The Role of Ideological Conflict within the Australian Asylum Seeker Debate: A Critical Analysis

Abstract

As the refugee and asylum seeker crisis has grown, arguments about immigration and migration have been at the forefront of Western politics. The policy approaches of nation-states in this climate have garnered a range of ideological responses across the socio-political spectrum. This thesis applies a neo-Gramscian theory of ideology, hegemony and counter-hegemony to investigate Australia’s controversial anti-asylum seeker policies. A critical analysis of the discourse and actions of Australia’s political and business elites advocating harsh treatment of asylum seekers, is followed by an examination of the civil society groups opposing this treatment.

The thesis investigates and critiques the structure and function of neoliberal ideology, buttressed by racism and nationalism, that is currently hegemonic within Australian society. The thesis then explores the potentially counter-hegemonic force of the liberal humanitarian and radical civil society groups active within the socio- political and ideological conflict over the Federal Government’s anti-asylum seeker policies. Despite their ideological differences, these latter groups have been working together to achieve their most basic goals, mobilising members of civil society to demand the Federal Government respect asylum seekers and refugees who are trying to enter Australian society. The pro-asylum seeker and refugee movement has not yet achieved all its aims. Nevertheless, they continue to occupy an important space, questioning the common-sense rhetoric that often dominates the media and political debate, and advocating real socio-political change in the future.