Ioften write about how younger Australians are carving out a different political identity from older generations. But theelection resulthas reminded us of what cuts across age and sits in our national core. That deep-seated Aussie reaction: “yeah-nah, that’s a bit much” when things go too far. We’re allergic to imported bravado, anything too loud, too messianic. And, when pushed, we don’t shout – we shrug.
This election was one long shrug. A rejection of chaos and division, not through fury but through an assertive, ballot-powered recoil.
I’ll admit: I expected more of a fragmented youth vote. Labor couldn’t count on all young peoplevoting progressive. Young voters don’t fit neatly into left or right. I’ve long argued that grouping 18-year-olds with 45-year-olds under a single “youth vote” umbrella never made much sense. Yes, there are shared concerns – housing, inequality, job insecurity, climate change – but the fault lines of gender, geography and ethnicity are real.
So I worried it wouldn’t be all about numbers. Like many, I fussed about how young (male) voters mightpull awayfrom Labor and risk a hung parliament. Instead we saw a decisive vote for stability in the face of underwhelming national pitches and overwhelming global uncertainties.
Young Australians aren’t animated by performative politics. Their concerns are deeply material – rents, wages, the price of groceries, a system that no longer delivers. While some have speculated that Donald Trump has fuelled a gender divide among gen Z men, my analysis of the Australian Election Study (1996–2022) suggests something more nuanced. Yes, gen Z men are more conservative than gen Z women – but they’re stillmore progressivethan older generations of men. And, when it comes to actual vote choice, gender differences mostly disappear. It appears that this election is a nod to that finding.
Trump has also proved to be political kryptonite for Australians, especially younger ones. AMarch 2025 studyfound that Australian voters between 18 and 44overwhelmingly reject Trump-style leadership– with just 23% saying Australia would benefit from a leader like Trump and 58% saying absolutely not.
But Labor should not take the wrong lesson from this result – that a win is a mandate to keep the status quo, which is clearly failing younger Australians. If Labor wants to keep their support, it needs to see the warnings wrapped up in the win. Voters – especially young ones – are crying out for action on the big structural problems: housing supply, intergenerational inequality, flatlining productivity.
And Labor’sblind spotsare showing. A refusal to ban gambling ads, despite overwhelming public support. No meaningful move to lift people out of poverty, despiterepeated advicefrom its own experts. Silence on the Uluru statement of the heart in the wake of the referendum defeat. No scrutiny of Aukus, even as Trump jeopardises our alliance. These aren’t side issues for young Australians – they’re central to the kind of future they’re being asked to vote for.
The election result should not be used as proof that young voters are some homogenous progressive bloc, or that they’ve thrown their weight behind a steady two-party system. The electorate is increasingly fluid, willing to swing whichever way the moment demands. Labor read the room better this time but it was the electoral environment – the campaign, the global chaos and the aversion to populism that shaped the result. The rise of the crossbench, the Greens’ stable primary vote despite seat losses and movement in inner-city seats across Victoria and Queensland all signal that shift.
Finally, we should remember and acknowledge the role compulsory voting plays in keeping young people tied to the system and having a say in the future they’ll inherit. Just look at Brexit: when young people sit out, history happens to them. In Australia, they help write it.
Dr Intifar Chowdhury is a youth researcher and a lecturer in government at Flinders University