With "Australia Day," just around the corner
I thought it might be interesting to see what
people think about what it means to be Australian.
I've surfed the web - and there are some interesting
articles on the subject. Some funny, some serious.
One gave two versions - both done humourously -
I've listed the link below:

http://www.onlymelbourne.com.au/what-it-means-to-be-australian

It begins with:

"Being Australian is about driving in a German car to an
Irish pub for a Belgian beer, then travelling home,
getting an Indian curry or a Turkish kebab on the way, to
sit on Swedish furniture and watch American shows on a
Japanese TV."

Then, on a more serious note we have the following:

http://theconversation.com/how-do-we-teach-what-it-means-to-be-australian-32206

What does it mean to you?

Don't worry Foxy, White Nationalists don't recognise Australia day, there's no need for the Anti White side to panic every year as January 26 closes in. It means nothing to us beyond the arrival of the first White slaves from the U.K, so grab your Muslim neighbours and Chinese work colleagues and diversity each other to your heart's content.

Well to begin with, I don't drink.
I also don't watch any sports,
I don't have a television,
I don't celebrate Xmas,
I don't accept government handouts (including Medicare),
I don't like being ordered around by laws and regulations,
I don't believe it right to have one regime enforced over a whole continent,
and I don't believe that everyone is equal.

No chance I'll ever be a true Australian.

Gee Yuyitsu, you must be both wealthy and healthy if you don't accept Medicare!
I am assuming that if you need to go to hospital that you go to a private one?

Foxy, my personal opinion is that you are Australian if you were born in Australia, or if you are offered, and choose to take, full Australian citizenship after migrating here.

I don't like it much when people choose to live in Australia, but don't choose citizenship, and remain a permanent resident.
That is very un-Australian.

To be an Australian means someone who is committed to this country.

OMG not another one of these WE-ARE-ALL-AUSTRALIANS-EVEN-THE-JIHADIS threads :)

'morning Yuyutsu,

If you take out the bit about government handouts you have the profile of a good Moslem! There is a place for you in about the 7th century, otherwise you will have to settle for being an anarchist in this century.

I don't believe a word of it of course but I suspect your next post will tell us all about the dark humour we all missed?

brilliant stuff,spindoc ;)

Being Australian means adopting American style ultra patriotism and draping yourself in the Aussie flag while beating up on anyone thats different from you because its their fault that your personal life is crap.

‘morning Foxy,

Your post sets the scene very nicely. Firstly you post a link sourced from an “anonymous” email and a page from Facebook that denigrates all Australian’s as Bogans and you think that’s funny?

Then you post a link from the Conversation that further supports Islamification of Australia and reinforces the message that Australians are racists, bigots, and anti-Islamic.

The Conversation levels accusations that the non-left are re-writing history about the Cronulla Riots, it appears that we are all wrong and that the riots were not caused by social tension between Islam, the PC Left and real Australians? The Conversation proposes that we mush “teach” Moslems to be Australians. What?

What your two links really say is that Australians are not intelligent enough to have an opinion but the regulating class will provide you with one and we will correct your dim view of Islam by “teaching” them to be Australians.

Do you mean teaching them to be bogans like us?

It’s interesting that whilst re-writing history about the Cronulla Riots, they fail to recognize that real Australians now associate Australia day with the riot started by our first communist PM, Julia Gillard.

Your post is a very poorly constructed distraction from the role progressives have played in supporting policies that attracted mass immigration of non Australian values, defending the non Australian values they represent, excused their excesses of barbaric butchery, rhorting our social safety net, establishing Halal Certification, imposing disproportionate social division and public angst from a minority of less than 2% of our population, creating Islamic victimhood and targeting fellow Australians who progressives describe as “threats” for extremists to attack.

And you have the audacity to ask posters to tell you what it means to be Australian when what you really mean is “I am now going to tell you what it should mean to you”.

Why don’t you get back to us with more sickly sweet platitudes and some “feely” responses that avoid the real issues?

You are so transparent I could still watch the test match if you stood in front of me.

Dear spindoc,

What a pity that all you're seeing is negativity
and trying to bring me down to your sad level of
existence. I can't really help you.

Cheers.

The fact that you feel the need to even ask the question belies a certain insecurity. Why does it matter to you either way? Why waste time asking such a question unless you are trying to check whether or not you meet the criteria? Only those who are insecure about themselves as a human being need to try and validate things like their culture or nationality. You are a human being and that is all you need to be – anything else is purely an accident of birth or a simple preference of place to live. Such preferences are just a matter of taste and no more significant than taste in music or art. No one needs to justify such preference. A more reasonable question might be what do you like about living in Australia as distinct from other countries? Answers might include the climate, the food and other such variables. Things like pluralism, freedom or opportunity are hardly unique to Australia.

Such a fascination with national and cultural identity is the hive of people who are not comfortable in their own skin. They are looking to justify their life. I am a proud Australian – therefore I am. This is what inflames tensions and riots such as we saw at Cronulla. People on both sides clinging to their national or cultural identity like their lives depended on it. Emotional security does not come from these things but from an overwhelming sense of being a human being and having every right to exist for no other reason than that.

Dear Suse,

I agree with you - being Australian to me means
feeling privileged not only to have been able to make
a home here but also to have found my own sense of
belonging. I was born in Australia - and my parents
also became Australian citizens. For them however, they
did face some adjustment difficulties in the
beginning. They suffered from a sense
of guilt at having left their people to continue the
struggle against a repressive communist regime.
They found a greater
physical freedom in Australia, in that their lives were
no longer in danger, but the struggle they commenced with
their conscience allowed them no spiritual freedom. It took
them many years before they felt at ease.

Growing up - there are so many memories, from Manly Beach, to
the Royal Easter Show, to going to my first ballet with
the school and my music teacher explaining things to us.
My first experience with the theatre, my girl-friend intorudicng
me to tennis - and taking me to watch a game,
learning to play squash, my years at university, then travelling
overseas, and gladly coming home again.

I remember seeing -
The Australian Women's Weekly in New York, and bursting
into tears, I was that home-sick. My loyalty is totally
with Australia and much as I've travelled - I could not
see myself living anywhere else. I love the openess here,
and I love the city of Melbourne in which we have our home.

Interesting question, Foxy...I have no idea.

Regarding the national anthem...that "boundless plains to share" bit is apparently now so passe.

@Poirot,

<<"boundless plains to share">>

Tush tush Poirot ...we have been exceedingly sharing ...Just take a time-out from your busy ranting-schedule and have a bopeep at some of those we have been caring and shared with :)
http://i3.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article4815751.ece/alternates/s2197/Muslim-cleric-Man-Haron-Monis-main.jpg

And here's another:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Nacer_Benbrika

SPQR,

"...just take a time-out from your busy ranting-schedule..."

Certainly...if you take time out from your cheer-leading/pom-pom-waving duties.

Dear Phanto,

This topic seems to come up prior to every
Australia Day - I've raised it in previous
years simply to open up the discussion for
people. Of course people don't have to either
read or contribute if they don't approve.
Each of us is entitled to our opinions
(of course) and to speak from our own experiences.
We're not entitled to make assumptions about
other people and try to negate their experiences.
Thanks for expressing your opinion .

Dear Poirot,

You've raised a valid point about the
line - "We've boundless plains to share."

Perhaps this needs to be looked at again
in terms of sustainability.

Then again - maybe we'll have a new flag and
anthem - if the country votes to become a
Republic sometime in the future. Possibly
after the death of Queen Elizabeth?

‘morning Foxy,

You said;

<< What a pity that all you're seeing is negativity
and trying to bring me down to your sad level of
existence. I can't really help you.>>

Mmmm? So those who disagree with you are negative, inferior, beyond help and live a sad existence? Now where have I heard that before, Oh yes of course, climate change deniers.

I knew you would pull the “intellectually superior” card at some stage but not this soon. Your other options based on your track record are to take your wickets home or sing La La La and talk about something else.

It’s just that I wished to remind you that you were the one to used the links to imply that Australians are really bogans and that Islam is nothing to worry about and that the PC’s will “educate” them for us. Now you want to ignore the basis of your post and not talk about it? How so Foxy of you.

As for being migrants from an “repressive communist regime”, what tosh. You want us to believe that as a 2nd generation migrant you now support the repressive policies your parents escaped from? What is that all about, Stockholm Syndrome? I don’t believe a word of it.

Anyway, I guess that having launched your implied “bogan/Islamophobia” slur on OLO’ers and have it blow up in your face, you can now get back to a nice little chat with Poirot and Suse. A stimulating conversation with those who agree with you is so rewarding.

Now where is section 18c when you need it?

Can you ask the rest of the Stockholm Syndrome supporters club where I might find it?

Dear spindoc,

The first link that I gave in my opening post
was meant only as a tongue-in-cheek bit of humour.
Did I hit a nerve with you. After all I don't
really know you. Perhaps it's too close to home
for you. That is beyond my control.

The second link was provided simply to
broaden the discussion.

Your interpretation of my intentions are wrong.
But again, that is something over which I have no control.

If you have something of substance to contribute to
this discussion please feel free to do so. Personal
attacks will be ignored and are inappropriate.

Cheers.

Foxy:
“Of course people don't have to either
read or contribute if they don't approve.
Each of us is entitled to our opinions
(of course) and to speak from our own experiences.
We're not entitled to make assumptions about
other people and try to negate their experiences.
Thanks for expressing your opinion.”

What are assumptions other than opinions?

To express an opinion about why the question is raised is perfectly legitimate. If I think that there is some other agenda for the question I am perfectly entitled to express that and to describe what I think it is. It may lead to many people questioning why they also think the issue is of any relevance and it may lead to a de-escalation of all that nationalism that can so easily become violence.

If there is no other agenda to your question or for anyone else who raises that question then there is no need to react to it all.

Spindoc,

"Mmmm? So those who disagree with you are negative, inferior, beyond help and live a sad existence? Now where have I heard that before, Oh yes of course, climate change deniers."

You're rather combative lately, dear...don't you like us or something : )

I think Foxy was musing as to why you've spent so much time on this thread attacking her...instead of telling us what you think describes Oz.

Dear phanto,

Having raised this topic for people to discuss
I feel obliged to respond to their posts.
It's the polite thing to do and is part of my
culture. I am not questioning your opinions.
I am merely trying to explain my actions.

Here's what it means so be an Ozzie if you live in certain parts of it, & are a leap year baby.

In 1980 I was running the boats for a resort island. I had 2, 50/60Ft ferries, a outer reef fishing charter boat 5, 30Ft sail your self rental yachts, & their 55Ft mother ship, & my own yacht to take care of.

Fortunately we had a good mangrove creek in a large bay nearby on the mainland. The mangroves filled an area about a mile deep, by a mile wide at the head of the bay, with the deep water creek winding it's way through the 40/50 Ft high 3 Ft diameter mangrove trees. The friction of the trees stop all but the really big gusts of wind like magic. Of course, no wind meant loads of sand flies, [midges] & mosquitos.

The mud banks the mangroves grew on were about 6Ft dry at low tide, but although the creek was still deep, the outer flats weren't. You needed about 8Ft of tide, with our average tidal range of 14Ft to get in. I Had 2 skippers & a deck hand to help get the boats in, & stay with them.

The creek was only about 70Ft wide, so quite snug once in there. The boats were tied to 2 mangrove trees either side, front & back, with plenty of slack to allow for about 30Ft of water rise from flooding in cyclonic rains, & a rope tied from stem to stern of each boat to allow them to be pulled together for access. The flood run in a good rain could reach about 12 knots, faster than any 9.9HP outboard tinny we had.

This cyclone was a pain. It hung around for 2 days before coming ashore right over us, & moving inshore. Just when we thought it was all over, the damn thing turned around & went back out to sea, rebuilding for another couple of days annoyance.

Continued

Continued

Yes, you've guessed it, we got the boats back out on the first of March, & I'd missed another birthday. I had missed the previous one in a cyclone in the Solomon sea. 12 years between birthdays, that must be some kind of record.

Hope a few of you have enjoyed my little story of how the other half live, & what it is like for some to be Ozzies.

Hasbeen

Dear Spindoc,

You raised the topic of 18C - I found the
following on the web - that may be of interest
to you - to broaden your outlook:

"Not all those who pose a threat
to civil liberties and freedoms stand behind
a foreign flag and hold Kalashnikovs.
Some stand behind the Australian flag and
promote the myth that civil liberties and
freedoms need to be sacrificed in order to
obtain security."

http://newmatilda.com/2015/01/14/giving-bigots-more-rights-wrong-response-charlie-hebdo-massacre

Dear Phanto,

<<Emotional security does not come from these things but from an overwhelming sense of being a human being and having every right to exist for no other reason than that.>>

I agree with your post, it's an excellent contribution, but I would like to take it a step further:

You do not even need to be identified as a human being in order to attain emotional security. Humans are part of nature: a moment they are here, the next they are gone, so if your security depends on being a human, then it is still on shaky grounds. There is no need to identify with any part of nature, be it nations or humans or whatever else. You are who you are, nothing else is required.

‘morning Poirot,

<< ...don't you like us or something : ) >> ?

Of course I like you silly, I wouldn’t play with you if I didn’t :)

I do note your Royal “us” however, I often wonder why the tag team of Poirot, Foxy and Suse try to present as Alpha Females? You’re not of course because your offer too many “girlie” responses and there is little evidence of a Beta male in your lives.

That said, you all share the common attributes of refusing to debate either your own content or that of other posters, the tendency to ignore posters that rattle you and the habit of changing motivation when you get “sprung”. Sooo Girlie!

You are all intelligent, well read, at least within the narrow confines of your self referential networks, articulate and have a good command of English. It would be so much better if you could create your own opinions rather than borrowing them from the ABC, New Matilda, The Conversation and Fairfax.

It’s such a waste to see good brains avoiding critical thinking :)

Hasbeen, "Hope a few of you have enjoyed my little story of how the other half live, & what it is like for some to be Ozzies"

You mean while others who regard themselves as the intellectual elite are swinging from the taxpayers' teat in guvvy-funded sinecures (and airconditioned offices) spruiking the endless-diversity-we-have-to-have for all of that growthism, the 'Big Australia' the same intellectual elite say they despise?

You get back to work, Hasbeen! As one of those (eeew, shudder-shudder) old 'white' men you should know you are privileged to be allowed to remain alive, and there are queues at 'Wonderful' Centrelink to support.

All in the spirit of jolly good chuckle. That is the purpose of the thread we are informed.

Gee thanks, Spindoc.....so, the wash up is that we girls act far too much like..er...girls!

And apparently the three of us are exactly the same to boot!

And you boys don't ever indulge in tag teaming, as is evidenced by SPQR showering you with flowers and sweetmeats earlier in the thread. - "brilliant stuff, Spindoc"

Thanks for showing us how a wise alpha male swaggers around on a thread - most impressive!

‘morning Poirot,

I’ve mentioned before that you don’t read posts, you feel them. Try reading it again, this time note that the focus is on presenting as Alpha Females and not Tag Team. That is why as usual, you missed (or ignored) the content.

Come on Poirot, show us there is a brain between the ears and stop flashing with emotive indignation, you can do it.

Poirot meet Stick, no the other end Poirot :)

Spindoc,

You'll have to excuse me for not concentrating to my fullest girlie extent, but I was nursing a bowl of icing sugar, cocoa and butter on knee, stirring it and posting at the same time (I believe that's called multi-tasking:)

Anyway, it gave you a reason to snipe back at me - and Mr13 is now happily scoffing chocolate cake - so everyone's happy : )

As usual, Poirot has zoomed in on the critically important: a 'girl' Poirot is definitely NOT and that applies in spades for the two other seniors.

As will doubtless be mentioned one day on the ABC, in New Matilda, The Conversation or Fairfax - whose 'journalists' (a description to be taken loosely in modern times) xerox from the BBC and there is a time lag, but we need not wait for that - that 'G' word is sexist and the BBC has ruled accordingly.

<Now BBC bans the G-word: Sports reporter joked that he’d been beaten in judo bout by a 19-year-old GIRL... so ‘sexist’ word cut from broadcast
Mark Beaumont, 31, made joke after being hurled to floor by judo champion
Remark aired in full when programme first broadcast last month
Show was edited when rebroadcast last week to remove word
Athlete herself Cynthia Rahming left bemused: ‘I wasn’t offended – I didn’t find it sexist'
Mariella Frostrup and Miriam O'Reilly support BBC stance
Anthea Turner and Kathy Lette both think corporation's edit was wrong>

http://tinyurl.com/kmp33j6

It is a timely reminder to always refer to the voluminous PC Dictionary and where in doubt, always self-censor.

BTW, in case anyone is wondering, it is is NOT censorship when political correctness is applied to delete something that could cause offence to the serially sensitive and is therefore PC 'unapproved'.

"As usual, Poirot has zoomed in on the critically important: a 'girl' Poirot is definitely NOT and that applies in spades for the two other seniors."

Lovely sentiment there, otb, - thanks for that.

One can almost hear the mature gentlemanly timbre of your kindly musings...nice bit of tag-teaming too.

You fellas always show us how these things are done best.

The vexed problem of how to address the feminist dinosaurs left over from the previous century, make that Last Millenium, is solved by the ruling by Swedish ruling that the non-sexist term is 'hen'. That being the radfem preference of arguably the most radfem country on the planet, 'hen' it will be.

Fortunately, that is where Australia has led the feminist pack. -Aussies are proactive and the term 'hen' has been in use for a long time and is already well-entrenched within the Australian vernacular and used by women and their menfolk, for example the reference to 'Hens Parties', Hens Night' and so on.

'Chooks' is the affectionate plural. That is something to squawk about - Sweden's hens are playing catch-up to the Land Down Under.

Being Australian for me will be celebrating with my friends who will be sharing the oath. They have come from Africa and the Phillipines. Great guys and very thankful to be in this blessed land.

Dear Hasbeen,

I'm so pleased that you've understood the point of
this discussion. Thank You. It's always educational
to learn how the "other half" lives.

Dear Poirot,

Analytically speaking, some of these guys are talking
out of their rear ends.

We can all act like classic Grumpy Old Men is we so choose.
However, when we look at our children and our
grand-children we soon realise that they turned out
rather well - and the future will be pretty safe in their
hands. The following link confirms this. It's written by
a young school kid, an 11 year old from Toowoomba, Queensland
on what it means to be Australian:

http://www.asg.com.au/assets/files/what_it_means_to_be_australian.pdf

Dear spindoc,

You asked for critical analysis - here's something
that may help:

http://www.convictcreations.com/research/identity.htm

It also covers "bogans" and "anti-bogans."

Hi Foxy,

I'm a tad confused...

One of the gentleman here reckons I'm too girlie- while the other one thinks I'm a senior!

So I conclude that I must be somewhere in the middle - which sums up my reality quite well.

Interestingly, talking of Australian attitudes, my experience is that most men with whom I interact aren't intimidated by smart mature women....unlike our experience on this thread.

Dear Poirot,

I suspect the problem with these guys is their
age, education, and upbringing. Either that or
(dare I say it?) they're not getting laid.

<<I'm a tad confused>> [Poirot]
Now there's a understatement ROFLMAO

<<the problem with these guys is their
age, education, and upbringing. Either that or
(dare I say it?) they're not getting laid.>> [Foxy]
And that is a clear example of projection ROFLMAO

Yeah, thanks, SPQROLFMAO,

You're not quite as offensive as you'd like to be - a tad lightweight in my book...but excellent effort.

Foxy,

Regarding you last observation - I don't think I'll run with that one.

Dear Poirot,

I don't blame you.

Serves me right for trying to be facetious.

I should have stuck to my original reaction
to Spindoc - which was:

"Dear Poirot,

Hey guess what?
Spindoc does like us and wants to play.
Yay!"