Nationalism: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly

It is interesting and timely that a discussion on nationalism should take place in Bendigo for a couple of reasons. Firstly, Bendigo has been the scene in recent years for protests by far-right groups such as the United Patriots Front and the like-minded Reclaim Australia in opposition to the construction of a mosque in Bendigo. These protests can be seen as part of a precursor to the reemergence of 'Hansonism' and the consequent election of three One Nation politicians into Australia's senate in the federal election held in June this year. 

But it is also noteworthy - probably more as a curiosity for history buffs like me as much as anything else - because Bendigo was the seat held by ultra nationalist Billy Hughes at the conclusion of World War 1. Trying to explain the political machinations of Hughes would take more space than this blog allows but needless to say Hughes held extremely firm views on what Australian identity was. To put it briefly it was uncompromisingly white and masculine. 

In 1919 Hughes, the then prime-minister, had returned to Australia from visiting Europe where post war reconstruction work was commencing. Reports from the period give a sense of Hughes having a spring in his step and convey a tone that while the war had been a great catastrophe resulting in horrific loss of life, it had also been an opportunity for Australia to prove itself on the world stage. 

I have come back as I could have desired, in a manner symbolical of war and the glorious aftermath of war... I could not have fashioned for myself a more splendid and  glorious way of returning to Australia than that which fate has destined for me... It is well that we should remember today, that after 16-months my colleague and myself have landed in Australia again and find it still a free Australia, a white Australia. Australia is free and white today; but it owes nothing to those who, being able to fight, remained behind, and everything to those who, being able to fight, went out and fought. (Source) 

For Hughes, Australia's participation in the war was completely tied to an identity of Australia as being a white man's country. The 'White Australia' policy received overwhelming bipartisan political support and was a key plank of the Australian Labor Party's political platform for a number of decades. The ALP stalwart Arthur Calwell was still clinging to it well into the 1960s. 


This afternoon's panel - facilitated by Louise Adler - consisted of Anne Summers, Benjamin Law and Peter Doherty. It was a wide ranging discussion that strangely enough - given the potentially bleak subject matter - resulted in a number of laughs. Unfortunately, it is impossible to give a detailed account of the conversation so I will have to cherry-pick my highlights.  

Benjamin Law spoke with characteristic intelligence and humour of his experiences growing up as the son of immigrants from an Asian back ground and living in a comprehensively white Gold Coast. 

A national history is a personal history - Benjamin Law

Law found himself in secondary school when Pauline Hanson burst spectacularly and controversially onto the Australian political scene in the 1990s. He felt a shift took place with regards to multiculturalism during these years - the "Hanson and Howard years" - and that Australian-ness was an ideal that was recognised by an ability to speak English. Law challenged this widely held mainstream perception - subtly and not so subtly encouraged by the sections of the media and political classes - by telling the story of his grandmother who did not speak English but who worked in Australia, paid taxes in Australia, and contributed much to Australia. 

Peter Doherty spoke of transforming the long-held rifts within Australian society through the emergence of a new Australian identity - a new understanding of Australian-ness - that was removed from a sense of nationalism - as understood as part of the nation-state construct - and based more on a love of country, an appreciation of landscape. 

 Although, Anne Summers challenged this to an extent by claiming that there would be many Australians of a recent immigrant background who would never have ventured far from the cities in which they live and would not have the connection to the sort of natural wonders of Australia that Doherty spoke of. 

Summers makes a good point but I must admit I found what Doherty said to be consistent with my own thoughts. That an appreciation and celebration of Aboriginal culture and heritage - and in particular having that esteemed sense of place - as something intrinsic within oneself - that does allow for the possibility to rise above a narrowly conceived and crudely articulated jingoistic sense of what Australian identity might be - as being crucial to a maturation of both an individual and collective identity. The way in which I experience what Doherty speaks of is as a quietism, that is meditative and mindful, aware and conscientious, that has definite 'spiritual' aspect and if allowed to develop to its potential could well become a way in which one is guided in life. (That would of course become a challenge to finance capital and the expoitative and extractive industries that historically and presently plunder the Australian countryside.) (Perhaps there is an enforced dissociation between Australia and Australian-ness because of this?)

All panelists agreed that there is generally a sense of confusion surrounding ideas of Australian nationalism. 

The fundamental problem is that we don't know who we are as Australians - Anne Summers

Summers remarked  that unlike America whose main days of public celebration were July 4th and Thanksgiving - days that are more inclusive rather than exclusionary as to who can participate - Australia's public days of national celebration were more problematic. Australia Day antagonises many because it can justifiably also be seen as an Invasion Day. And Anzac Day is a commemoration to a World War 1 battlefield that in spite of considerable media attention does not actually hold any significant direct connection to many Australians. 

Is this how we want to express ourselves? - Anne Summers  

We don't have unifying symbols - Anne Summers  

(It is an interesting point, but how would you go about determining a new national day of inclusive celebration?) 

Doherty spoke of the rapid rate of change - technological and economic - that has taken place and the sense of uncertainty that now exists around jobs. For Doherty much of this has been caused by the "toxic religion of economic rationalism" and that something needed to be done about "the bastards" who know about "the commodification of everything and the value of nothing" and that "we need to do something about neoliberalism."

Doherty's comments fitted nicely with a question that later came from the floor regarding the role of 'Fox News' in the impoverishment of American political discourse and the consequent rise of nativism as expressed by Donald Trump. 

Summers viewed 'Fox News' as not just pushing fear that drove a wedge deep into political discussion but also being driven by and actively perpetuating "a reign of terror" through "a regime of misogyny" that was over seen by Roger Aisles. 

Fox News promulgates lies - Anne Summers 

The 'Fox News' mode of operation was then tied back to the reemergence of Pauline Hanson in Australian politics and what Louise Adler referred to as the "incivility of discourse" where the likes of Hanson already have their minds made up and "are not wanting to hear any other views." How can rational discussion take place under those sort of circumstances? 

While there is much to be concerned about there is also plenty that warrants optimism. Public discussions of the sort that this panel contributed to demonstrate there is still a desire of many to engage thoughtfully and constructively in talking through and trying to give sense to complex modern issues. (My account above of the session has condensed much and selectively highlighted the sensational. It was far more measured and issues teased out more gently than I have detailed)

It was stimulating to listen to four highly intelligent and articulate people speak at length on issues that often are reduced to sound bites or vigorous slanging-fests on social media. (Or recounted with extreme discrimination in a self-serving blog!) 

To take the time to be fully absorbed into what somebody is saying does allow you to reflect more thoroughly on what is at stake. It is actually nice to be in a communal public space and be surrounded by other members of society and to experience some sort of pause for reflection.   

Australia is very much at a new part of its history and it is very new to all Australians. We are ground-breakers in this complex multi-cultural place with its difficult history and potentially antagonistically fraught future. (It seems as though at times it is all up for ceaseless contest)

Perhaps there is some confusion and muddling about but we do still retain the possibility to shape our futures. It is very much up to us how we engage with the challenges.   

The beliefs of the likes of Billy Hughes do continue to loom large within the sentiments of many contemporary white Australians and it is noticeable in the attitudes of many who live in central Victoria.  


In other words, something such as Nationalism: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly could easily run at future Bendigo Writers Festival's well into perpetuity.