> Whether the sheep and beef cockies will be able to over-rule these at-risk
>agricultural industries is open to question, probably not in Tasmania, but
>on a national level Tasmania isn't very important. Tasmania may revolt. The
>rest of the world won't really notice.
Does Australian agriculture get large subsidies like in the US and the EU?
> Sovereignty isn't something Australians care about in the usual abstract
>patriotic way. It isn't as though most Australians actually know the words
>to the national anthem and when they do hear them they are more likely to
be
>embarrassed than anything else. Traditionally, Australia has never really
>had true sovereignty, making a clean transition from a UK colonial outpost,
>to a US vassal state, without seriously considering the idea of true
>independence.
When the Third World nationalism is in decline, one wouldn't generally expect resurgence of Australian nationalism? Unless it is the rightwing, xenophobic type that has emerged in France and Austria.
> Paranoia about the Asian hordes you see. That attitude is still alive and
>well, if muted, as demonstrated by the deranged over-reaction to a few
>hundred refugees from Afghanistan and the middle east. Now of course the
>'war against terrorism' is threatening to fan the same incipient racism.
Immigration is a problem in Malaysia. In India, we have similar sentiments against Bangladeshi immigrants. But we don't hear about anti-immigrant sentiment anywhere in the Persian Gulf region, though immigrants are a very large community in that region. South Asians, particularly.
> But racism isn't the same as nationalism. Come to think of it, racism is
>probably what precludes sovereignty becoming an issue. Sorry, I'm raving
>now, it just got me thinking and some things don't bear thinking about too
>much.
BTW, I find Gordon Childe's work Aryans has been cited in the literature on the Asian antiquity. (Haven't read it, though.)
Ulhas