[jlangenauer]

I'm from Australia, but live in Germany, and have been just horrified at what's happened back there. It's as though the country has lost its mind.

My personal theory is that it's a manifestation of fear and insecurity. Australia, and many of its citizens have always had a certain lack of confidence, which is often covered up by bravado about being "the best country in the world" (as if there even is such a thing) and things like the tall poppy syndrome, currently often directed at expats("Too good to live in Australia, are you?")

On top of this, a huge amount of fear has been manufactured over the Covid-19 pandemic, both by the media seeking clicks, and by politicians seeking electoral advantage. This is one of the most shameful aspects of the entire thing to me: the deliberate emotional abuse of the population. The contrast between Dan Andrew's daily fear-mongering and berating of "rule-breakers" and Angela Merkel, most of whose public statements during the pandemic were about reassuring the German people (with occasional expressions of "concern" at most when things were going badly) has been stark for me. Even Jactinta Ardern has been much more measured in her statements, although NZ wasn't immune from madness like banning the delivery of fiction books.

And so, yes, I think a lot of Australians are on board with the border closures, the lockdowns and the like, which is astonishing to me, but I think the degree of fear there is what fundamentally explains it. As for government snooping, hardly anyone in Australia cares.

[AussieWog93]

>bravado about being "the best country in the world"

You mean "the lucky country"? That's an ironic, self-deprecating joke.

>The contrast between Dan Andrew's daily fear-mongering and berating of "rule-breakers" and Angela Merkel

As have the number of deaths between the two countries. 90k+ in Germany vs. <1k in Aus. (If you scale it per-capita, it's still about 25k vs 1k).

>I think a lot of Australians are on board with the border closures, the lockdowns and the like, which is astonishing to me, but I think the degree of fear there is what fundamentally explains it.

No, we're on board because it saves lives and people don't want to see their family die in the name of some abstract concept.

[jlangenauer]

I'm well aware of the "lucky country" stuff (and even have Donald Horne's book on my shelf). For those who don't know what we're talking about, the full "lucky country quote":

"Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second rate people who share its luck. It lives on other people's ideas, and, although its ordinary people are adaptable, most of its leaders (in all fields) so lack curiosity about the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise."

[mikeyjk]

I find it a bit disconcerting you responded defensively to a quote to prove you know it - choosing to not respond to the more consequential data, which seems to address the heart of your argument.

[graderjs]

>You mean "the lucky country"? That's an ironic, self-deprecating joke.

It's both. It started (I learned today) as a negative criticism, but is also used favorably and positively, also it is sometimes a joke. I'd heard the positive and joke usage but wasn't aware it started life as a negative thing. Funny to think that Aussies were previously more self-critical than we seem today.

Different context, different people, all referencing the same phrase. There's no "one true" meaning...but it's good to know there's might be more to it than just what you've seen already. :)

[vermilingua]

Most people I know that throw around "best country in the world" and "the lucky country" are not at all aware that the latter is a joke.

[hmwhy]

I second these.

For anyone reading GP's comment, my take is that some expats do hate their home country.

It's insanity that some people think that strict lockdown rules are an invasion of freedom.

I'll tell you what's an invasion of freedeom: selfish, infected people partying and infecting everyone else sticking the the rules and toughing in out.

[hmwhy]

Maybe my response was emotional, but if everyone is going to pile on and down vote, it would be nice to at least get an explanation -- even if it's just an emotional disagreement it's still great and appreciated.

I couldn't care less about my karma, it just feels like I am getting punished simply for expressing my point of view here in a way that's not any more or less emotional than the GP.

[detaro]

a) painting people with negative opinions about something in society as "hating their country" to invalidate their opinion is a bad trope, and one one is in terrible company with when using it. (e.g. see use of it against people opposing involvement in wars, and it gets worse from there)

b) strict lockdowns are invasions on freedoms, quite obviously, because they suspend rights you have. They do so for a reason, and society can very well decide "this is a legitimate restriction on freedoms" (hopefully guarded by legislative and judicial process), as it has in much of the world to varying degrees, but that is not the same as pretending it's not a restriction.

[mantenpanther]

Using fear constantly is the most powerful tool to influence people, this became really clear to me the last 18 months. I hope politicians and media will get down to a more rational style of communicating, but I'm not too optimistic about it. Many countries experienced the dire consequences of a constant climate of fear in the past and might therefore a little more measured.

[novaRom]

Permanent fearmongering leads to a moral panic. How much more people today do believe in conspiracy theories than 18 months ago?

[dalmo3]

It probably correlates to how many conspiracy theories from 18 months ago have materialised.

[novaRom]

That's for sure. Indeed lots of things a year ago assumed as crazy conspiracies like covid-passes, mandatory vaccination, regular mandatory shots, masks mandates, etc. are now a crazy reality. So, what's next to expect?

[retsibsi]

In your psychoanalysis of the country, have you considered the possibility that it... strongly preferred not to let tens of thousands of people die painfully, and hundreds of thousands more become seriously ill?

[AbrahamParangi]

Is the response proportional to the potential harm? Consistent with other responses? It seems like it would at least be worth thinking about it.