It’s never held government, or even opposition, yet One Nation’s managed to exert an outsized influence on the public policy agenda.

From borders to migration, multiculturalism to Indigenous affairs, the far-right party has mastered mainstreaming and captured the masses fleeing the Coalition.

In the fourth instalment of The Making of One Nation, we speak to Josh Sunman, Associate Lecturer in Public Policy at Flinders University and Tim Bale, a Professor of Politics at Queen Mary University of London.

This episode was written and hosted by Ashlynne McGhee and produced and edited by Isabella Podwinski. Sound design by Michelle Macklem. Misha Ketchel is the editor of The Conversation Australia.

If you are enjoying the series, please consider donating to The Conversation, an independent, not-for-profit news organisation.

Or, you can subscribe to one of our free newsletters.

We’d all like deeply considered policy and informed debate to be at the heart of politics, but unfortunately controversies and scandals tend to steal the show.

For most parties, scandals are disastrous: they lose seats, ministers and elections — but not One Nation.

It's weathered defections and punch-ups (including a memorable smearing of blood on a Senate door), jail and chaos, and thirty years on it's surging.

This is a party that doesn’t just survive the chaos, but cultivates it and capitalises on it.

---

Subscribe to The Conversation's free newsletters.

You might remember this line in Pauline Hanson's maiden speech: "I'm afraid we're in danger of being swamped by Asians."

It wasn't the first racist comment she'd made in public and it certainly wasn't the last.

Over the years, her enemies have changed and she now targets Muslims and elites, but it's the same tactic and it's infiltrated Australian politics.

---

Subscribe to The Conversation's free newsletters.

Nearly thirty years on, Hanson's infamous maiden speech — warning that Australia was "being swamped by Asians" — still echoes through Australian political life.

But who was Pauline Hanson before she became a phenomenon, and what did she actually represent?

Was she a cause of a new kind of politics, or a symptom of one already forming?

Subscribe to The Conversation newsletter here.

From a fish and chip shop in regional Queensland to the heart of Australian politics: this is the unlikely story of the country’s most controversial minor party.

For thirty years, One Nation and Pauline Hanson have been ridiculed, dismissed and shut out. Now, no one is laughing. This is the story of how a party built on fear and grievance thrived, died and rose again to upend Australian politics.

We go beyond the headlines and stunts to document how One Nation works and what it means for our future.

In November, six Democratic lawmakers recorded a video directed at members of the US military and intelligence agencies. In it, they issued a blunt reminder:

"The laws are clear: […] You must refuse illegal orders."

The lawmakers were issuing the warning against the backdrop of US airstrikes on boats off the coast of Latin America the Trump administration claims are suspected drug runners. Many Democrats and legal experts, however, argue these strikes are illegal.

Since returning to office, Trump has successfully expanded his power over his own party, the courts and the American people. Now, like many autocrats around the world, he’s trying to exert control over the military.

The list of people Donald Trump has punished or threatened to punish since returning to office is long. It includes the likes of James Comey, Letitia James, John Bolton, as well as members of the opposition, such as Adam Schiff, Mark Kelly and Kamala Harris.

In fact, he has gone so far as to call Democrats "the enemy from within", saying they are more dangerous than US adversaries like Russia and China.

According to Lucan Way, a professor of democracy at the University of Toronto, when a leader attacks the opposition like this, it's a clear sign a country is slipping into authoritarianism.

In democratic systems, the courts are a vital check on a leader’s power. They have the ability to overturn laws and, in Donald Trump’s case, the executive orders he has relied on to achieve his goals.

Since taking office, Trump has targeted the judiciary with a vengeance. He has attacked what he has called "radical left judges" and is accused of ignoring or evading court orders.

The Supreme Court has already handed the Trump administration some key wins in his second term. But several cases now before the court will be pivotal in determining how much power Trump is able to accrue – and what he'll be able to do with it.