One of the easiest jobs in politics is being a mouthpiece for the aggrieved
Find something people are angry about. Tell them their anger is justified. Promise to fix it. Then repeat back whatever grievance your audience already believes.
It’s a low-risk strategy, particularly when you’re speaking to a tribe that rarely questions whether the promises are realistic, affordable or even possible.
The elections of 2022 and 2025 demonstrated how powerful grievance politics has become. Voters across the political spectrum increasingly reward politicians who offer certainty, simple answers and someone to blame.
This tendency is not unique to any one party or ideology. The temptation to mobilise anger rather than solve problems exists across the political spectrum. But wherever it appears, it carries the same risk: reducing complex issues to slogans, scapegoats and impossible promises.
The danger is that we appear to be heading further down that path. If current trends continue, the politics of 2028 may be even more dominated by outrage, simplistic narratives and promises that cannot realistically be delivered.
What is far harder is addressing the underlying causes of people’s frustrations. Harder still is explaining that complex problems rarely have simple solutions, that government has limits, and that not every demand can be met without trade-offs.
Anyone can promise everything. Governing requires choosing between competing priorities, accepting constraints and being honest about what can actually be delivered.
Yet despite these realities, grievance politics continues to flourish. The rise of One Nation in the polls suggests it remains a powerful force in Australian politics.
But politicians alone cannot explain its success. Demand matters as much as supply. Why are so many people drawn to movements built around opposition, resentment and anger?
Some political actors undoubtedly recognise that outrage attracts attention. A grievance can become a headline. A headline can become a movement. Social media rewards conflict, algorithms amplify outrage, and audiences are often more engaged by anger than nuance.
For some, grievance becomes a pathway to influence, followers, donations, votes or power. Whether consciously or unconsciously, there is an incentive to keep audiences angry, because anger is highly effective at holding attention.
But the appeal of grievance politics runs deeper than political strategy.
Grievance politics offers coherence, energy and a sense of belonging. It provides simple explanations for complex problems and clear villains on whom responsibility can be placed. The psychological rewards are real.
The problem is that when identity becomes built around opposition, it becomes dependent on conflict. When one grievance is addressed, another must be found. When one enemy disappears, another must be identified. The movement cannot rest because its sense of purpose depends upon the existence of something to oppose.
Social media intensifies this dynamic. People can become so immersed in a constant stream of outrage that they rarely stop to question the claims being presented to them. Information is filtered through tribal loyalties, reinforcing existing beliefs and making critical examination less likely.
The deeper challenge, then, is not simply rebutting claims or defeating particular parties at the ballot box. It is rebuilding a political culture that can provide meaning, identity and solidarity without requiring an endless supply of enemies.
Because grievance politics is easy. It demands no trade-offs, no difficult conversations and no accountability for outcomes. It only requires a new target whenever the old one loses its usefulness.
That is why it flourishes.
And that is why it is so dangerous.
