The Generation Game: How Age Shapes Australia's Political Landscape

Why generational divides are reshaping Australian democracy and what it means for our future

When Greta Thunberg addressed the United Nations about climate change in 2019, her words resonated powerfully with young Australians who had just lived through the worst bushfire season in recorded history. Yet many older voters saw her speech as naive idealism from someone too young to understand economic realities.

This divide wasn't just about one Swedish teenager, it reflected a fundamental generational split that's reshaping Australian politics. From the rise of the Greens to the teal independent revolution, age has become one of the most powerful predictors of political behaviour in contemporary Australia.

The Great Generational Split

Australia's political landscape has never been more stratified by age. The 2022 federal election provided a masterclass in generational voting patterns. Voters under 35 delivered massive swings to the Greens, particularly in inner-city seats like Griffith and Ryan. Meanwhile, voters over 65 remained more loyal to the major parties, helping the Coalition retain seats in suburban and regional areas.

The Australian Election Study data reveals the extent of this divide. In 2022, 31% of voters aged 18-34 gave their first preference to the Greens, compared to just 8% of voters over 65. Conversely, the Coalition received 52% support from older voters but only 23% from younger ones.

It’s too soon to get a breakdown of all of the voting patterns and habits from the 2025 election; I’m sure with time the data will prove that young people remained fundamentally loyal to the greens and that older swing voters delivered new seats to the Labor party.

But this isn't just about voting patterns. It's about fundamentally different worldviews shaped by distinct historical experiences.

The Silent Generation (born 1928-1945) came of age during post-war prosperity and the Menzies era. They witnessed Australia's transformation from British outpost to modern nation, experiencing unprecedented economic growth and social stability.

Baby Boomers (1946-1964) lived through the Vietnam War protests, Gough Whitlam's revolutionary reforms, and the cultural upheaval of the 1960s and 70s. They've seen both the power of government to create transformative change and the chaos it can unleash.

Generation X (1965-1980) grew up during economic uncertainty, the rise of neoliberalism under Hawke and Keating, and witnessed the beginnings of Australia's climate change debate during the early days of greenhouse politics.

Millennials (1981-1996) entered adulthood during the Howard years, lived through the Global Financial Crisis, and face a housing market where median prices have grown from four times average income to twelve times since their parents were young adults.

Generation Z (1997-2012) have never known a world without climate change as a dominant political issue, have grown up with social media activism, and entered the workforce during a pandemic that highlighted economic inequality.

When Movements Fracture Along Age Lines

These generational differences become most apparent within political movements themselves. The climate movement provides the clearest example of how age shapes political strategy and priorities.

The Australian Conservation Foundation, established in 1965, has traditionally worked within existing political structures. When they successfully campaigned against the Franklin Dam in the 1980s, they did so through careful coalition-building, research-based advocacy, and working with sympathetic politicians across party lines.

Meanwhile, School Strike 4 Climate, launched by then-15-year-old Jean Hinchliffe in 2018, embraced confrontational tactics that older environmentalists found uncomfortable. The sight of thousands of school students walking out of class challenged the adult world's authority in ways that traditional environmental campaigning never did.

Both approaches have achieved results, but they reflect different theories of change. Older environmentalists remember when patient advocacy achieved victories like World Heritage listing for Kakadu National Park. Younger activists point to decades of incremental progress whilst emissions have continued rising and ask: where has patience gotten us?

Similar tensions exist within the labour movement. The ACTU's traditional focus on job security and wage growth sometimes clashes with younger workers' priorities around casualisation, mental health support, and workplace flexibility. This has led to the emergence of new union models, like the Retail and Fast Food Workers Union, which organises using social media and addresses issues like wage theft and unsafe working conditions that disproportionately affect young workers.

The Social Media Revolution

The generational divide in Australian politics becomes most visible in how different age groups consume and share political information. When Scott Morrison was photographed holding a cricket bat during the 2019-20 bushfire crisis, the image spread differently across generational lines.

Older Australians shared the image on Facebook with earnest commentary about leadership during crisis. Younger Australians turned it into TikTok memes mocking Morrison's disconnect from the emergency, creating viral content that defined his leadership for their generation in ways traditional media coverage couldn't match.

This represents more than different platforms - it's different languages of political communication. The rise of FriendlyJordies (Jordan Shanks) illustrates this perfectly. His YouTube channel combines political commentary with entertainment, reaching over 600,000 subscribers with content that traditional political communication could never engage. When he investigated NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro, the resulting controversy demonstrated how new media can drive political outcomes independently of traditional journalism.

Political TikTok has created entirely new pathways to political engagement. Popular creators translate complex policy debates into accessible content for audiences who might never read a newspaper or watch evening news.

Policy Priorities: The Generational Scorecard

The policy priorities that animate different generations reveal the depth of these divides:

Housing Crisis: When Treasurer Josh Frydenberg suggested in 2021 that young people should move to regional areas to afford housing, the response split along generational lines. Older voters saw practical advice about geographic mobility. Younger voters saw a admission that the housing system had failed their generation entirely.

The data supports their frustration. In 1990, it took the average young Australian 6 years to save for a house deposit. Today, it takes 12 years. This isn't just a policy preference, it's about whether an entire generation can access what previous generations took for granted.

Superannuation: The 2020 debate over early access to superannuation during COVID-19 revealed generational tensions within the retirement system. Older Australians, represented by groups like the Association of Superannuation Funds, opposed early access as short-sighted. Younger workers, facing immediate financial crisis, saw their super as the only accessible savings they had.

Climate Policy: The 2019 election saw climate change rank as the top issue for voters under 35, whilst older voters prioritised economic management and taxation. This wasn't just about environmental concern - it reflected different timelines for thinking about consequences. Younger voters will live with climate impacts for 60-80 years. Older voters focus on immediate economic disruption from climate policies.

The Crossover Effect

Yet generational politics isn't entirely predictable. The phenomenon of "generational crossover,” where individuals adopt political positions more typical of other age groups, is becoming increasingly common.

Consider Gladys Berejiklian's renewable energy policies as NSW Premier. Born in 1970, she championed Australia's largest renewable energy zone, perhaps recognising that younger voters would be crucial to her party's future survival. Her approach reflected understanding that traditional conservative voters increasingly have children and grandchildren demanding climate action.

Conversely, some younger Australians in regional mining communities hold views on climate policy that align more with older, more economically cautious voters. The 2019 election saw young workers in Gladstone and the Hunter Valley vote against parties promising rapid transitions away from coal, prioritising immediate job security over long-term climate goals.

The Teal Revolution: Generational Change in Action

The emergence of the "teal independents" in 2022 perfectly illustrates how generational change is reshaping Australian politics. These candidates represented a fusion of traditionally conservative fiscal management with progressive social and environmental policies.

In Wentworth, Allegra Spender's victory over Liberal Dave Sharma reflected a generational shift among affluent, educated voters. Exit polling showed that Liberal voters over 65 remained loyal to Sharma, whilst younger Liberal voters switched to Spender over climate policy and political integrity concerns.

Zali Steggall's retention of Warringah followed a similar pattern. Her 2019 victory over Tony Abbott had shocked the political establishment, but her increased margin in 2022 demonstrated that generational change was consolidating rather than retreating.

The teal phenomenon showed how traditional political coalitions fracture when generational priorities diverge. Older Liberal voters who valued economic management found themselves at odds with younger family members who prioritised climate action and integrity in politics.

The Personal Cost of Political Division

These generational divides aren't just abstract political phenomena - they're affecting relationships across Australia. Research by the Australian National University shows that political disagreement between generations within families contributes to anxiety and social isolation, particularly among young people who feel their concerns aren't taken seriously.

The 2019 election saw unprecedented levels of climate anxiety among young Australians, with mental health services reporting increased presentations related to "climate grief" and "eco-anxiety." When young people's existential concerns about climate change meet older relatives' dismissal of their fears as overblown, the personal toll becomes significant.

Yet these tensions also create opportunities for genuine dialogue. Organisations like the Climate Conversations project have developed methods for bridging generational divides on climate policy, focusing on shared values rather than competing positions.

The Democracy Challenge

The most significant challenge posed by generational political divides is their impact on democratic legitimacy itself. When different age groups have fundamentally different priorities and communication styles, building the consensus necessary for democratic governance becomes increasingly difficult.

Traditional democratic institutions - parliament, political parties, established media - were designed for a more homogeneous political culture. They struggle to accommodate the diversity of contemporary generational politics.

This institutional strain is visible in declining trust in government among younger Australians. The 2022 Australian Election Study found that only 24% of voters under 35 trust government to do the right thing, compared to 41% of voters over 65.

Growing support for direct democracy mechanisms reflects this dissatisfaction. Citizens' juries, deliberative polling, and participatory budgeting appeal to younger voters who want more direct input into political decisions than traditional representative democracy provides.

Success Stories: Bridging the Divide

Despite these challenges, some political movements have successfully bridged generational divides by identifying shared values beneath surface disagreements.

The marriage equality campaign succeeded because it connected older voters' commitment to fairness with younger voters' passion for LGBTI+ rights. The campaign's messaging evolved to emphasise family values and personal freedom rather than just equality rights, creating space for cross-generational support.

The campaign for an Indigenous Voice to Parliament initially gained cross-generational support by appealing to both historical justice and contemporary reconciliation. Older voters responded to arguments about completing unfinished business from earlier generations, whilst younger voters saw it as essential for addressing ongoing inequality.

Even on climate policy, successful examples exist. South Australia's renewable energy transition enjoyed broad cross-generational support because it was framed as both environmentally necessary and economically beneficial. The state's achievement of net-100% renewable electricity appealed to older voters' pride in South Australian innovation and younger voters' climate concerns simultaneously.

The Path Forward

Understanding generational divides in political movements isn't about dismissing any age group's concerns or picking sides in intergenerational conflict. It's about recognising that democracy works best when it incorporates multiple perspectives and finds ways to synthesise different generational insights.

Older voters bring institutional knowledge, historical perspective, and hard-won wisdom about the complexities of political change. Their caution about rapid transformation reflects lived experience of unintended consequences from well-intentioned policies.

Younger voters bring urgency, innovation, and moral clarity about emerging challenges. Their impatience with incremental change reflects understanding that some problems - particularly climate change - have deadlines that don't accommodate traditional political timelines.

The most successful political movements of the next decade will be those that bridge generational divides rather than exploit them. They'll speak to shared Australian values whilst acknowledging that different generations might prioritise different pathways to achieving those values.

This requires new approaches to political communication that work across generational lines, institutional reforms that create space for different styles of political engagement, and policy frameworks that balance urgent action with careful implementation.

The alternative - continued generational political warfare - threatens not just individual policy outcomes but the social cohesion that makes democratic governance possible. Australia's future depends on finding ways to harness the energy of generational difference whilst maintaining the solidarity necessary for collective action.

The generation game isn't about winning or losing - it's about learning to play together.