Albanese can now define patriotism beyond the Anzacs and the Wallabies

Sydney Morning Herald

20-05-2025

Albanese's adoption of progressive patriotism can help reset. When we talk about patriotism, we shouldn't have to explain that it needn't be aggressive. Or that nations needn't be defined by race or blood.
In today's Australia, the new default should be that patriotism is a love of country that is democratic and egalitarian. It is something that includes those of different races and backgrounds. It is not about an insistence that we are better than everyone else; it is about a belief we must live up to the best of our traditions.
Loading
Understood in this way, patriotism is by no means owned just by one side of politics. Australians can love this country in more ways than one. Some of us will instinctively think less about our democratic traditions and more about a connection with the land or family. We don't need to agree on everything about what makes our country special. But the civic character of patriotism – a commitment to the country as a citizen – can unify us all.
There can be a clearly defined progressive patriotism, however. For an Albanese Labor government, patriotism can power a renewed centre-left in the tradition of Labor nation-building.
This is the tradition followed by Labor reformist governments. When at their best, these governments were guided by a belief in modernising Australia and a politics of the common good – and by an ethos of fairness, equality and humanity. This thread ran through the governments of Chifley, Whitlam, Hawke and Keating, and can be glimpsed in later Labor governments led by Rudd and Gillard.
Many contemporary policy problems call for such an approach. Nation-building, after all, is about more than physical infrastructure. A nation is more than just a collection of roads, schools and hospitals; it is ultimately defined by its culture, its institutions, its citizens. Whether it is the economy, health, housing, climate or social cohesion, these concerns all implicate projects in building a nation.
Albanese should learn from the experience of his recent Labor predecessors. Although Kevin Rudd became prime minister promising new leadership, he struggled to tell a coherent national story. Julia Gillard faced a similar problem, weighed down by the demands of minority government.
Albanese can learn, too, from his first term in office. One of the reasons the Voice referendum failed was because not enough Australians saw a Voice to parliament as something that benefited all Australians. It was a painful reminder of how reform can only succeed if built on some common ground.
With his political authority unquestioned, Albanese has an opportunity to craft a nation-building agenda. The significance is more than just national. At the moment, parties of the centre-left are struggling to find compelling alternatives to Trumpist populism. In many countries, they are failing to find ways to connect with disillusioned constituencies who are angry at elites.
It certainly feels that way here in the UK. Faced with the alarming rise of Nigel Farage's Reform Party, Labour's Prime Minister Keir Starmer seems to be plotting a different course to Albanese. Previously, Starmer has spoken in support of a patriotism about belonging and inclusion. Recently, though, he has grimly warned that the UK risks becoming 'an island of strangers'. He has insisted Britons must 'take back control of our borders' and close a 'squalid chapter' of rising immigration.
Clearly, not all those on the centre-left who take up progressive patriotism can get it right. But Australia may be showing how it can be done.