Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Why mate equals hate

By Josh Ushay - posted Wednesday, 6 April 2005


It's difficult to know what to make of the recent poll by the Lowy Institute and its conclusion that the majority of Australians feel the US has a disproportionate influence over Australia in general, and our foreign policy in particular.

While this may be surprising, if not welcome for some, this poll probably says more about the Australian character than it does about our attitude towards the Americans; for there is a chance this poll reflects our traditional pre-occupation with both the tall poppy syndrome and with having "a fair go", rather than fundamental resentment of the US.

On the one hand, there is a clear sense of dissatisfaction towards the Bush Administration held by many Australians, and not just from the left-leaning intelligentsia. While criticisms from the so-called latte-left are well known, these criticisms have a much deeper resonance in the community than conservative critics would lead us to believe.

Advertisement

Two-thirds of the respondents to the Lowy survey say the US has too much influence on our foreign policy and the only countries rated below the US on a positive index were Indonesia, war-ravaged Iraq and Iran.

But a majority of Australians still regard the US alliance as important and three in five people said this link was "very important" to our security.

In terms of a threat from the outside world, almost as many nominated the US as those who regarded Islamic fundamentalism a significant danger - 32 per cent compared with 36 per cent, respectively.

It is clear many Australians of moderate political persuasion share the view that the Bush Administration invaded Iraq on false pretences; that the US Republican Party is more interested in oil than it is making the world safe for democracy; and that Australian foreign policy is shaped more in Washington than it is in Canberra.

The fact that this criticism emanates from moderates says something. While some of the criticism from the latte-left lacks balance, and therefore credibility, there is a great deal of evidence to suggest the US is less focused on strengthening its ties with Australia and more focused on furthering its own interests, at our expense nonetheless. To many, this offends the traditional Australian sense of being "fair dinkum".

Yet, on the other hand, the extent of this dissatisfaction is probably inflated, albeit unconsciously. These sorts of polls have a tendency to paint a distorted picture of the way Australians see the world; a distortion, moreover, that stems from two distinctly Australian characteristics - the belief that everyone deserves a fair go, and the tall poppy syndrome.

Advertisement

First, many Australian moderates, while ambivalent, are in the end not hostile towards the Bush Administration.

This is part of a traditional Australian affinity for the US that stretches back to World War II. Because a lot of American GIs died protecting Australia from the Japanese, and because the US and Australia share the core values of democracy, liberalism, and the free exchange of ideas and capital, the Australian commitment to having "a fair go" tends to translate into a loathing for totalitarianism, be it in the form of Nazism, Stalinism or Islamism.

Thus, while many moderates see merit in arguments from the Left, they also are conscious that the US, for its many faults, is a nation that not only embraces values similar to our own but also protects us from those who do not share these values.

Second, these moderates are reluctant to put forth anything that is not rabidly anti-American, for fear of being perceived as pro-American. Pro-Americanism not only challenges the deeply held Australian characteristic of disdain for authority but also contradicts our traditional propensity for supporting the underdog - and the last thing one could label the US is an underdog, in just about anything.

This aversion to pro-Americanism, furthermore, also is driven by the fear of being associated with the long-held American tendency for exceptionalism.

Unlike in the US, open declarations of self-perceived moral superiority do not sit overly well with Australians.

While nearly all of us would agree with Bush's claim that the way of life in the so-called "free world" is far superior to that in fundamentalist police states, we would probably be extremely hesitant to make this the cornerstone of our message to the world. To Australians, it is the diplomatic equivalent of telling everyone how much better you are than everyone else, which, in turn, borders dangerously on the most feared criticism one can ever inflict on an Australian - being "up yourself".

And, condemning the Bush Administration has other benefits. By distancing themselves from the US, many of those in the middle of the road can avoid stinging attacks from Bush's Australian critics, who sometimes have a disturbing tendency to view those who disagree with them as both intellectually and morally inferior.

Whatever the case, all of this makes clear that the Lowy findings are intriguing, to say the least. It also is clear that if there is one thing everyone has an opinion on these days, it is American foreign policy. As the Lowy poll demonstrates, the vigour of debate on this topic shows no sign of waning.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

First published in The Courier-Mail on March 31, 2005.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

7 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Josh Ushay lectures in American foreign policy and international security at the Queensland University of Technology.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Josh Ushay

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 7 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy