Australia in WWII? Post WWII?

[3113]

I need some historical help from our resident Aussies. I apologize for not being more specific here, but the story idea is unformed in my head because, frankly, I don't know enough to give it shape yet. I'd like some idea of what Australia was like during WWII and/or just after. You can assume I know absolutely nothing, because I don't. I haven't even googled this yet, as I one can't ask google for more information on this or that as one can a person.

Among the things I would like to know: was Australia mainly smallish towns back then and were they linked by roads or railroads? As Australia was supporting Britain from the minute it declared war, how did the loss of so many men drafted into the army and shipped oversea affect it? On the other hand, as it wasn't bombed or invaded, did it thrive in other ways (as the U.S. did in that everyone was employed and all industries working for the war effort)? And by the way, how did the war in the Pacific affect it? How did Australia feel about the U.S. dropping down big bombs in, essentially, it's part of the globe (or near enough).

Post-war, I assume Australia, like the U.S. was able to recover far faster and easier than Europe--am I right? And was it drawn into the whole cold war scenario when Korea started up? Did the U.S. make any use of Australia post-WWII given that it continued on in Japan and the Pacific?

How was the situation between the aboriginal population and the rest of Australia in those days? Were aboriginal peoples also drafted into the armed forces? Or allowed to volunteer? Was there a color barrier similar to that in the U.S. in those days? Were there interracial relationships/marriages?

Given that it took longer and was harder for things to get to Australia from Europe and America in those days, and the reliance for information was not-always-reliable radio, how far did Australia trail behind when it came to fashion, the latest news, movies, etc.?

Those are just some quick thoughts that pop to mind for now. But throw out anything you'd like that might relate. As I said, I'm still formulating this story--and I don't know anything so anything is news to me! Thank you all very much in advance!

 

[sr71plt]

For openers, although I'm not an Aussie, Darwin was bombed--repeatedly--in WWII.

 

[slyc_willie]

This might help somewhat. Unfortunately, my degree in history concentrated on much older times so I more or less glossed over the more recent centuries except when I needed to pass a test.

But from what I am able to recall, the Wiki article is a pretty good starting point.

It's worth pointing out that Australia was fairly quick in declaring war with Germany following the UK declaration. This was because Australia had aligned itself with British foreign policies against Germany in the years leading up to the war. They initially became involved mainly in the Mediterranean and African fronts. In the latter half of the war, most Australian war efforts were geared toward the Pacific side of things, partnering with the Americans, although they maintained a significant presence in the air effort against Germany. They remain, however, remembered for their roles in several campaigns in the Mediterranean.

After the war, Australia enjoyed a significant economic boom. Like the USA, they were left largely unscarred from the effects of the war. Perhaps because of that, they shifted their post-war foreign policy to align with that of the United States.

 

[oggbashan]

I need some historical help from our resident Aussies. I apologize for not being more specific here, but the story idea is unformed in my head because, frankly, I don't know enough to give it shape yet. I'd like some idea of what Australia was like during WWII and/or just after. You can assume I know absolutely nothing, because I don't. I haven't even googled this yet, as I one can't ask google for more information on this or that as one can a person.

I'll try, but your questions need a long story as replies. I was in Australia as a near adult in the early 1960s. My father was working with the Australian Defence Forces. I met many of his colleagues who were still mainly those who had been active in WW2, but were promoted to senior positions.

Among the things I would like to know: was Australia mainly smallish towns back then and were they linked by roads or railroads?

As now, the majority of Australia's population was concentrated on the major conurbations and farming areas of the South and East. That is the cities and hinterland of Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney, and Brisbane.

There were railroad links between the major cities but the Australian railways ran on different gauges (the distance between the rails) so goods and people had to physically change trains where the gauge changed. The junction between Victoria (wide gauge) and New South Wales (standard 4 foot 6.5 gauge) had the longest railway platform in the world as trains ran into one end and everything had to move to the train at the other end.

Roads? Most Australian roads were graded dirt. Even by 1960, the road between Melbourne and Sydney was only recently completed as tarmac for the whole distance. The Pacific Highway, that went from Melbourne to Sydney around the coastal communities, had long stretches of graded dirt.

The larger rural communities were linked by graded dirt roads. The smaller ones had what were later called 'jeep tracks' i.e. tracks that were possible with a jeep. But in WW2 Australian civilians in the outback didn't have jeeps. They used either Australian built Holdens (a division of General Motors) or American cars such as Ford's Model T and A.

During WW2 a military road was built North from Alice Springs to Darwin. That was the first practical link across Australia from South to North.

Crossing the Nullabor plain from Adelaide to Perth was only practical by train and that took days. Although some people had made the journey on four wheels, that was a major expedition requiring preparation and stamina for the vehicles and people.

Most inter-city trade in Australia was by ship.

 

[Bramblethorn]

First off: do not use Baz Luhrmann's "Australia" for historical research. Trust me on this

Among the things I would like to know: was Australia mainly smallish towns back then

Some info on that here. Roughly speaking: about 50% of Australians lived in metropolitan areas, 25% in non-met urban (towns etc), and 25% rural. Most of the metropolitan population is clustered in Sydney, Melbourne, and Brisbane on the east coast.

and were they linked by roads or railroads?

East coast, Adelaide, and Perth: rail link, but you generally had to change trains at state borders because they hadn't yet standardised the rail gauges. Albury rail station (NSW/Vic border) had a 450-metre long rail platform to accommodate two trains end to end. This was a MAJOR logistical problem when moving troops & equipment in WWI and WWII.

Darwin: LONG road (I think most of it dirt at that stage) or boat. Not linked to the south by rail until 2003. It's a long way and there's not much in the middle, and Darwin wasn't a big town.

This made Darwin quite vulnerable in WWII and led to a fair bit of paranoia, especially when Japan was raising the flag all over SE Asia.

And by the way, how did the war in the Pacific affect it? How did Australia feel about the U.S. dropping down big bombs in, essentially, it's part of the globe (or near enough).

Australia was heavily involved in the Pacific war, starting before the USA joined in. Initially Japan wasn't taken seriously as a threat (this had a lot to do with racist stereotypes of weedy myopic "Japs") and the fall of Singapore was a big shock.

Japan itself is a long way from Australia, and considering how messy the Pacific war had been (and how badly Australian prisoners were treated) I don't think many Australians were bothered by bombing on the Japanese mainland.

Post-war, I assume Australia, like the U.S. was able to recover far faster and easier than Europe--am I right? And was it drawn into the whole cold war scenario when Korea started up? Did the U.S. make any use of Australia post-WWII given that it continued on in Japan and the Pacific?

Yep. Australia sent 17,000 soldiers to Korea (~ 300 killed) and 60,000 to Vietnam (~ 550 killed).

After WWII, Australia picked up a lot of European migrants looking for a better life. A lot of them ended up working on the Snowy Mountains hydro-electric scheme, then settled back in Melbourne and Sydney. My neighbourhood is full of little old Greek and Italian ladies who would've come out to Australia at that time, and I used it as part of the background for the love interest in my recent story here. There was a fair bit of racism directed at "wogs" at the time, but then we had later waves of immigration and the hostility shifted to those.

How was the situation between the aboriginal population and the rest of Australia in those days? Were aboriginal peoples also drafted into the armed forces? Or allowed to volunteer? Was there a color barrier similar to that in the U.S. in those days? Were there interracial relationships/marriages?

NB: in modern usage, if you want to avoid offence, capitalise "Aboriginal". Also note that Australian Aboriginals aren't the only indigenous Australians; there are also Torres Strait Islanders.

At the time, the general attitude was that Aboriginals were a lesser race and doomed - the phrase "smooth the pillow of a dying race" describes policy of the time. Many were confined to missions (reservations) and required permission from the Protector of Aborigines to travel (and I think to marry). They weren't allowed to enlist at the start of WWII, but around 1941 that policy changed, and around 3000 enlisted.

Mixed marriages would have been a major no-no, but there were a lot of children of mixed ancestry; the fair-skinned ones were often taken away from their parents and given to white parents (cf "The Stolen Generation". The rationale was to civilise them, but they were often treated very badly. It shows up in a recent film "The Sapphires" (set during the Vietnam War, but the practice didn't end until around 1970).

After the war, Australia enjoyed a significant economic boom. Like the USA, they were left largely unscarred from the effects of the war. Perhaps because of that, they shifted their post-war foreign policy to align with that of the United States.

That, and also because the Pacific war had made it clear that the alliance with Britain was a lot less dependable than Australians had believed.

For openers, although I'm not an Aussie, Darwin was bombed--repeatedly--in WWII.

Yep. Around 100 air raids, 243+ people killed in Darwin and elsewhere in the NT - Darwin had a peacetime population of around 6000, so that's quite a lot.

Also, Japan launched a midget sub attack on Sydney Harbour that killed about 20 people.

 

[oggbashan]

As Australia was supporting Britain from the minute it declared war, how did the loss of so many men drafted into the army and shipped oversea affect it? On the other hand, as it wasn't bombed or invaded, did it thrive in other ways (as the U.S. did in that everyone was employed and all industries working for the war effort)? And by the way, how did the war in the Pacific affect it? How did Australia feel about the U.S. dropping down big bombs in, essentially, it's part of the globe (or near enough).

...

There was no debate in the Australian Parliament about going to war with Germany. Australia considered itself part of the British community and 'associated' with the UK declaration of war.

The Australian Army militia was signed up to defend the homeland. But the Australian Government controversially decided to include New Guinea as part of the 'homeland' and sent poorly trained militia troops to defend the Kokoda Trail from the Japanese. At first those troops were weak both in equipment, training and leadership and suffered appalling casualties and reverses. But they learned jungle fighting - remember most Aussies were city or town dwellers - and helped push the Japanese back.

The surrender in Singapore changed Australian attitudes to Britain dramatically. Tens of thousands of Australian troops were surrendered to the Japanese and suffered badly as POWs. That was seen as a British blunder, sending Australian troops into a badly run situation which was already lost. From that point on Australia realised that it had to depend not only on its own resources but on alliance with the USA, not the UK.

Australian forces were significant in the air Battle of Britain, in the North Africa campaign, and in the Pacific theatre. Their Navy suffered as a result of the Singapore surrender and during the naval battles in the Pacific.

"On the other hand, as it wasn't bombed or invaded,"

As has been stated above, Darwin was repeatedly bombed. There was a real threat that Northern Australia would be invaded by the Japanese if the Allies lost New Guinea - which was a real possibility. If the Japanese had invaded Northern Australia, the Australian government's intention was to have a 'scorched earth' policy and destroy everything useful in the areas that the Japanese took.

Australian food and raw material production boomed during the war and the manufacturing base improved from a low base.

The war in the Pacific was regarded as being in Australia's back yard, and was seen as a far greater threat to Australia than the war in Europe. After Pearl Harbor, there was some resentment about Australian troops being sent to North Africa and Europe when the Japanese threat was on Australia's doorstep, and far more immediate.

Atomic bombs? The general view was that they were necessary to avoid serious losses of Australian forces allocated to the proposed invasion of the Japanese Islands.

There was less anger against the US tests in the Pacific Islands, but there is still real anger about the UK atomic tests carried out IN Australia which have left large areas polluted. There was also some annoyance about the French atomic tests.

 

[Bramblethorn]

There was less anger against the US tests in the Pacific Islands, but there is still real anger about the UK atomic tests carried out IN Australia which have left large areas polluted. There was also some annoyance about the French atomic tests.

And more so when the French government sent goons to bomb the Rainbow Warrior in New Zealand, killing a Greenpeace cameraman. Australia and NZ are culturally close, and arranging what amounts to a terrorist attack in a peaceable nation was viewed as pretty despicable.

 

[BenjiBoy83]

*****

 

[oggbashan]

...

Given that it took longer and was harder for things to get to Australia from Europe and America in those days, and the reliance for information was not-always-reliable radio, how far did Australia trail behind when it came to fashion, the latest news, movies, etc.?

Pre-1939 and up to the late 1960s there were frequent passenger liners from the UK and Europe to Australia, together with ship freighters on scheduled runs.

Australia was connected to the UK by telegraph and telephone but telegrams and calls were expensive and telephone calls had to be booked days in advance.

News, movies etc - not much delayed.

Fashion? That was different. Not only were there delays in current fashions reaching Australia but there were significant delays within Australia. Two examples from my own experience:

1. When my mother arrived in Melbourne, Victoria, she had to learn the customs for when and how to wear a hat and gloves when on a social call among friends and neighbours. Apparently the social rules changed. Before noon, one rule applied. After noon, another, and an evening visit required another set of rules. A lady should wear a hat and gloves for one, wear a hat and carry her gloves for another, and not wear nor take hat no gloves for the third. But which way round? I forget.

When Jean Shrimpton visited the Melbourne races in 1960 (oops! wrong date - 1965), the shortness of her skirt was shocking, but not as shocking as the lack of hat and gloves!

Look at the women behind her - if you can drag your eyes away!


2. In 1961 we visited relations in deeply rural New South Wales. They lived 25 miles from their neighbours and 40 miles from the nearest settlement with a shop and pub. One of my young female relations had caused outrage because she was the first woman locally ever known to bleach her hair - inexpertly with the help of her brother. She was effectively ostracised for being 'fast'. My mother's blue rinse was even more startling but allowable because she was a visiting Pommy who had come from Europe.

My mother's blue rinse, and her assurances to the gathered relations and neighbours that turning blonde was normal not just in the UK but in Sydney, rehabilitated our young relation's social status. Once back in Sydney, my mother sent a more professional bleaching kit - which took three weeks to arrive...

 

[PennLady]

This may sound odd, but I recently read Rick Springfield's memoir, "Late, Late at Night." He was of course born Rick Springthorpe in Australia, in about 1950, and the early part of the book covers his childhood and what it was like to be in the non-citified areas of Australia. That might give you a more personal view of what it was like at the time, plus his father was in the military (helped bring computers into the Australian military) and so he was probably closer to the post-war stuff in some respects.

 

[3113]

To everyone who replied--thank you! Great stuff! Ogg, I love the story of the hats/gloves, Pennlady, Slyc & Benji thanks for the reference materials (links), I'll get on 'em! Bramblethorn--I didn't know that U.S. forces in Korea and 'Nam were augmented by those from Australia--though I can certainly see why. Given what you and Ogg said about the roads and railways, I'm amazed Australia managed so very well--seems they had internal as well as external handicaps when it came to getting men and/or materials from one place to another...outside of shippin' 'em.

This has certainly been eye-opening. And really interesting.

 

[oggbashan]

... Given what you and Ogg said about the roads and railways, I'm amazed Australia managed so very well--seems they had internal as well as external handicaps when it came to getting men and/or materials from one place to another...outside of shippin' 'em.

This has certainly been eye-opening. And really interesting.

Many people who have not visited Australia, or have only visited the Eastern and Southern seaboards, have little idea of the distances or difficulties involved in traversing inland Australia. Unlike the US where the road network is far more developed, large parts of Australia are still very rarely visited and effectively uninhabited. Until ground-surveying satellite technology, much of inland Australia was unsurveyed and unmapped and could have been marked "unexplored" until the 1960s.

One of my more distant relations qualified as a vet specialising in horses and cattle. In the late 1940s he was employed on a large cattle station (ranch) in the Northern Territory. When he started he did his rounds on horseback. The cattle station gradually enlarged with acquisitions of neighbouring stations that failed in dry seasons. He changed to driving a jeep, then added a cross-country motorcycle to get where the jeep couldn't go.

Before he retired, he had qualified as a helicopter pilot because the size of the cattle station was hundreds of square miles, mainly of nothing that cattle could live on.

First find your patient...

 

[oggbashan]

Australians in Vietnam

The Australian experience in Vietnam was difficult:

Australian War in Vietnam

One former Viet Cong leader is quoted as saying; "Worse than the Americans were the Australians. The Americans style was to hit us, then call for planes and artillery. Our response was to break contact and disappear if we could...The Australians were more patient than the Americans, better guerilla fighters, better at ambushes. They liked to stay with us instead of calling in the planes. We were more afraid of their style."

The Australians had long experience of jungle warfare with limited resources e.g. on the Kokoda Trail in New Guinea, and successful counter-insurgency with the British in Malaya.

However their advice and approach was not acceptable to many US commanders despite the Australians' success in containing the Viet Cong in the areas occupied by Australian forces, and normally having a positive kill ratio of Viet Cong to Australians, even when heavily outnumbered on the ground.

The Vietnam War was as unpopular in Australia as it became in the US, particularly as conscription was used. There were very few ways to avoid Australian conscription which was by a lottery on all 20 year olds.

 

[Saxon_Hart]

I do know that America extensively used Australia as R&R for the Pacific theater, and that the Japanese were driving to invade. I can't recall off the top of my head how close they came though.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

New Guinea. It is an interesting fact that though the U.S. Marines are the ones people think about in the Pacific War, the horrendous New Guinea campaign was Army . . . and a miserable thing it is reported to have been. However, the Army did shove the Japanese back into the sea, much to the relief of the Australians (and the New Guineans, too, of course.)

 

[oggbashan]

New Guinea. It is an interesting fact that though the U.S. Marines are the ones people think about in the Pacific War, the horrendous New Guinea campaign was Army . . . and a miserable thing it is reported to have been. However, the Army did shove the Japanese back into the sea, much to the relief of the Australians (and the New Guineans, too, of course.)

The Japanese came within 20 miles of Port Moresby and could see it when they had to withdraw because of losses at Guadalcanal. The Kokoda Track (or Trail) campaign was largely fought by Australian forces including militia. The brass didn't appreciate the severe conditions under which their forces were fighting, nor that they were heavily outnumbered and outgunned.

Although the defenders were poorly trained, outnumbered and under-resourced, the resistance was such that, according to captured documents, the Japanese believed they had defeated a force more than 1,200 strong when, in fact, they were facing only 77 Australian troops.

Kokoda Track

If the Japanese had taken Port Moresby, they intended to use it as a base to invade Northern Australia. They failed, not just because of the fierce resistance of the Australian forces, but because of the real difficulties of supplying their large forces by back-packing everything over the Kokoda Track as they got closer and closer to Port Moresby. But the main reason for their withdrawal was their expensive failure at Guadalcanal.

Later battles in Papua/New Guinea involved far more US forces. At the time of the Kokoda Track campaign, the Allies hadn't realised how many Japanese forces were involved, and what the Japanese strategic objective was. The Australians were almost always vastly outnumbered yet fought an eventually successful defensive campaign in appalling conditions.

US commanders frequently underestimated what the Australians were doing. An example of US/Australian misunderstanding from later in this campaign:

At this point Australian fears of a Japanese counterattack grew and they requested reinforcements from their higher commander, General Douglas MacArthur. However, the request was denied as MacArthur's intelligence staff believed that there were only 350 Japanese in the vicinity. Actually, there were already 5,000 Japanese around Sattelberg and Finschhafen while throughout early October this number grew to 12,000 as they began to prepare for their planned counterattack.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

post war - look at the influx of european migrants.

A Town Like Alice (1981) - a mini-series is pretty good in relation to the 'flavour' of the times during and immediately after.

 

[ndoorfin]

okay I am no expert
in appaling condtions the australians stopped the japanese in new guinea. While they prepared the brisbane Geelong line (go cats, geelong is my home town) to defend against the japanese
the indigenous/aboriginals did fight and fought well in the defence of this country despite not getting the vote until 1967
film was the insperation of fashion being so islated but it also made us self reliant inventive and fucking clever
we invented refridgeration and the utilty\pick up truck both by geelong people
and someone mentioned atomic testing by the poms in south australia a friend has stood on the spot where one was detonated
any qustions just ask
my mum always bragged she had the first bikini in australia

 

[oggbashan]

post war - look at the influx of european migrants.

A Town Like Alice (1981) - a mini-series is pretty good in relation to the 'flavour' of the times during and immediately after.

This book They're a Weird Mob written in 1957 is a comic take on Australian (male) attitudes to European immigrants.

Basically, if immigrants worked hard and made attempts to integrate into Australian society, they were eventually accepted. But attitudes to Ten-Pound-Poms (UK people who paid £10 for their passage to Australia) were different.

Why?

Because many UK immigrants had two faults:

1. They considered themselves superior to Australians, or failed to overcome hostility from Australians.

2. Many of them came to Australia because they had failed in the UK. Not surprisingly, they failed in Australia too. Far more UK immigrants than other Europeans left Australia within ten years of arrival.

I arrived as an Englishman in Australia but found little difficulty in integrating. I hadn't come as a Ten-Pound-Pom but had travelled First Class on a scheduled liner. Many of my fellow passengers on the long voyage were Australians so I was aware of the accent and language. I then spent several months with relations in Sydney, learning to be a surf lifesaver and travelling with my parents.

When I finally went to school in Melbourne I spoke Australian, I could surf, I had sun-bleached hair and a significant tan. The only other newcomers in their final year before university were a Russian, a Malaysian and an American from Boston. The Russian was a wrestling fanatic; the Malaysian was a highly qualified Black Belt from a specialist Karate school, and the American wore glasses and was a serious nerd (he proved to be an outstanding scientist and valued member of the school's golf team which redeemed the poor initial impression). Most of my fellow students assumed I was Australian - from Sydney because my accent wasn't local.

But then, as probably now, those who wanted to be in Australia and live as Australians were accepted much more easily than those who hankered for 'The Old Country', whatever that country was. If you were Australian Irish, you were Australian first. But if you were Irish Australian, your priorities were wrong.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Sounds pretty much like the best way to integrate into any new country.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

This book They're a Weird Mob written in 1957 is a comic take on Australian (male) attitudes to European immigrants.

Basically, if immigrants worked hard and made attempts to integrate into Australian society, they were eventually accepted. But attitudes to Ten-Pound-Poms (UK people who paid £10 for their passage to Australia) were different.

Why?

Because many UK immigrants had two faults:

1. They considered themselves superior to Australians, or failed to overcome hostility from Australians.

2. Many of them came to Australia because they had failed in the UK. Not surprisingly, they failed in Australia too. Far more UK immigrants than other Europeans left Australia within ten years of arrival.

I arrived as an Englishman in Australia but found little difficulty in integrating. I hadn't come as a Ten-Pound-Pom but had travelled First Class on a scheduled liner. Many of my fellow passengers on the long voyage were Australians so I was aware of the accent and language. I then spent several months with relations in Sydney, learning to be a surf lifesaver and travelling with my parents.

When I finally went to school in Melbourne I spoke Australian, I could surf, I had sun-bleached hair and a significant tan. The only other newcomers in their final year before university were a Russian, a Malaysian and an American from Boston. The Russian was a wrestling fanatic; the Malaysian was a highly qualified Black Belt from a specialist Karate school, and the American wore glasses and was a serious nerd (he proved to be an outstanding scientist and valued member of the school's golf team which redeemed the poor initial impression). Most of my fellow students assumed I was Australian - from Sydney because my accent wasn't local.

But then, as probably now, those who wanted to be in Australia and live as Australians were accepted much more easily than those who hankered for 'The Old Country', whatever that country was. If you were Australian Irish, you were Australian first. But if you were Irish Australian, your priorities were wrong.

holy shit. i read that book years ago. there are a couple more where nino gets married and where he takes his aussie friends to italy. oh, and one where he's suffering from stress in the building trade and goes fishing. good call!

 

[hoo_hoo_boo]

The Australian experience in Vietnam was difficult:

Australian War in Vietnam

One former Viet Cong leader is quoted as saying; "Worse than the Americans were the Australians. The Americans style was to hit us, then call for planes and artillery. Our response was to break contact and disappear if we could...The Australians were more patient than the Americans, better guerilla fighters, better at ambushes. They liked to stay with us instead of calling in the planes. We were more afraid of their style."

The Australians had long experience of jungle warfare with limited resources e.g. on the Kokoda Trail in New Guinea, and successful counter-insurgency with the British in Malaya.

However their advice and approach was not acceptable to many US commanders despite the Australians' success in containing the Viet Cong in the areas occupied by Australian forces, and normally having a positive kill ratio of Viet Cong to Australians, even when heavily outnumbered on the ground.

The Vietnam War was as unpopular in Australia as it became in the US, particularly as conscription was used. There were very few ways to avoid Australian conscription which was by a lottery on all 20 year olds.

The lottery(conscription) was on 19 year old males. Most people watched the lottery on TV where a barrel of marbles was spun and marbles fell out. If the date on a marble was your birthday and you were male and 19 you were conscripted. It was disbanded when Gough Whitlam became Prime Minister, (in 1972) along with recognising Red China and withdrawing from Vietnam- he and Lance Barnard, the Deputy PM did that on election night.

Remember that Australia is the driest continent. Most of it is desert. It is doubtful that it could sustain a large population which the other day reached 23 million. Most Australians have a very strong identification with the desert though most live in the capital cities.

To write about Australia you must know about Anzac Day and the Anzacs. You must know about the Gallipoli campaign. It is from that Australia has derived a lot of its identity and Anzac Day is celebrated every year- 25 April, and it commemorates the landing of Australian and New Zealand forces at Galipoli in Turkey. Its our most important day. We lost but it is central to the country. Only once has Australia conscripted men for war and that was against Vietnam. We had a referendum about it in ww1.

You might like to know about the Brisbane line where the north of Australia was to be abandoned if the Japanese invaded but this tactic and the existence of the line was often denied.

You should know about Robert Menzies- Prime Minister after ww2 . He was PM for 18 years and very conservative. He was also PM when war started and declared war with a speech beginning- "It is my melancholy duty ..." It was John Curtain, as Prime Minister, who moved the focus from Britain to America during the war. He died in office during the war.

You could write about the rabbit plague too and I remember being in a car as it slipped and slid on a road covered with rabbits that raced in huge waves of thousands across the roads, mile after mile of it- millions of rabbits.

You should be aware of an economy based on wool where it was worth a pound for a pound(lb) particularly during the Korean war. Until 1966 it was Pounds shillings and pence. 12 pennies to a shilling, 20 shillings to a pound, and if it was fancy it was in guineas- twenty one shillings to a guinea. There were also halfpennies. Since '66 we have used dollars and cents.

You could also write about sport- Australia's preoccupation with cricket and often it's the world champion- strangely not right now but that probably won't be for long. Don Bradman is a big name in cricket. The football codes- Rugby League in NSW, Rugby union in Queensland and Australian Rules in the rest of the country. Australia has often been world champions at both rugbys and is always world champion of Australian Rules! No one else plays it! I'd suggest that the football codes are intrinsic to Australia. Now people play soccer too- for a long time a sissy game. It's not popular- I suspect because there is an absence of a fair go- particularly when against Italy and Iran we lost because they cheated. You should be aware of the numerous Australian tennis champions too- Laver, Emmerson, Sedgeman, Roach, Fraser, Stolle, Newcombe, Rosewall, McGregor and so many others who won Wimbledon. You should be aware of the Olympics with its champions- particularly in swimming- Dawn Fraser and Murray Rose and others. It is one of a small handfull of countries to have been represented at every Olympics. Australia has had no civil war and no military victory - we comemorate battles and they are almost always in some one else's wars. Instead, the country has identified with sport. That our colours are green and gold is the result of cricket. That the states came together to form the one country in 1901 was in part due to the Sheffield Shield for cricket.

We are one of the oldest democracies, perhaps the oldest. Everyone, 18 and over is obliged to vote. It is the home of the secret ballot.

You should be aware of the Australian ideal of a fair go. which is central to the ideal of Australia- similar to the American concept of freedom. In America every one has the opportunity to make it big- in Australia every one has the opportunity to be treated fairly- a fair go, roughly speaking.

I think you could also use the existence of Dame Edna Everidge- she is fascinating and provided a lot of insightful, biting commentary. She once lampooned the Australian habit of driving two tone cars(mostly Holdens) as she/he sat, wearing spectacles that were huge and equipped with windscreen wipers that swished across the lenses as she spoke. She / He retired this year. She /he demonstrates a humour very different from that in America.

I won't go into race or aboriginal relations because I'm in it and can't see it like visitors can. We did have a White Australia policy for ages though and now we are multicultural and multiracial. I guess our short comings are mostly about hamfistedness rather than popular intention- proportionately we have more emigrants and refugees arrive consistently over a very long time than almost any other country.Our small population is seen to make us vulnerable though.

I have no idea what you really want but these things are central to the country- the frame work if you like. I've probably missed things too. Its a start though and you can hang things from it.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

This book They're a Weird Mob written in 1957 is a comic take on Australian (male) attitudes to European immigrants.

Basically, if immigrants worked hard and made attempts to integrate into Australian society, they were eventually accepted. But attitudes to Ten-Pound-Poms (UK people who paid £10 for their passage to Australia) were different.

Why?

Because many UK immigrants had two faults:

1. They considered themselves superior to Australians, or failed to overcome hostility from Australians.

2. Many of them came to Australia because they had failed in the UK. Not surprisingly, they failed in Australia too. Far more UK immigrants than other Europeans left Australia within ten years of arrival.

I arrived as an Englishman in Australia but found little difficulty in integrating. I hadn't come as a Ten-Pound-Pom but had travelled First Class on a scheduled liner. Many of my fellow passengers on the long voyage were Australians so I was aware of the accent and language. I then spent several months with relations in Sydney, learning to be a surf lifesaver and travelling with my parents.

When I finally went to school in Melbourne I spoke Australian, I could surf, I had sun-bleached hair and a significant tan. The only other newcomers in their final year before university were a Russian, a Malaysian and an American from Boston. The Russian was a wrestling fanatic; the Malaysian was a highly qualified Black Belt from a specialist Karate school, and the American wore glasses and was a serious nerd (he proved to be an outstanding scientist and valued member of the school's golf team which redeemed the poor initial impression). Most of my fellow students assumed I was Australian - from Sydney because my accent wasn't local.

But then, as probably now, those who wanted to be in Australia and live as Australians were accepted much more easily than those who hankered for 'The Old Country', whatever that country was. If you were Australian Irish, you were Australian first. But if you were Irish Australian, your priorities were wrong.

oh, and it wasn't the britanis or australis you sailed on, was it, og? greek line, white crosses on the funnels.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Just . . . the sea. Australians are mad about anything that can be done in water, (salt water, that is since they have so little fresh they don't waste any of it). But surfing, angling, diving, spearfishing and sailing . . . gawdhelpme the Aussies are magnificent sailors and racers. If I were to immigrate Down Under I'd be unlikely to surf because I don't swim worth a damn. I sink! However, give me a lifejacket and I'd be out in Sydney harbor under a thumming rag happy as a . . . as a . . . bear in a sailboat!

 

[ishtat]

I have come to this thread a little late to offer much, but one or two observations.

1.The fall of Singapore in 1942 signalled to Oz that the British Empire provided security in name only and since then Australians have been firmly committed to the American alliance.

2. Whitlam and Barnard did not make the decision to pull out of Vietnam - that is one of the most commonly misrepresented pieces of Australian History. The decision had already been made by the previous Liberal government.

3. One of the Poms who did not make the cut in Australia was Tony Blair and his family. Fortunately he returned to England and stuffed them up.

4. Australia's population has more than tripled since 1945 but is still less than that of Texas. More than 1 million Brits have emigrated 500,000 each of Greeks and Chinese, almost as many Italians, plus many many others - even 180,000 Americans were allowed in. Almost one third of Australia's current population was born in another country.