So now We are One.

[not_for_sale2025]

So now We are "One". What does that mean?

Does it mean we now recognise we are a multicultural society and do not support racism? Does it mean will will no longer discriminate between the ethnic races? Will we advocate for financial equality for all Australians where people do not get extra benefits because of their race? Will all Australians take the knee when white, black or ethnic Australians suffer a wrongful death because all lives matter? Will the historical resentment and hate heal?

Somehow I don't think so.

[not_for_sale2025]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

And let's face it, the words are just that - words on paper - they are not a sacred text engraved on tablets of stone. We already changed 'Australia's sons' to something less sexist. 

---

But they are not just words on paper. The line was taken so seriously that the Prime Minister and Governor General changed the word to "One".  The word "Young" was taken literally in reference to a country where the original inhabitants have resided for much longer than most other countries on earth. Supposedly, the change was made in an attempt to recognise indigenous history and help foster a "spirit of unity".

So now, how do we literally interpret "One"? Is it meant to suggest We are united, equal and all together in this moment? If so then it is not true, although I hope it is some day.

I feel the change was made to appease the indigenous community. It was the respectful and politically correct thing to do. But I can't help thinking it is also like a pat on the back and saying, "Are you happy now?". In some ways I think the word "One" is just as hypocritical as "Young". Australia remains divisive irrespective of what our national anthem now claims.

[the_great_she_elephant]

I think any National Anthem expresses aspiration rather than reality. 

[not_for_sale2025]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

I think any National Anthem expresses aspiration rather than reality. 

---

The line now states, "Australians all let us rejoice, For we are one and free."

It seems it is supposed to be about what we are, in reality, not what we wannabe!

[the_great_she_elephant]

Maybe I should have said "wishful thinking" rather than "aspiration".

[rogespeed]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

It's a change that was long overdue. Not only does 'young and free' have  racist overtones - it is also smacks of agism. We may all be "free" (whatever that means) but we are certainly not all young.

If, as Mark Latham insists, the words are meant to  to celebrate how recent our nationhood is, then they should read  "Our nation's young and free" not 'we are young and free."

And let's face it, the words are just that - words on paper - they are not a sacred text engraved on tablets of stone. We already changed 'Australia's sons' to something less sexist. 

---

Most of the words have been changed or deleted from the original 1878 version

[rogespeed]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

I think any National Anthem expresses aspiration rather than reality. 

---

Was the choice by popular vote ( well was an optional additional question on the 1977 referendum )  : Out of thousands of songs and ditties we were offered one of four ( count them ) choices  - as unbelievable in the retelling 

Advance Australia Fair  43.29%

Waltzing Matilda   28.28% 

God Save the Queen     18.78% 

The Song of Australia (? )   9.65%

[4channel]

---

- - - -

---

@not_for_sale2025 wrote:

Will the historical resentment and hate heal?

---

@lyndal1838 wrote:

Not if people listen to Anthony Mundine.

He was complaining even before most people had heard of the changes.

---

Anthony can be a hard man to please and sometimes he over reacts. However his thoughts and opinions are based on fact!

We need to keep in mind that when this land was invaded by England and settled by mainly Anglo Saxons, there was never any consideration for the land's original inhabitants. There was never intended to be a place for them in "this new country" Indigenous Australians were regarded as fauna and they were sometimes cleared away along with the vegetation.

Before any anthem can be considered there needs to be a re-discovery of actual history. There also needs to be an awakening. People should know about the conquorer and who and what they really were. An Anthem that encompasses all should be the right one. It also  needs to acknowledge the original inhabitants properly.

[springyzone]

I don't think any national anthem needs to outline every part of a nation's history or every fault and failing.

If you look at the Amrican national anthem, it's all about battle and war and victory. Some of the lyrics could be taken as quite insulting to the 'enemy' who are now close allies.

Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution!

Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust":
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Now, was America really the land of the free? Of course not. Slavery was still a thing there, well after it stopped in England.

Are all American's brave? No.  No more than people in other nations ie some are, some aren't.

Are all American's even religious? No, though a lot pretend to be.

Yet Americans idolise their anthem, it moves them, they wouldn't change it in a fit. They see no incongruity in singing it, they aren't ashamed of it at all.

On the other hand, every single thing in our own history has people over thinking things. The flag. So it has a union jack in part of it. So what? That was part of our early history and settlement. I've no problem with the concept of a change of flag but shame shouldn't be the reason, or the idea we have to pander to ethnic groups who came after the British.

Same with our anthem. It can be idealistic, they are an appeal to emotion rather than a catalgue of historic facts.

For myself, I quite like the music and some of the lyrics to 'I am Australian'.

Perhaps with some weaks it would be a good anthem.

Let's look at the first 2 verses.

I came from the dream-time From the dusty red-soil plains

I am the ancient heart The keeper of the flame

I stood upon the rocky shores I watched the tall ships come

For forty thousand years I've been The first Australian

I came upon the prison ship Bowed down by iron chains

I worked the land, endured the lash And waited for the rains

I'm a settler, I'm a farmer's wife On a dry and barren run

A convict, then a free man I became Australian.

What worries me is the first verse is always used but for some reason, that second verse is often dropped but I see it as pivotal.

I think if we kept both verses but had a new 3rd verse written to incorporate the migration history since then, it would be fairly inclusive for everyone. Maybe something about people leaving behind hardship or war to seek peace and build a new start here.

Whole segments of the original song could be cut out and just have the end part to finish off.

I'm a teller of stories I'm a singer of songs

I am Albert Namatjira And I paint the ghostly gums

I'm Clancy on his horse I'm Ned Kelly on the run

I'm the one who waltzed Matilda I am Australian  (should this verse be included, do you think?)

I'm the hot wind from the desert I'm the black soil of the plains

I'm the mountains and the valleys I'm the drought and flooding rains

I am the rock, I am the sky The rivers when they run

The spirit of this great land I am Australian

We are one, but we are many

And from all the lands on earth we come

We'll share a dream and sing with one voice

"I am, you are, we are Australian.

Anyway, that's my suggestion for a new inclusive anthem. I'd nominate she elephant to write a fitting 3rd verse.

[the_great_she_elephant]

Wow! that's a big ask Springy. I'll do my best but you'll have to be patient, it's not something I (or even Old Blue) can dash off in a hurry. 

My current thinking is, it doesn't really need 3 verses - as an anthem they'd never all be sung anyway. Maybe one verse incorporating lines or themes from the others and the chorus would be sufficient.