Mabo analysis somewhat overlooks the extent to which the Court considered itself to be applying the ancient English law vis a vis the rights of colonised/conquered peoples—the point on international law was a necessary but insufficient pillar of the argument. In that respect it remains a uniquely Australian continuation of the unbroken common law, particularly as we never seriously went down the treaty/semi-sovereignty path as did the Americans.
Otherwise though this is spot on. Anecdotally, people of my generation (mid 20s and below) have simply not known a world where American music, film, television were not hegemonic. American sport similarly is not quite hegemonic, but is still consumed by people my age to an outsized extent. The age of children raised largely on a media diet that was not majority American is laughably gone and this expectedly shapes the cultural setting in which events and trends are perceived. But, of course, no one wants to admit out loud that we spend this much time thinking about a country who spends comparatively zero time thinking about us.
One other counterexample might be don't-ask-don't-tell. Australia allowed open homosexuals to serve in the ADF since Keating, whereas the US armed forces didn't until Obama. I suspect this could still be interpreted in line with your thesis though because gay rights had already become a big culture war issue in both countries by that point. It just happens to be the case that due to its smaller size and lack of an influential Evangelical movement, Australia developed a consensus faster nationally and beat America to the punch on this particular policy.
The irony is that non-American Westerners often try to distinguish their own countries from the US by suggesting that their countries are more socially progressive without realizing that their standards for socially progressive are imported from internal American political controversies.
I agree with the general thrust - and indeed the ALP explicitly references the US in its own name, one than precedes Federation. However I think you gloss over popular anti-Americanism a little too much, which is prevalent across the political spectrum, but now fully embedded in the left.
I also think you may have contorted yourself a bit in the origin story of the RAN. This was founded in 1910. While it may have been a direct reaction to the rise of Japan as a naval power in the aftermath of the 1905 Russo-Japanese war, it is worth remembering that Japan was an important ally during WW1 starting four years later in 1914, and if I recall correctly even had warships based in Darwin in that period.
I like this piece, so I'm a bit sorry to say I don't think it's as unique as you claim. I shamefully can't refer to any specific authors or works, but the idea that Australia follows the USA is a common one -- the flashpoint often described is the fall of Singapore in 1942. I have an American friend who is gobsmacked by how much attention we pay to American politics -- I reckon everyone here could name the US Vice President but very few could name the Deputy Prime Minister.
You probably could write a whole series of books about how dominant American media has been in Australia since the Second World War -- American movies, music, TV, literature, etc. Teaching English literature in New South Wales, I notice that every student learns about Emmett Till and reads To Kill a Mockingbird, Of Mice and Men, The Crucible -- all good works but all distinctly American. The attention given to 20th century Australian (or even British) authors is comparatively small. So at school, children are absorbing American themes and references; in their spare time, they're either mindlessly attentive to other American media or the very American social media. It's no wonder the cultural (and increasingly the political) grammar of this country resembles that of America -- and it's doubly insulting because we only seem to imitate the most debased Americanisms that all intelligent Yanks want to get rid of!
Australia has a legacy of supposedly rationalist utilitarianism because it was popular amongst the British elite at around the time of federation. The utilitarianism remains somewhat embedded but as you said it has been swamped by Americanisms.
Australian Labor also made a shift towards neoliberalism before other left wing parties in the Anglophone world. Although this might just be a feature of Australians being more right wing on average than other Anglophone nations.
Although our current treasurer Jim Chamers seems to be borrowing more from Ezra Klein than Paul Keating.
Mabo analysis somewhat overlooks the extent to which the Court considered itself to be applying the ancient English law vis a vis the rights of colonised/conquered peoples—the point on international law was a necessary but insufficient pillar of the argument. In that respect it remains a uniquely Australian continuation of the unbroken common law, particularly as we never seriously went down the treaty/semi-sovereignty path as did the Americans.
Otherwise though this is spot on. Anecdotally, people of my generation (mid 20s and below) have simply not known a world where American music, film, television were not hegemonic. American sport similarly is not quite hegemonic, but is still consumed by people my age to an outsized extent. The age of children raised largely on a media diet that was not majority American is laughably gone and this expectedly shapes the cultural setting in which events and trends are perceived. But, of course, no one wants to admit out loud that we spend this much time thinking about a country who spends comparatively zero time thinking about us.
Great article. I always die on the inside when I read some Australian leftist saying “Don’t Americanise Australian politics”.
One other counterexample might be don't-ask-don't-tell. Australia allowed open homosexuals to serve in the ADF since Keating, whereas the US armed forces didn't until Obama. I suspect this could still be interpreted in line with your thesis though because gay rights had already become a big culture war issue in both countries by that point. It just happens to be the case that due to its smaller size and lack of an influential Evangelical movement, Australia developed a consensus faster nationally and beat America to the punch on this particular policy.
The irony is that non-American Westerners often try to distinguish their own countries from the US by suggesting that their countries are more socially progressive without realizing that their standards for socially progressive are imported from internal American political controversies.
So is this part of a whole series on the strange self hating Anglos of Australia?
A series on Australia and her Anglos for sure!
Great 😊I need something tangible to send my Naarm group chat. I view your articles as cognitive behavioural therapy for deranged Anglos.
I agree with the general thrust - and indeed the ALP explicitly references the US in its own name, one than precedes Federation. However I think you gloss over popular anti-Americanism a little too much, which is prevalent across the political spectrum, but now fully embedded in the left.
I also think you may have contorted yourself a bit in the origin story of the RAN. This was founded in 1910. While it may have been a direct reaction to the rise of Japan as a naval power in the aftermath of the 1905 Russo-Japanese war, it is worth remembering that Japan was an important ally during WW1 starting four years later in 1914, and if I recall correctly even had warships based in Darwin in that period.
https://www.thepsmiths.com/p/review-the-grand-strategy-of-the
Seems relevant.
I like this piece, so I'm a bit sorry to say I don't think it's as unique as you claim. I shamefully can't refer to any specific authors or works, but the idea that Australia follows the USA is a common one -- the flashpoint often described is the fall of Singapore in 1942. I have an American friend who is gobsmacked by how much attention we pay to American politics -- I reckon everyone here could name the US Vice President but very few could name the Deputy Prime Minister.
You probably could write a whole series of books about how dominant American media has been in Australia since the Second World War -- American movies, music, TV, literature, etc. Teaching English literature in New South Wales, I notice that every student learns about Emmett Till and reads To Kill a Mockingbird, Of Mice and Men, The Crucible -- all good works but all distinctly American. The attention given to 20th century Australian (or even British) authors is comparatively small. So at school, children are absorbing American themes and references; in their spare time, they're either mindlessly attentive to other American media or the very American social media. It's no wonder the cultural (and increasingly the political) grammar of this country resembles that of America -- and it's doubly insulting because we only seem to imitate the most debased Americanisms that all intelligent Yanks want to get rid of!
I did not learn about Emmett Till at school but agree wth your point. I explictly said as much in the piece.
The core claim revolves around the legislative framework and timing. Which I have never seen anyone else point out.
Yes, fair enough!
Australia has a legacy of supposedly rationalist utilitarianism because it was popular amongst the British elite at around the time of federation. The utilitarianism remains somewhat embedded but as you said it has been swamped by Americanisms.
Australian Labor also made a shift towards neoliberalism before other left wing parties in the Anglophone world. Although this might just be a feature of Australians being more right wing on average than other Anglophone nations.
Although our current treasurer Jim Chamers seems to be borrowing more from Ezra Klein than Paul Keating.