Haig,

Great article! How fascinating to hear how the "move to Canada" jokes have impacted Canadian identity.

This American was also expecting a more Canadian, or socialist, country in Australia. Half my family is Canadian and I attended some Uni in Canada. I would say Canada is not only significantly different on paper from the U.S. in terms of social policy, but you can really feel the effects of socialism on the ground, in a positive way.

I neither see nor feel these effects as much in Australia. That doesn't mean it feels American--Australia feels different to me than the U.S. in many ways, starting with the amazing phenomenon of small community social feel in even big-city Sydney.

But to what extent does a relationship with the US decrease DOMESTIC socialist policy? Individualism, while an American value, is also just a product of an increasingly competitive, urbanised world. It is these forces that threaten to carry selfishness, etc to new heights, much more than American influence. Here's where U.S. bashing is misplaced energy.

To those sensitive Aussies who ask me if I'm Canadian when we first meet, good on you! I would imagine that asking Canadians if they are American only contributes to the "we are not American" quotient of the identity, which is probably not the most uplifiting, and in my view, not the most productive, for Canadians.

Astute observations,It pains me to have to agree but the evidence is there for all to see.
What wise people could possibly re-elect a leader who habitually lies to them...and smirks as he does so...
Recall the Children overboard; the Weapons of Mass destruction;That troops had not been deployed when ideed they were already engaged;The sell-out on a US Free Trade Agreement,Proposals for US Bases in Australia;Adoption of a missile defence system..There is a view that there was not a viable alternative;but thats debatable.
We appear to be fertile ground for right wing /conservative religious imports from the US along with their fundamentalist religious principles which don't have much in common with so-called 'Christian' ethics when it comes to compassion for refugees and asylum seekers.

Good on you Haig, well defined, erudite article. I am very concerned at the sublimation of Australia's identity and sovereignty - concern which has increased since the last election. Keep up with the observations - I intend to.

The difficulty with the perspective advanced in your piece is that national identity is a rather slippery and potentially a dangerous, concept.

I would have thought, in observing the vicissitudes of Australian foreign policy during the Hawke-Keating and Howard years, that the point is that Australian national identity is contested. There is not a "national identity" in the world that is not contested but Australia - in Samuel Huntington's view - a "torn country", that contestation is perhaps greater than most Western European and North American social democracies.

It could certainly be argued, in response to your piece, that foreign policy under Howard has involved rather more assertive advocacy of what many would identify as Australia's national identity and national interests. One could also argue that such assertions are related to radical and irreversible changes to Australian society that have occured as a result of Howard reforms, reforms that have taken Australian society in a divergent direction from many Western European and one North American social democracies.

There is undoubtedly an element of Derridean "othering" in Canada's definition of itself by reference to what it is not - the United States.

But "standing up" for the "national identity" of middle powers need not necessarily entail opposition to various aspects of superpower policy. On the contrary, it might conceivably entail support for superpower policy.

It all depends on what you mean by "national identity".

I agree with Hill's proposition that a 'national indentity' may well encompass the support of a superpower's policy.
One problem with Bailan's analysis is that it rests upon a dubious premise, i.e. that at one time Oz & Canada were similar in many respects, but have now diverged.

On one level it could be said that we are now more similar & risk the prospect of greater cultural similarity, given that Oz like Canada,has entered into a free trade agreement with the US. To me Bailan is just unhappy about the results of the recent Federal election.

Oz's foundations & character although similar in some respects to the Canadian also differ sharply. Historically our roads to & from British dominion status have been influenced heavily by different fundamental factors, such as the role of the French; the influence & the nature of each country's borders; the level of the threat & engagement in the Pacific theatre of WW2; geographic position, etc etc.

Whilst we are both members of the post British colonial club & have both adopted Westminster forms of goverment, what will be more important in the future will be the response of each nation to the threats upon our new world western social & political systems from both the East & the Middle East.

Whilst it must be good to be able to have a joint with your gay spouse without fear of the law, that in my view somewhat trivialises an analyses of where each nation stands on so many issues of greater moment, such as increasing American cultural hegemony & rampant Islamic fundamentalism.