in support for liberal independents, known as "Teals", who opposed the right-wing drift of the LNP in favour of a more centrist approach.

The effect of the re-election of Donald Trump as U.S. President in 2024 and the bellicose, irrational, and often objectively false policy statements that followed should not be underestimated. Far-right populism has been an increasing feature of democratic politics in recent years as the far right has encouraged a range of conspiracy theories and divisive political approaches to harness support, especially to engage in culture wars, whilst tacitly supporting the interests of national capital against the interests of labour and internationalisation. Trump made this quite explicit after his election, calling for the introduction of tariffs whilst simultaneously proposing a US takeover of Canada. This provided the Canadian Liberals and the Australian Labor Party the opportunity to advocate for the sovereignty of their respective countries against the imperialist ambitions of the United States, taking away the more typical nationalistic ground held by the Conservatives or the LNP, who both tried to follow the Trump agenda and suddenly found that it was a liability. As if ever the case, nationalism has a progressive character when it is directed by people of that nation from an outside force and a reactionary character when directed with an expansionist and racist approach.

Demographics also played a role in these results and will certainly do so in the future. Urbanisation is a significant component; in the last three elections in the United States, Trump did not win a single city that had a population of over a million people. In the Australian election, the LNP Coalition received a majority in non-metropolitan seats, but was overwhelmingly defeated in population centres, approximately 61% to 39%. The same effect occurred in Canada as well, with the Liberals doing well in the big cities and the Conservatives in rural areas and smaller population centres. One significant point of difference was that in Canada, younger people showed some interest in the Conservatives due to cost-of-living matters; this was not replicated in Australia where the Labor Party was seen as keeping a steady hand on economic matters.

Of course, the urban-rural divide is well-established in political sociology and is generally as important as the recognition that younger people tend to vote for more liberal-left parties and candidates. There are two contributing arguments to the urban-rural divide: diversity and education. With regard to the former, people living in urban centres are more likely to encounter cultural, religious, and sexual diversity, and as a result are less likely to respond to fear campaigns based on such differences. With regard to education, urban population centres tend to have more educated people and people employed in knowledge-based industries, which also encourages a more rational approach to diversity. Whilst in the U.S., Germany, and France, less than half the population lives in urban centres of more than a million people. Canada has a similar percentage, with nearly a third of the population in the metropolitan regions of Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver, with Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa also of note. However, in Australia, it's over 60%. In all these cases, the urban population and percentage is growing.

To put it bluntly, right-wing populism has no future. It represents a reactionary idealisation of a past that never existed and a future that cannot exist. It is born of a fear of the unknown, when all the demographic trends are encouraging knowledge. Economically, it advocates for a nationalism based on relative rather than absolute wealth, and requires ongoing scientific ignorance and conspiracies about how the world operates. However, a dying reactionary beast can still thrash about in its death-throes and cause a great deal of damage. In the coming years, we should expect this from reactionary governments and their supporters. For liberal and social democrats, such as those who won the elections in Canada and Australia, this will be a telling moment, because historically, when confronted by the rise of the extreme right, supporters of such ideologies have capitulated, leaving the actual fighting of fascism to the far left. In other words, liberals have been willing to give up democratic rights in order to save national capital property rights, and with the deadly consequences that bring. Once again, they may have to choose, and this time hopefully with the benefit of history and hindsight.