James Curran

The “Thin Dividing Line”: Prime Ministers and the Problem of Australian Nationalism, 1972–1996

This paper is concerned with the way in which Australian prime ministers gave expression to an idea of “national community” in the post–1972 era. With the declining relevance of the British connection, the departure of “great and powerful” friends from the region, the imperative of engagement with Asia and the emerging concept of Australia as a “multicultural” society, one of the central challenges for these leaders has been whether or not they could offer an alternative myth of community which would preserve social cohesion in the new times. This raises an important historical question concerning Australian political culture at this time — what happened to the need for nationalism? By examining the speeches of Prime Ministers Whitlam, Fraser, Hawke and Keating, it can be seen that far from asserting an old–style, exclusive Australian nationalism, in most cases these leaders expressed great caution and hesitation towards the idea of nationalism itself.

‘An Organic Part of the Whole Structure’: John Curtin's Empire

This article examines the proposals that Australian Prime Minister John Curtin took to the May 1944 Commonwealth Prime Ministers Conference in London. At the meeting Curtin urged the creation of a permanent imperial secretariat that would oversee a new era in imperial affairs once the war had ceased. Above all else it would provide for ‘full and continuous consultation’ between London and the Dominions. It was an idea of imperial unity that Australian leaders had long sought. Curtin seized the opportunity offered by the war crisis to try and realise this ambition. Indeed this Labor prime minister devoted nearly a year to developing his case on greater imperial cooperation and presenting it to the party and the people. Yet Curtins 1944 proposals have either been dismissed as a cunning electoral ploy to prove his ‘British’ credentials, or submerged beneath a nationalist interpretation of Curtin as the great national saviour, abruptly dispensing with the British link in the face of the Japanese threat and reorienting Australias foreign policy towards the United States. Moreover, the fact that he had a history to go with it has been completely overlooked. This article treats his ambition for the post-war empire as a serious expression of his idea of Australia.

Australia at empire’s end: Approaches and arguments

This article explores recent scholarship on the end of empire in Australia, discussing how it reveals an ongoing debate about historical approaches and methodologies. The unravelling of the maritime empires and the political and economic integration of Europe converged during the 1950s and 1960s, both serving to reorder the world politically and imaginatively. Australia’s adjustment to post-imperial realities can be seen in this broader global context. The paper considers some of the consequences of these tectonic events for Australian history and historiography, asking too whether the much-vaunted claims of ‘transnationalism’ require greater scrutiny. This article has been peer-reviewed.

Australia Should Be There

Abstract This article explores the history of Australias participation at the 1967 International Exhibition in Montreal. It shows that the task of organising Australias contribution had significant implications for the broader problem of projecting the Australian national image in a post-imperial era. With less than two years in which to prepare, Australian officials and organisers had to craft a new image of the nation for international consumption. The experience highlighted the tension between a desire for Australia to be seen as ‘modern’ and up-to-date, and a compulsion to showcase the nations more distinctive characteristics.

Australia and Appeasement: Imperial Foreign Policy and the Origins of World War II

members who left Labor with him, joined forces with a rump of the old Nationalist Party and a younger group of anti-Labor politicians spurred on by proactive business groups, especially in Melbourne, to form the United Australia Party (UAP). Lyons led the UAP to victory in the wake of the Scullin government’s cracking apart, and Lyons became Prime Minister in January 1932, a post he held until his sudden death following a heart-attack in April 1939. Henderson argues that Lyons was more than merely a gatherer of newly configured antiLabor political forces. One of the most persuasive parts of her study is the need for us to appreciate how modern and effective was the Lyons team (i.e. Joe and Enid, who was very much a public figure) at managing the new opportunities for public image projection that came with the spread of radio, increased use of special supplements in newspapers, and photo opportunities. In one chapter she even uses the sub-heading, ‘A Lyons personality cult’. Lyons not only nurtured the young UAP, led government effectively, and offered shrewd and principled policy direction, but he became much-loved at a popular level. Having said this, the project of rehabilitation does not work as well as it might. Joe Lyons emerges early in the book as a character of distinction and interest through the exceptional qualities of Tasmanian politics (where he rose to become Premier, 1923 28)*sensitivity to the need to promote locals; concern for workers founded in his tough experiences as a teacher; a shallow-rooted socialism giving way to pragmatism; and the Hare-Clark electoral system. But Tasmanian exceptionalism as the key to Lyons’ world fades as the book unfolds; and his world view, what makes him tick, remains sketchy at best. For me, the book is also too long: Lyons would have been rehabilitated more effectively if we followed his progress according to a plot that delved more deeply at some times and summarised more tightly at others. And Henderson’s choice not to include references/footnotes backfires. Admirably, she remains keen to acknowledge key sources she relies on, but this leads to other problems. If a move aimed at broadening the appeal to a general readership results in repeated cluttering phrases along the lines of, ‘As X writes in her book . . .’, or ‘this document can be viewed in . . .’, then I think the reader might be better off with references that can be read or ignored, but which do not interfere with the main prose.