Devaluing Australian values

For numerous reasons, Australians have found it difficult to define Australian values. One problem is that 20 per cent of Australians are migrants and some are more governed by the diverse values of their homeland than any values that might exist in Australia. A second problem is that the majority of Australians are religious, and their belief in religious values is more important than a belief in any Australian values. A final problem is that values generally flow from the operation of certain circumstances. As circumstances change, so do the values of the society.

Despite values being difficult to define and agree upon, attempts have been made to define them and force others to conform to them. From the 15th of October 2007, anyone applying for a visa to Australia has been required to sign a values statement (see below.)Likewise, anyone wanting to migrate to Australia is required to show their commitment to Australian values with a variety of tests.

The values tests have provoked concern amongst Australians who either don't agree with the values, or have a value that people should not be pressured to conform. For example, the anti-values site, http://valuesaustralia.com, takes a sarcastic look Australian values in order to strip them of any prestige. (It is not clear what values the site's authors are governed by other than a value that Australia should not be respected in any shape or form.)

Even though not all Australians, past or present, have shared the same values, there are some values that have survived across the generations. Because these values are intertwined with customs, the Australian manner of speaking English, and iconic representation, they have survived in those Australians who engage with the customs, icons, and language.

Socioeconomic egalitarianism

Although not all Australians have an equal amount of money, most Australian men want to pretend they are still equal in status. Socioeconomic egalitarianism is expressed in the Australian manner of speaking English as well customs relating to drinking beer. In regards to English, the Australian version is more informal than versions found in America and England. Australians quickly get onto first name basis and rarely use titles when addressing people of superior status. For example, when cricketer Dennis Lillee first greeted Queen Elizabeth, he used the words:

"G'day, how ya goin'?"

As well as being informal, the broad Australian accent is classless. It is just as likely to be used by a billionaire (Kerry Packer) or prime minister (Bob Hawke) as it is by a tradesmen. On the other hand, an English billionaire or English prime minister will never use a low class cockney accent.

Ironically, being treated as an equal has sometimes offended foreigners. In 1980, a Japanese prefecture sponsored a weekend seminar to discuss problems that Japanese people might experience in Australia. One speaker, Hiro Mukai, stated:

"Australians appear very naive to the newly-arrived Japanese. They speak the same way with everyone."

As well as in the language, socioeconomic egalitarianism is also expressed in a number of customs such as buying a ‘round’ at the pub. A round is where one individual will pay for the drinks of the other members of the drinking party. Once the drinks have been drunk, another member of the drinking party will get the next round. Every member of the drinking party must buy the same number of rounds. Like splitting the bill at a restaurant, there is no consideration given to each member's financial status. In 1978, the National Times wrote of the round:

"In tribal societies in which gift giving is economically important, there may be exchange of gift giving of identical (or useless) gifts which serve to maintain the relationship between donors. In Australia, the ritual of the round, known virtually to all adult members of society, has some parallel functions. It symbolise entry to a group (and, for that matter, makes pointed an exclusion). It binds a group together."

Mateship

Although people in every country have friends, arguably no nationality lionises mateship to the same degree as do Australians. An Australian's lionisation of mateship is particularly evident in the way mateship is celebrated in ANZAC Day services. Whereas most countries use their military day to affirm all that is good and just about their nation, Australians use their military day to remember the character of those who died in war. A central feature of the Anzac Day service is a paragraph taken from the poem 'Ode for the Fallen':

"They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old;
Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning
We will remember them."

Along with the Ode, Australian military tradition lionises mateship with the immortalisation of John Simpson and his donkey. During the Gallipoli campaign, Simpson deserted his unit and saved hundreds of wounded men by carrying them from the battlefield to the army hospital. It was an act of self sacrifice that ultimately cost him his life.

The importance of mateship can be attributed to hardship. It has long be known in psychological circles that social bonding coincides with extreme difficulty. (For this reason, defence force training inflicts hardship upon new recruits in order to foster such bonding.) In the colonial era, Convicts had to deal with the hardship of being exported from their country and turned into slaves in a harsh and forgiving land. In the pioneering era, farmers had to deal with land that was infertile and droughts that were common. In the depression, Australians had to deal with a lack of jobs.

By comparison, Australian life today is quite easy and mateship is perhaps declining in importance as a result.

Fair go

The iconic Australian saying of ' fair go' is an abbreviation for the Convict saying 'fair crack of the whip'. To believe in a fair go is to believe in individual determination free of racial, political, religious or socio-economic discrimination.

There is nothing particularly Australian about such a belief. After all, the same belief is promoted by most governments the world over. Defining what constitutes a fair go changes according to different governments. In Australia's first century, a fair go basically meant that if an individual was being wronged, others would step in to help him. Usually it was unions that would step in to lend a hand.

Today, the fair go concept has been politicised. Some interest groups argue that migrants illegally arriving by boat have been denied a fair go in Australia. It is open to debate whether preserving the integrity of an orderly immigration process benefits Australia, benefits relations with foreign countries and benefits potential refugees or migrants. For this reason, those who have tried to evoke the Australian value of a ‘fair go’ in order to change attitudes towards illegal migrants have not persuaded people as effectively as they would like.

Battler

In tough times, people build their self esteem by associating themselves with heroes. As a general rule, Americans like to associate themselves with a champion individual whose success inspires hope that the American dream is alive and well. Contrasted to this, Australians seek inspiration from a fellow battler; someone who does not necessarily succeed but shows great character in the face of adversity. 

A good definition of a battler comes from authors Michael Page & Robert Inapen:

"The true Aussie battler and his wife thrust doggedly onwards: starting again, failing again, implacably thrusting towards success. For success, even if it is only the success of knowing that one has tried to the utmost and never surrendered, is the target of every battler"

The desire to support the battler is most clearly expressed in the tendency of Australians to support the underdog. In supporting the underdog, Australians are choosing to support someone who is likely to fail. However the losing battler will still inspire Australians if they show persistence and strength of character in the face of their adversity. 

America's support for the champion and Australia's support for the battler can be explained by looking at the different histories of the two countries. In America, the dream came true. The land was green and fertile. The British were expelled and politicians declared equality for all regardless of race or class. In Australia, the dream failed. The top soil was thin and droughts common. The Convict uprising at Vinegar Hill was ruthlessly crushed as was the Eureka rebellion 50 years later. Ned Kelly led an independence movement only to be captured and hung. Australia's politicians never preached the virtues of being Australian nor did they preach equality of race or class. Just when Gallipoli war hero, John Simpson, seemed to have built an aura of someone with divine protection, he was shot dead. Don Bradman needed only 4 runs in his last innings to achieve the magical average of 100 but was bowled first ball. Pharlap, the loser horse that became a champion, left Australia to prove his worth in America. He easily won his first race, and then died. 

Volunteering culture

A study by Ernest Healy, senior research fellow at the Centre for Population and Urban Research at Monash University, found that people in Australia with an Australian identity were 50 per cent more likely to do volunteer-related work than people with an ethnic identity. The explanation for the difference was that if an individual felt part of the community, they were more likely to contribute to the community.

The problem with the explanation was that the ethnics didn't seem to have a strong culture of wanting to contribute to their ethnic community even though they identified with the community.

An alternative explanation is that many ethnic identities are associated with dancing, singing.or historical feuds with other nationalities. Conforming to the identity doesn't require an ethic of volunteering. On the other hand, the Australian identity has a strong association with volunteering. For example, Australia has developed a very positive mythology surrounding volunteer fire-fighters, soldiers, Salvation Army workers, and surf lifesavers. As ex -Army chief Peter Cosgrove explained:

"Without doubt the best quality we observe across the entire Australian community is a natural willingness to pitch in and have a go, to help others. We see it of course whenever there is an emergency or a worthy cause. We see it in every community volunteer organisation from the lifesavers to the bushfire brigades through to the thousands of youth and mature age sporting clubs and those great international service organisations like Rotary and many others. We see it in our professional bodies such as the police, fire and ambulance services and of course in the defence force. It is a generosity of spirit and a selflessness that is perhaps our most precious heritage to hand on to younger and newer Australians - a nation of people who care for and look out for each other."

 

Value statement for migrants

Ironically, pressuring someone to conform to individual freedoms violates the value

Assesment of the values

Like every country around the world, men and women are not equal in Australia. In Australia, the differences are expressed in language, clothing, and customs. It would be more accurate to say, "equal educational and work opportunities for men and women."

The Australian government funds private schools that provide a religious education. Although parents have a choice to send children to the schools, children at the schools have no freedom to abstain from religious guidance. It would be more accurate to say the separation of religion and state.

Over the last two centuries, many Australians have challenged the laws of the day and were immortalised by subsequent generations as a result. At the Eureka Massacre, diggers burnt their licences and dug in for a battle with authorities. Ned Kelly tried to start a revolution 30 years later.

From 1838 to 1902 it was illegal to swim off public beaches during the day. The law was challenged and eventually changed. Until 30 years ago, homosexuality was illegal in Australia. The laws were challenged and changed.

It would probably be more accurate to say that an Australian value is to find fault with the law. This seems to be a Convict legacy. As one Convict wrote:

"What is the measure of the guilt of those transported for killing game, or goaded to robbery by famine and destitution? Then, there are innocent men in the position of criminals, who have been erroneously found guilty upon obscure or implausible evidence or misdirection, or who have been made to appear guilty by the false oaths and artful devices of wicked persons interested in effecting their ruin or destruction."

A Convict poet wrote:

" The law locks up the man or woman
Who steals the goose from off the common,
But leaves the greater villain loose
Who steals the common from the goose. " 

Most people support democracy as long as democracy gives the outcome that people want. When a disliked party gets in power, voices quickly emerge that some people don’t deserve a vote because they are uneducated, lacking in compassion or lack some other kind of required value. That said, evoking the value provides a useful goal for Australians to aspire to.

Australia is not a respectful society. Australian children are taught to be critical by their teachers and so grow up to be very critical people. With the culture of criticism, Australians criticise other Australians and fail to show tolerance or a sense of fair play. They do; however, justify their criticisms as being in the pursuit of the public good. Again, even if it is not true, evoking the value provides a useful goal for Australians to aspire to.

The value is generally upheld with exceptions made for Aborigines and ethnic groups. For example, Robert Manne, voted Australia’s leading intellectual in 2005, wrote about Aborigines having "an intricate social order, in which, through kinship structure, every human held a precise and acknowledged place". While Manne wanted individul to be free in his own world, he wanted the group to dominate in the Aboriginal worlds.

Australian judges have shared similar ideologies with Robert Manne when refraining from giving jail sentences to Aborigines who have used culture as an excuse to violate the rights of individual Aborigines. For example, in 2005 an Australian court heard that a 55-year-old Aboriginal elder anally raped a 14-year-old girl, imprisoned her for four days and repeatedly beat her with a boomerang. In the man's culture, his actions were perfectly acceptable. The judge sympathised with the man and only sentenced him to one month's jail. Justice for the victim was denied. When it came to Aborigines, culture was deemed more important than individual rights.

 

 

(Top)