I have this weird new feeling. I agree with everything in an OLO piece! Except maybe for the last paragraph, about 'rethinking how we might take advantage' etc. There is already a nice balance between asserting our national identity and accepting the historical connections of a majority of Aussies. But the balance might turn out to be a bit delicate if rocked. Best leave it alone.

Interesting article. Australia is 'British' because we acquired the British brand of liberal democracy. So it's not so remarkable that Australia still retains deep cultural affinities with the UK, despite that country's increasing irrelevance to Australia geo-politically and economically. Australians don't even seem to to care or remember that the British abandoned us in 1942 and then waved us goodbye by joining the EEC. Even though mother doesn't love us, we love her.

No mac we don't particularly love them, & we don't dislike them either, we simply admit that the UK is our root.

We, the thinking ones anyway, would much rather remain with them, than let the layers loose in the courts, as would be the case, much to their wealth, if we change even a few words of a successful constitution.

Hasbeen,

I'm not sure what you mean by 'remain with them', do you mean stay as a constitutional monarchy?

Well, I guess that the geographical distance matters a lot in this. of course Australia is historically connected with Britain - but in the second half of the twentieth century - after the decline of the BE - Australia has moved on on its own accounts. There are undeniable British roots (most obviously the language) but the cultural treetop (to keep it metaphorical) is no longer the Crown.

There is no contradiction between rejoicing in the best of our British heritage such as parliamentary democracy, the English language, and a respect for the rule of law founded on an independent judiciary on the one hand, and recognizing the imperatives of our geography. . We are located
In south Asia. Our major trading partners are overwhelmingly in Asia. The ethnic composition of our population is increasingly diverse with a steadily growing percentage from greater Asia. I suggest that in two generations from now we will look back on this generation's clinging to the British monarchy as the quaint absurdity that it is. That does not mean we discard the assets mentioned above that we have inherited.

And the cleverness of the metaphor goes further, josephine, in that whenever it happens the achievement of a republic will be described as a 'crown fire'.

Ho hum, and not a word about the most vital attribute we have inherited from our British roots; that is their legal system which is nonpareil.

This legal system is also the reason why, as the author, notes, but in an misunderstanding fashion, why:

"Other than the reports from al Jazeera on SBS News, media coverage of the rest of the world comes to us largely from British and American journalists"

The reason for this is the British legal system has allowed the evolution of the concept of the freedom of the press and general freedom of expression within the wider community.

The other totalitarian social systems, either of the left or religious based, suppress such social advantages. Which explains why this government is in favour of suppressing freedom of the press via the Finkelstein report.

Well I certainly hope you are wrong James O'Neill. From my experience the last thing you want is to have our culture morph into something similar to our Asian neighbours, or to that of some of the more distant places our "refugees" are coming from.

I have not seen much kindness on the streets of Indonesia or India, or the other Asian countries of which I have experience. From recently returned people, Afghanistan does not have much milk of human kindness, & middle eastern cultures seem happy to see the weakest riped off unmercifully.

If you want a kind Oz, you would be best advised to stop all immigration immediately, before our existing culture is swamped by too many from such places.

My European forbears were in the main, Irish and Scots. They lived through a time when speaking your own language was a crime punishable by death or transportation.
Many of them had their property and possessions confiscated by legalised methods.
Foreign Churches and their tithes were imposed on the native populations, and if those tithes weren't met, the very farm animals that made their miserable lives actually possible, were confiscated, leaving them with little other choice but to steal to survive!
Highlanders, were forcibly relocated to much poorer less fertile coastal areas, and their crofts turned into sheep farms.
Many died or were forced into a life of petty crime, poaching etc, in order to simply survive.
An Irish ancestor, was transported for stealing a pair of shoes!
It might be argued that the sense of fair play and completely non partisan, totally independent courts arrived here, via the British colonial service, often populated by Scots, Welsh and Irish personal?
They were the ones, I believe, who invested their morals into those things their English Lords and Masters, merely gave lip service to?
It is a reported fact that around 40% of Australians have Irish ancestry? Add in the Scots and Welsh and our Celtic roots probably outweigh our Anglo-Saxon roots 2 to 1?
Which probably explains our very evident and inherent pleasure, whenever we beat the Poms at cricket, or anything else.
I believe it is time for all the forelock tugging and cultural cringing was put to bed. And we stood up on our hind legs and declared we were a republic, with very little in common, with the English and their Monarchy.
The Queen is not a young person, and it might be argued, has served us and our notion of democracy reasonably well.
So, it probably would do no harm and a mark of respect, to wait until she "retires", before we declare ourselves a republic, and invested our own sense of inherent fair play, into our democracy, proportional representation, bill of rights, rule of law, etc/etc.
Rhrosty

Hear, hear Rrosthy. Isn't it embarrassing when a bunch of Australians wax lyrical about all things British without knowing much of English history, or even their own? And absolutely nothing whatsoever of histories from other nations. Or their legal systems for that matter