Hey auspol. It's about that time again: you know, the one where you have to sit around researching about 15 minor parties that sound distantly familiar to figure out what to put as your bottom preferences.

This year I found my way to a couple of blogs which offer brief and unabashedly biased reviews of the minor parties in the federal landscape. These are not new, I'm just late.

Both blogs are written from a relatively progressive-left perspective, at least by Australian standards. Inside the spoiler below is what they say about themselves:

Summaries of bloggers

Blatantly Partisan Party Reviews

I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of a political party. I review from the perspective of a small-g green democratic socialist. I am trained and work as a political historian of Australia and New Zealand. This background guides my reviews, which originated as—and remain—notes to inform my own vote. I do not aim for any false neutrality or objectivity, and I share these remarks in the hope they are useful to others trying to navigate Australia’s plethora of micro-parties. It should be obvious but these are my personal opinions, which should not be construed as representing the views of my employer nor of any other organisation with which I am affiliated.

Something for Cate

I’m Maz. In no particular order I’m left of centre, a grandparent, a writer, trans, pansexual, a mental health lived experience worker, agnostic, supportive of unions, and supporter of the Arts. I’m committed to holding governments and media accountable and, while I can’t promise complete objectivity, I can promise to deliver the same treatment to every party and independent in this election.

I’m Loki. I’ve been in several political parties and never found one left enough for my liking. I’m a bisexual cis male, and likewise agnostic, pro-Union and pro-arts. I try not to approach anything uncritically, whether I agree with it or not. I firmly believe that objectivity is a goal that can be striven for but never actually reached. That said, in that quest I will seek, strive and not yield.

While I obviously recommend you come to your own conclusions about the parties, it can be nice to hear what other voters think of them, especially when it's some shit you never heard of before.

Something for Cate especially includes coverage of unregistered groupings, which are a deep black box of nothing to me most of the time.

top 9 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 10 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Oh shit. I liked the Pirate Party, and even gave them my 1 vote in at least 1, if not 2, elections last decade.

I stopped voting for them when they became Fusion because I didn't really understand them. At best, they seemed like off-brand Greens, having lost the core focus on an issue that I cared about with the Pirate Party: digital and intellectual property law.

But reading this Blatantly Partisan review holy shit will I never be voting Pirate again. This is appalling behaviour from the folks behind Fusion. Such a shame.

[–] brisk@aussie.zone 5 points 23 hours ago

That's extremely disappointing. I was thrilled to see a Fusion candidate on my lower house list, as that sheet is usually effectively Lib/Lab/Green, and Fusion theoretically contains several parties I'd love to have the chance to give my vote to.

I'm dismayed to discover the candidate is actually a "Democracy First" member.

[–] thisisdee@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh wow. I didn’t know it was this bad. I was planning to vote 1 for them cos they’re the only left minor party other than Greens where I am. I guess I have to rely on Greens and Labor instead.

[–] Ilandar@lemm.ee 2 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

This is only from Victoria, it doesn't mean necessarily mean that your local candidate or branch is the same (depending on where you live). Fusion is a micro party that attracts a very wide range of people, so I don't think painting them all with the same brush is a particularly smart or helpful thing to do.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Fusion is a micro party that attracts a very wide range of people, so I don’t think painting them all with the same brush is a particularly smart or helpful thing to do

That's true, but I also think it's actually sort of part of the problem. Because Fusion isn't one party, but instead a...fusion...of multiple different parties, it is inevitably very unclear where they stand. And they don't exactly make it easy to see who's who, or what they stand for.

I've got no idea where the Fusion candidate in my seat, or the ones on my state's Senate ballot, stand on important issues. But I do know that they are happy associating with a party that's willing to put Libertarians, Labor, and even the LNP and Family First ahead of the Greens. And that I find to be deeply concerning about anyone's political reliability.

[–] Ilandar@lemm.ee 1 points 3 hours ago

Again, I don't necessarily agree with that last part because every candidate and branch may (or may not) be different. Frankly, I don't really care who is being preferenced in Victoria when I'm voting in South Australia. But yes, I absolutely agree that Fusion as a concept has a major issue in that it's values and policy positions are so broad that it makes it very difficult for me as a voter to determine which aspects of the party platform are core, where influence lies and why my candidate is running under the party banner. I like a lot about Fusion but I expect that I'm actually a minority in that regard and that people are probably more likely to be attracted by specific elements of the party, which is a problem for stability and transparency. I am fortunate to have a lower house Fusion candidate in my seat but I can't preference him above The Greens guy because it's not at all clear why he is running or what he stands for.

[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Same, Pirate Party used to get top preferences from me, but then Fusion was sort of just a micro-party Greens, which is fine but not really adding to the landscape. It's bizarre to see what they've become as of 2025. I don't know where this sudden rightward lurch came from.

[–] kudra@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I was a Pirate Party member briefly almost a decade ago. I realised within a very short time that unfortunately, even then they were more right than Greens and Labor. And weren't really a good fit for me. They have some understanding of the importance of tech, but they lean more libertarian in philosophy than anything, and their high preference for Libertarian party is no surprise at all.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 3 points 15 hours ago

I was never a member, but I have followed the Pirates on Facebook for a long time and as I said above, gave them my 1 vote for a time. Even then though, I got that same concerning libertarian vibes at times. Reading their policy webpage mostly assuaged me of those concerns at the time, and especially given the strength of and how well thought out their policies on copyright and patents were I was willing to overlook the icky vibes. But it certainly doesn't come as a huge surprise that they've gone the way they have.