mcqueen

Ok so i'm a lurker here and thought i'd chime in on a question that i've seen in a few threads....i.e,'what is an Aussie anyway?'When i've seen posters ask this question,it seems to be rhetorical,implying that there is no 'australian ethnicity'.Anyway,for what it's worth,as a British born person who grew up here(from age 7,now 33) i'll give you the lowdown on what i've come to learn. :lecture:

Firstly,to say Australia is a nation only of immigrants is(in a very nitpicky way) incorrect.There was no 'Australia' before 1901 though there were 3 distinct ethnic groups already living on the continent which made up approximately 3.8 million people-Aboriginals(100,000),British and Irish(3.7 million).All of these people at one point did immigrate to this continent(the Aboriginals obviously way before anyone else),but they did not immigrate to the nation of Australia as it was not yet in existence.In a sense,Australia is no more a 'nation of immigrants' than any nation on earth is.

Up until WW1,most white native born Australians referred to themselves as either British-Australian or Irish-Australian.However,by the time WW2 rolled around,the British and Irish had mixed so much that the term 'Anglo-Celtic' was used to describe the white Australian ethnicity,in a somewhat similar way to how Dutch South Africans were known as Boers.The only other place this term is commonly used in a racial context is in the American confederate states,if you do a search of the term on the net most sites will refer to Australia though.

Then came the 50's/60's and the first major non British/Irish wave of immigration started,mostly from Italy and Greece.The general populace was not exactly receptive to the newcomers,and saw them as a threat to the 'Anglo-Celtic character' of Australia.British immigrants were viewed as gold,while Italians and Greeks were kept at arms length and forced to live in their own ethnic ghettos.It wasnt until the 70's that the southern Europeans began to be called new-Australians instead of plain wogs(though that term has endured to this day in the cities).The next wave of immigration came in the dying days of the White Australia Policy(70s),mostly Vietnamese(because of the war),then Chinese,then(80s/90s)Arabs/Indians/Pakistanis and in the new century we are seeing the first signs of non-white African immigration.

Ok,after that longwinded effort,i'll get to the main point,i.e,the difference between what most people here think of as the difference between an 'Aussie' and an Australian citizen-:

Any post 1950 immigrant who does not have Anglo or Celtic blood is generally not called an 'Aussie'.For example,even though i was not born here,at school i was considered an 'Aussie' while Australian born kids of non-Anglo/Celtic parents were not......not by others and not by themselves.They were Australian born with Australian citizenship but were always Italian/Greek/Chinese/etc-Australians.The exception to this seems to be only when an 'ethnic' Australian has one Anglo-Celtic parent.This is something that would not be the case in the USA or Canada,possibly because of the very anglocentric system that Australia has been built around.Also,almost all Australian folklore,war stories,music,sport etc is represented
almost exclusively in an Anglo-Celtic context.A British immigrant can be an Aussie through getting an accent alone,but non-anglos who are even 2nd generation are eternally hyphenated Australians.This,understandably,makes ethnic Australians feel left out(and usually very pro-republican).Australia is 70% Anglo-Celtic,20% 'other' European,and 10% general 'other',yet the only representations of Australian culture and sport seen overseas is from the first group and Aboriginals.The exception,ofcourse,is soccer.

So if you ask what an Australian is,it could be anyone with citizenship.But if you ask what an 'Aussie' is in any classroom/pub/whatever across Australia,the answer will be more clearly defined.The government DID stop using the term 'Anglo-Celtic' in the late 90s as an official policy,but today,just as much as 1960,it is the defining characteristic of what an Aussie is to most people.I suppose it is helped along by the multicultural councils appeal for immigrants to hold onto their own culture,and they often insinuate there was no dominant culture ever in Australia..........which in turn offends Aussies so they hang onto the flag,monarchy and occasionally nationalist political parties like One Nation(who are affiliated with the BNP btw).

I'm not justifying or endorsing this way of thinking,but it becomes pretty much common knowledge to anyone who has attended school here,especially in the more non-anglo areas of the major cities,where you get a real taste of differences and cliques.......in places like Tasmania and rural Australia,i suppose it would be a non-issue.

Gosh this ended up a long post,i'll quit before it's a book!

CON

Great post. I agree with all that you say and welcome to the forum.

Wol

Excellent!

And, although this will seem patronising (which it isn't meant to be) it's pleasant to read a well written exposition on the subject.

Enjoy the forum.

Bix

Could you explain that in laymans terms please mate ?

Welcome to the forum McQ

Don

Hopefully I'm not a total misfit here but you have explained 'Australian-ness' in an extremely narrow way with not much in the way of history and without due weight given to Aborigines and their time in Aus or to ethnic groups in Australia outside those of UK origin.

A bit like defining 'American-ness' as being like Bostonian WASPs?

Good onya for the disquisition, despite my reservations.

Vegemite Kids

Welcome McQ, goo post but on the basis of that post can you please classify me.

born in OZ (6th generation - great great great grandpappy moved here from the Isle of Skye in the 1820's) but havent lived in OZ since i was 14 (parents were old school and thought I needed a european education :LOL, but recently (april 2004) moved back with scottish hubby and scottish accent after living/working in 14 countries.

Bix

I've always considered you a P.A. Mairi

mcqueen

Thanks for the welcome(s).

Bix:In layman's terms,a Dutch South African is a Boer while an Indian South African is not,yet remains just as South African.Now swap the former for Aussie/Anglo-Celt and the latter for any other(non Brit/Irish) immigrant and you have Australia's demographic situation.

Vegemite Kids

is that Pissed Australian or Perfect Angel ?????

Bix

Thanyou McQ....we are going to get along just fine

mcqueen

I gave as much on history as i could without making it of a totally innappropriate length for a forum .Ok,so to your points,'Australian-ness' WAS defined in an extremely narrow way for the majority of the nations history,just as most nations cultural identities were very narrow.It has changed slightly,but not much despite 30 years of diverse immigration.Also,British make up the biggest immigrant nationality year after year,followed by NZ'ers.Neither group exactly makes Australia less anglo-celtic.

I ommited info about the Aborigines because their situation is quite well known.For the most part,they identify themselves as Koori...yet ofcourse they are Australian.I think i gave ample weight to the situation of those in OZ of non-UK origin.They are as Australian as any citizen and have contributed alot,yet they simply do not refer to themselves as Aussies mostly....even those born here.This is the view from having grown up in Sydney BTW.

It's not like defining 'American-ness' as being a WASP either,America always had varied European immigration,Australia had virtually monocultural immigration up until the 70s.Thats why non-UK immigrants probably fit in better in the states.Not to mention the fact we are under the crown and have the union jack in our flag.

My thoughts are based on what i see on a day to day basis.I'm not arguing whether it's a good situation or not.And there are ofcourse,always exceptions to the rule.

mcqueen

While i have no official classification credentials,personally,i'd call you an Aussie with a better accent.

MikeStanton

The first wave of non-British immigrants started with the Chinese in the 19th century, driven by the gold rush. One of the by-products of this is the Chinese restaurant in almost every Oz town. And Oz did exist before 1901 - just not Oz as a nation state.

The answer to your own question - what is an Aussie? - is unclear. Are you implying that to be an Aussie, a person must have an Anglo-Celtic background? You say that a British immigrant can become an Aussie through an accent alone. So, if I affect an Aussie accent, I'm an Aussie? I don't think so. Or are you saying that this doesn't make me an Aussie, but is a necessary precursor?

So 'pure' Aborigines can never be Aussies? What about the children of mixed Aboriginal-Anglo parentage?

In 2004, being an Aussie is far less to do with Anglo-Celtic parentage, but rather how long a particular race has been in Oz and what attitudes and beliefs they adopt.

Your whole 'argument' rests on an unchallenged assumption : who defines what makes an Aussie. Sure, go and ask some good ol' boys in country pubs (where there is very little change of race), or Anglo-Celtic dominated areas of Sydney or Melbourne 'what an Aussie is' and you'll get what you have proposed. But, you'll get different answers in Redfern, Cabramatta and a host of other suburbs.

The Oz racial mix is changing and with 20%+ of people living in Oz having been born overseas, the definition of who is an Aussie will change with it.

Perhaps most importantly you don't define what being an Aussie is - beliefs, attitudes etc.

Bix

You got it in one

JAJ

Australia is under the *Australian* Crown, not the British Crown.
And the fact the Union Flag is part of the Australian National Flag is simply an indicator of the constitutional heritage of Australia as a nation.


My take on what makes an 'Australian' is a combination of two things:

- holder of Australian citizenship; and
- self-identification as an Australian.

If one can answer 'yes' to both of these then by any sensible definition of the term, one is an Australian. And if the answer in both cases is no, then one is not an Australian, by the same criteria.

A mix of yes and no is inconclusive and one would have to look further at the details.

Jeremy