Nationalism In Australia

Nationalism can be traced to the nineteenth century, European peoples came to identify strongly with communities they called nations. Members of a nation considered themselves a distinctive people that spoke a common language, observed common customs, inherited common cultural conditions, held common values, and shared common

Nationalism has been extremely important and influential in shaping the modern world we see today, causing revolutions, rebellions and the constant reshaping of world maps continuing even today. Its appeal is something that I don’t believe will diminish in the future. Many theologians and political commentators alike agree that Nationalism has perhaps been one of the most prominent political ideologies of the modern world “No single political doctrine has played a more prominent role in shaping the face of the modern world than nationalism” 1, and doesn’t look like ceasing to be as influential anytime

The concept of being a ‘nation of immigrants’ is at the center of Australian identity.

Present day Australia is met with the issue of outlining a sense of a nationwide community, after the breakdown of the British race patriot idea in the mid-1960s with the introduction of multiculturalism. The Euro-centric perception of Australia was annulled and it was incapable in playing a significant part in Australian policies and priorities. It triggered a calamity of national identity and meaning. The credence that Australian’s were apart of Britain, united by history, tradition and blood needed to be revised. A people who had recognized themselves so strongly with the British race now had to accede their race awareness and apprehend the notion of being a now multicultural society. The dawn of multiculturalism also provoked a quandary for balancing a respect of the British heritage with the abating relevance of the British connection and to construct a new language of community from the residues of the old British ways.

There are many diverse interpretations of the words “Australian Identity”. The national anthem, as evidenced in Stand Up, is a primarily white interpretation of Australia and the Australian identity, with many of the lines ignoring the Indigenous people of Australia (Perkins et al, 2012). Another form of the “Australian Identity” was one presented by Prime Minister Paul Keating in his Redfern Address in 1992. He proclaimed that “Australia is a first-rate social democracy…truly the land of the fair go and the better chance”. This idea presented represents an egalitarian society, where every single human has an equal opportunity at life. Yet another, shown in the songs Paul Kelly sang, but especially in “this land is mine” is the difference between the identity of Indigenous Australians and non-Indigenous Australians (Kelly et al, 2001). Each of these texts addressed a major issue. Stand Up compared the relative value of tradition and the right to freedom of expression. Keating’s speech expressed the need for justice and recognition of both the stolen generation and the injustices done to the Indigenous people as a whole. Kelly’s songs represent the importance of the land to Indigenous people and why the “returning of the land” is so important. Although they each mentioned a major issue, the texts all gave solutions to these issues, from reiterating the importance of the basic human right of freedom of speech in Stand Up, to explaining the role and qualities of the Aboriginal

Since World War 2 and the Vietnam War, Australia has become a multicultural country. Before the Vietnam War, though, the Australian government tried their best to keep Australia ‘white’. After the fear of communism from Vietnam, the government thought it would be in the country’s best interest to try and build up the population in Australia, but only allowing ‘white’ Europeans and British people to come. What is included in this report, is to discover how and why the migrants from non-European countries manage to change the face of modern Australia.

Nationalism is a powerful force that can unite people working towards a common goal, but when it is taken to the extreme it can cause major disharmony in society, evident in the numerous genocides during the Age of Imperialism, the Fascist party's rise to power, and the Japanese’s unwillingness to surrender during World War II. Nationalism is dangerous, because it warps the minds of the individuals in the organization, creates prejudice and discrimination, and can be easily manipulated into a weapon against humanity.

Nationalism has played a crucial role in world history over the past centuries. It continues to do so today. For many, nationalism is indelibly associated with some of the worst aspects of modern history, such as the destructive confidence of the Napoleon’s army and the murderous pride of Nazi Germany. Large numbers of people, descent in their hearts, have carried out unbelievable atrocities for no better reason than their nation required them to. Authoritarian and totalitarian regime have crushed dissent, eliminated opposition, and trampled on civil liberties in the name of the nation.

This paper is divided into two parts. In the first part the concepts or race, ethnicity, prejudice and racism are defined and how they are connected is discussed. Part 2 of the paper looks at the ‘White Australia’ policy and why it was introduced. The impact of such a racist immigration history on contemporary Australia is also discussed in terms of attitudes and behaviours of the population. Following is a brief discussion on how successive government polic

Nationalism can be described as a mix, multidimensional morally developed or created concept involving a shared common identification with one's Nation. It is more on politically motivated towards working and maintaining self-governance, or full sovereignty, working towards to a specific land or a territory of historical significance to the group such as land and its belongings. In simple Nationalism is a nation command and lead itself, free from foreign influence, it is the concept of self-rule. Nationalism is further formed towards maintaining and developing a Sovereignty based on shared features such as religion, language, race, culture, or either political goals or a belief in a customary ancestry. So its pride towards nation's achievements, and the concept in world history has shown positive and negative impact, moreover in a political dimension it leads either unification or disintegration.

Nationalism is a widely debated ideology that differs based on the historian’s definition. For example, Benedict Anderson attempts to define nationalism as "an imagined political community [that is] imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign"(Anderson, pg 6). Anderson also believes the main causes of nationalism can be

Nationalism has become one of the most powerful uniting-and occasionally separating-powers of the modern age. Throughout history, there were numerous countries that exemplified both sides of this classic European belief. However, as time has passed, this pride and promotion of one’s country has developed far beyond the scope of Europe. Nationalist feelings fester in all parts of the globe now, and with that comes more complicated expressions of the sentiment, as well as carefully crafted governments that exist for the sole support of nationalist fervor.

Nationalism at its core is the support of a country. The goal of a country is to have some sort of resonance within the individuals that reside there that call themselves citizens. If the citizens don’t feel any connection with their country, they may move to find one that they feel closer too. Once found, they may support the country over others, defend it within conversations of politics or just find groups that have the same ideals they do about the country. This papers purpose is to illustrate the pros of nationalism as well as its cons.

However, nationalism does not have one single definition, its meaning has evolved as society changes and modernises. Nationalism can “...refer to any behaviour designed to restore, maintain, or advance public images of that national community” (Gries, 2005:9). By the mid-1960s there were two main proposals to understanding nationalism. “In the first, nationalism was an aspect of national history, a sentiment associated with the nation...In the second approach, nationalism was a modern, irrational doctrine which could acquire sufficient power...to generate nationalists sentiments and even nation states” (Gellner, 2008:xx). Nationalism is defined differently by different schools of thought and theorists.

In 1995, Michael Billig, in his book of the same name, introduced the notion of ‘banal nationalism’. According to his definition, banal nationalism refers to the everyday representations of the nation that build a non-material sense of national solidarity and belonging among humans in the established nations. As examples, we might think about symbols in our daily life that contribute to create this sense of nationalism such as the use of flags on everyday contexts, national songs, sports events and contests, patriotic figures symbols on money, national clubs.. In addition, in the language, many symbols of the nationalism are effective such as popular expressions, turns of phrase and consideration of the ‘us’ as the people in the media. For Billig, these elements are successful in reminding the national identity and nationhood belonging by being constantly used and omnipresent in our life without being consciously analysed. There are subliminal and subtle. As Billig puts it, in other words ‘banal nationalism is not a flag which is consciously waved with fervent; it is the flag hanging unnoticed on the public building’.