What do you think?
Rate this book
The Lucky Culture And The Rise Of An Australian Ruling Class
A bold and provocative book about Australia's national identity and a plea to keep Australia's famed open-mindedness, Cater tracks the seismic changes in Australian culture and outlook since Donald Horne published THE LUCKY COUNTRY in 1964. 'A great book.' Rupert Murdoch
A bold and provocative book about Australia's national identity and how it is threatened by the rise of a ruling class. Nick Cater, senior editor at the Australian, tracks the seismic changes in Australian culture and outlook since Donald Horne wrote the Lucky Country in 1964.
His belief is that countries don't get lucky; people do. the secret of Australia's good fortune is not found in its geography or history. the key to its success is the Australian character, the nation's greatest renewable resource. Liberated from the constraints of the old world, Australia's pioneers mined their reserves of enterprise, energy and ingenuity to build the great civilization of the south. their over-riding principle was everybody had a right to a fair go and was obliged to do the right thing by others.
today that spirit of egalitarianism is threatened by the rise of a new breed of sophisticated Australians - the 'bunyip alumni' - who claim to better understand the demands of the age. their presumption of elitism and superior virtue tempts them to look down on others and dismiss opposing views.
Half a century after Donald Horne named Australia 'the Lucky Country', Nick Cater takes stock of the new battle to define Australia and the rift that divides a presumptive ruling class from a people who refuse to be ruled.
the Lucky Culture is a lively and original take on 21st century Australia and its people. Sometimes rousing, often provocative and always good-humoured, its unexpectedly moving message cannot be ignored.
'tHE LUCKY CULtURE is a great book and particularly relevant as it comes in a moment of high political excitement. I particularly loved Nick Cater's passion for the great Australian dream. It is the first step in restoring that dream.' Rupert Murdoch
A bold and provocative book about Australia's national identity and how it is threatened by the rise of a ruling class. Nick Cater, senior editor at the Australian, tracks the seismic changes in Australian culture and outlook since Donald Horne wrote the Lucky Country in 1964.
His belief is that countries don't get lucky; people do. the secret of Australia's good fortune is not found in its geography or history. the key to its success is the Australian character, the nation's greatest renewable resource. Liberated from the constraints of the old world, Australia's pioneers mined their reserves of enterprise, energy and ingenuity to build the great civilization of the south. their over-riding principle was everybody had a right to a fair go and was obliged to do the right thing by others.
today that spirit of egalitarianism is threatened by the rise of a new breed of sophisticated Australians - the 'bunyip alumni' - who claim to better understand the demands of the age. their presumption of elitism and superior virtue tempts them to look down on others and dismiss opposing views.
Half a century after Donald Horne named Australia 'the Lucky Country', Nick Cater takes stock of the new battle to define Australia and the rift that divides a presumptive ruling class from a people who refuse to be ruled.
the Lucky Culture is a lively and original take on 21st century Australia and its people. Sometimes rousing, often provocative and always good-humoured, its unexpectedly moving message cannot be ignored.
'tHE LUCKY CULtURE is a great book and particularly relevant as it comes in a moment of high political excitement. I particularly loved Nick Cater's passion for the great Australian dream. It is the first step in restoring that dream.' Rupert Murdoch
368 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 2013
8 people are currently reading
59 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
June 11, 2013
By the time I was finished this book I wanted to throw it out the window. This would have been a little silly to actually do considering I was mid-flight. But it made me mad.
Nick Cater argues that Australia is the land of the free. The land of endless opportunity, of self-development and improvement, available to anyone who works hard and wants to have a go. Yet in this discussion, he refers to the Australian "tertiary-educated middle class" with much distain and being the cause of all that is wrong with Australia today (which is probably a little hypocritical coming from the educated middle-class in the UK). One on hand Cater advocates the teaching of discernment and individual thinking at tertiary institutions and then proceeds to degrade those who do. Only the blue-collar workers may call themselves true Australians. Everyone else is just out to ruin the place.
Cater argues that Australia is a country of blue collar workers and one that does not value or encourage intellectuals. He uses a number of examples from Australia’s white history to argue this (stretching many of these examples to the point of disbelief . Following through on his argument, Cater uses much of the current commentary that suggests that the Australian Labor Party has lost its way and suggests that this divergence from its original path originated when Whitlam took leadership of the party, pushing Labor away from its more conservative roots. The Whitam reforms, suggests Cater only benefitted the “educated middle class” and not the “true-blue” Aussie workers, that things such as tertiary education is a privilege and not a right, although correctly identifying that Australian universities now very much have the “student-as-customer” mentality. Cater says that Labor is now a party of intellectuals and that the current Liberal Party best represents “true” Australians as they are essentially conservative and “traditionally moral”.
Cater goes so far as to say that breaking away from more conservative and restrictive policies has done great damage to our country. He suggests there was nothing wrong with the White Australian policy and that the introduction of multiculturalism and human rights policies and members of “…the victims’ club – women, racial minorities, the disabled or those with boutique sexual preferences” has led to further damaging Australia. That there is no such thing as sexism, homophobia or racism because it was never seen to have existed by contemporaries of the past. That Mick Dundee is the true Australian and that Alvin Purple, Barry Mackenzie, any of Barry Humphries’ alter-egos are not. That ABC should be shut-down because of its left-wing programming and lack of control it has over its media commentators. And so the list goes on….
Nick Cater works for Murdoch. And the book is published by a Murdoch-owned company. Need I say more?
Nick Cater argues that Australia is the land of the free. The land of endless opportunity, of self-development and improvement, available to anyone who works hard and wants to have a go. Yet in this discussion, he refers to the Australian "tertiary-educated middle class" with much distain and being the cause of all that is wrong with Australia today (which is probably a little hypocritical coming from the educated middle-class in the UK). One on hand Cater advocates the teaching of discernment and individual thinking at tertiary institutions and then proceeds to degrade those who do. Only the blue-collar workers may call themselves true Australians. Everyone else is just out to ruin the place.
Cater argues that Australia is a country of blue collar workers and one that does not value or encourage intellectuals. He uses a number of examples from Australia’s white history to argue this (stretching many of these examples to the point of disbelief . Following through on his argument, Cater uses much of the current commentary that suggests that the Australian Labor Party has lost its way and suggests that this divergence from its original path originated when Whitlam took leadership of the party, pushing Labor away from its more conservative roots. The Whitam reforms, suggests Cater only benefitted the “educated middle class” and not the “true-blue” Aussie workers, that things such as tertiary education is a privilege and not a right, although correctly identifying that Australian universities now very much have the “student-as-customer” mentality. Cater says that Labor is now a party of intellectuals and that the current Liberal Party best represents “true” Australians as they are essentially conservative and “traditionally moral”.
Cater goes so far as to say that breaking away from more conservative and restrictive policies has done great damage to our country. He suggests there was nothing wrong with the White Australian policy and that the introduction of multiculturalism and human rights policies and members of “…the victims’ club – women, racial minorities, the disabled or those with boutique sexual preferences” has led to further damaging Australia. That there is no such thing as sexism, homophobia or racism because it was never seen to have existed by contemporaries of the past. That Mick Dundee is the true Australian and that Alvin Purple, Barry Mackenzie, any of Barry Humphries’ alter-egos are not. That ABC should be shut-down because of its left-wing programming and lack of control it has over its media commentators. And so the list goes on….
Nick Cater works for Murdoch. And the book is published by a Murdoch-owned company. Need I say more?
July 31, 2013
A truly awful book. Mostly anecdotal and mostly repetitive but yet it never makes the case there is "an Australian Ruling Class" of the type Nick Cater suggests. There is a PC culture but does it actually have the run of the place? I would contend that it does not. I would also contend that Australians have changed over the last 30 years but I would not put it down to more university graduates amongst us as Cater has. A book is not bad because it disagrees with you but rather that it just does not make a convincing case.
The latte sipping, greeny, Prius driving, University graduates don't run the country. They are not a ruling class. The very title, the very premise of the book is not proved by the content of the book. A ruling class rules. A ruling class rules for itself, it may make concessions to other groups in society but it has its hand firmly on the till.
I cannot make this case any better than Guy Rundle does.
That's what a ruling class looks like.
The latte sipping, greeny, Prius driving, University graduates don't run the country. They are not a ruling class. The very title, the very premise of the book is not proved by the content of the book. A ruling class rules. A ruling class rules for itself, it may make concessions to other groups in society but it has its hand firmly on the till.
I cannot make this case any better than Guy Rundle does.
Still, maybe the stuff on how we hate nepotism is right. If you’d like to submit an article to The Australian about how anti-nepotistic we are, send it to Rebecca Weisser, recent op-ed editor, or to Nick Cater himself. Same difference. They are, after all, partners. If you’d like to make a TV show about it, contact Lachlan Murdoch at Channel Ten. If you’d like to make a theatre show about it, contact Michael Kantor, Rupert Murdoch’s nephew, ex-Malthouse head, who honed his craft for years on a trust fund coming from guess who. Welcome to Australian culture and power.http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/04/23/w...
That's what a ruling class looks like.
June 26, 2013
The Lucky Culture (2013) by Nick Cater is a curious book. It’s a well read, conservative English immigrant’s view of Australia that concentrates on the cultural change in Australia and in particular on the Australian Left since WWII.
The Lucky Culture looks at how the dramatic rise in University graduates has altered Australia. Cater looks at how the ALP is now a weird fusion of fairly poorly off people and inner-city left wing university graduates.
The details in the book are the most interesting. It’s remarkable to find out that Harold Holt was one of 3 University Graduates on the government benches in 1939 and how the ALP only removed the White Australia policy in the 1960s. The cataloguing of various artist’s and commentator’s contempt for how many Australians live in suburbia is extensive.
Cater’s chapters on the rise of odd agencies with little scope for feedback are good. The lack of accountability and responsiveness to feedback at the ABC and the rise of Human Rights Offices are well described. Cater also points out how governments of both persuasions have failed to reign in the ABC.
Cater misses quite a lot of Australia though. He writes about Australian inclusiveness from his perspective and isn’t aware of how people from non-English speaking backgrounds faired. The book also doesn’t look enough at how the Australian economy has changed and how that has altered Australia. Cater doesn’t look at how the ALP implemented a lot of pro-market reforms. He also doesn’t look at how the effective collapse of far left economics has altered the Australian Left.
The book is worth reading, mainly for the details on how Australia has changed.
The Lucky Culture looks at how the dramatic rise in University graduates has altered Australia. Cater looks at how the ALP is now a weird fusion of fairly poorly off people and inner-city left wing university graduates.
The details in the book are the most interesting. It’s remarkable to find out that Harold Holt was one of 3 University Graduates on the government benches in 1939 and how the ALP only removed the White Australia policy in the 1960s. The cataloguing of various artist’s and commentator’s contempt for how many Australians live in suburbia is extensive.
Cater’s chapters on the rise of odd agencies with little scope for feedback are good. The lack of accountability and responsiveness to feedback at the ABC and the rise of Human Rights Offices are well described. Cater also points out how governments of both persuasions have failed to reign in the ABC.
Cater misses quite a lot of Australia though. He writes about Australian inclusiveness from his perspective and isn’t aware of how people from non-English speaking backgrounds faired. The book also doesn’t look enough at how the Australian economy has changed and how that has altered Australia. Cater doesn’t look at how the ALP implemented a lot of pro-market reforms. He also doesn’t look at how the effective collapse of far left economics has altered the Australian Left.
The book is worth reading, mainly for the details on how Australia has changed.
June 14, 2017
What I thought would be an interesting read was boring, repetitive and disjointed. The author talks about an Australian ruling class as a result of more university graduates over the last generation or so - a politically correct class who are taking over the country. That they are ruining the "lucky country" of Australia because of their progressive ideas. That Australia was once some paradise but that's being eroded away by these university educated "know-it-alls". I honestly gave up half-way through this book. I could find no factual basis for his assertions at all. I'm surprised it was published. Lucky I borrowed it from the library and didn't waste money on it.
January 26, 2017
I'll admit I felt queasy reading through the first few pages of this and realising I had inadvertently started a book from a right-wing "The Australian" journalist... but I stuck with it.
This book is particularly fascinating post-Trump/Brexit - much of what the author talks about might seem logical now seeing how politics is shifting. I would guess the author is sitting somewhere right now saying "told you so!"
A good combination of history, politics and judgement. Not my side of politics, but it's not all wrong either.
This book is particularly fascinating post-Trump/Brexit - much of what the author talks about might seem logical now seeing how politics is shifting. I would guess the author is sitting somewhere right now saying "told you so!"
A good combination of history, politics and judgement. Not my side of politics, but it's not all wrong either.
July 15, 2014
This was a great read; it had some weaknesses, but was really well written. The re-revisionism of Australian political/cultural history in this book is long overdue and deserves a wide readership. It has sent the moralistic left wing into a frenzy! Cater has a rose-coloured understanding of progress in Western history (some have called it 'Whig-ish'), and this comes through quite a bit in the early chapters. Apart from that, well done sir!
March 13, 2020
terrible book. Went on and on about how good the liberals are.
September 5, 2017
pommie poofter writes shyte on behalf of seppo phone hacker
May 21, 2013
Nick Cater is rightly concerned that some people on the left in Australia allow their disagreements with ideologies to become dislikes of people who hold those ideologies. The only problem is that Nick Cater also dislikes these people he disagrees with.
This is a profoundly un-selfconscious book. Cater seems genuine in his concern about the changing country, but he has only one big causal factor (university education has caused the raft of social changes since the 1970s in Australia), which even if under-discussed in other tales, never adequately explains the raft of changes which Nick rails against.
Add to this a romanticised, but self-contradictory view of pre-1980s Australia (both celebrating larrikinism while wishing for more respect for captains of industry) and a general vague desire to blame change on the left, without every presenting an argument on the merits of change and you are left wondering what the author actually believes.
The biggest problem with the Lucky Culture is that Cater's one big idea doesn't add up. He never has the courage to say so expressly, but his concern is the rise of Green party values in Australia, and he blames this on the introduction of university education. Yet while 25% of the Australian population have degrees, only 12% vote Green. So tertiary education is clearly not everything for determining political values. And Cater seems to recognise this. In a notable passage early on, Cater says academics are not propagandists, that students are not mere receptacles, and that they're not really ruling this country.
Wait what? Yes, Cater in the book flat out disagrees with the Cater on the books cover. This is the profound contradiction of the book. Many changes are blamed on the left (such as the rise of consumer-service attitudes amongst students) that the left are just as critical of as cater is. Meanwhile atheism and utilitarianism are celebrated as core colonial era Australian values, but then turned into "souless" radical ideas when held by middle class types in 21st century Sydney.
Most of this book reads as a somewhat sympathetic tale of change and concern over change in Australia. There is an earnest, reasonable style to much of this prose as hard questions are asked about a period of change that has largely (and perhaps rightly) been celebrated in texts such as Paul Kelly's The End of Certainty or George Megalogenis' The Australia Moment, but only interrogated critically in far left or far right publications.
Unfortunately it's hard to get at this without noticing the 10% of the book, predominately in the introduction and the mid-chapter on the Whitlam govt which is a tired, unrelated conservative polemic. This is the part that has excited popular media attention, but I feel sorry for Nick if these sections are seen as the legacy of his efforts. There's more heart and sense in the text than these sections convey. But with the choice to ask the leader of the Australian Liberal Party to help review and launch the book, obviously the political was more important than the cultural focus Cater otherwise seems to desire.
There's something to Cater's thesis. He's not an unsymapthetic guide, and indeed the early chapter on Australia as a home to innovation and ambition is a worthy antidote to the pessimism that too often pervades our national discussions of history. But all too often, Cater seems to engaged in the same type of dislike rather than disagreement he pins on his opponents, while never quite having the courage to say what he thinks of the changes Australia has witnessed since his arrival. Maybe the marketing people have done a profound disservice to the authors' vision, but you can't help but think Cater has at least been a willing victim. Willing to accept his earnest concerns distorted in the service of more book sales, and greater partisanship. Which is just the sort of thing he seems to have set out to warn this nation against when he began writing.
This is a profoundly un-selfconscious book. Cater seems genuine in his concern about the changing country, but he has only one big causal factor (university education has caused the raft of social changes since the 1970s in Australia), which even if under-discussed in other tales, never adequately explains the raft of changes which Nick rails against.
Add to this a romanticised, but self-contradictory view of pre-1980s Australia (both celebrating larrikinism while wishing for more respect for captains of industry) and a general vague desire to blame change on the left, without every presenting an argument on the merits of change and you are left wondering what the author actually believes.
The biggest problem with the Lucky Culture is that Cater's one big idea doesn't add up. He never has the courage to say so expressly, but his concern is the rise of Green party values in Australia, and he blames this on the introduction of university education. Yet while 25% of the Australian population have degrees, only 12% vote Green. So tertiary education is clearly not everything for determining political values. And Cater seems to recognise this. In a notable passage early on, Cater says academics are not propagandists, that students are not mere receptacles, and that they're not really ruling this country.
Wait what? Yes, Cater in the book flat out disagrees with the Cater on the books cover. This is the profound contradiction of the book. Many changes are blamed on the left (such as the rise of consumer-service attitudes amongst students) that the left are just as critical of as cater is. Meanwhile atheism and utilitarianism are celebrated as core colonial era Australian values, but then turned into "souless" radical ideas when held by middle class types in 21st century Sydney.
Most of this book reads as a somewhat sympathetic tale of change and concern over change in Australia. There is an earnest, reasonable style to much of this prose as hard questions are asked about a period of change that has largely (and perhaps rightly) been celebrated in texts such as Paul Kelly's The End of Certainty or George Megalogenis' The Australia Moment, but only interrogated critically in far left or far right publications.
Unfortunately it's hard to get at this without noticing the 10% of the book, predominately in the introduction and the mid-chapter on the Whitlam govt which is a tired, unrelated conservative polemic. This is the part that has excited popular media attention, but I feel sorry for Nick if these sections are seen as the legacy of his efforts. There's more heart and sense in the text than these sections convey. But with the choice to ask the leader of the Australian Liberal Party to help review and launch the book, obviously the political was more important than the cultural focus Cater otherwise seems to desire.
There's something to Cater's thesis. He's not an unsymapthetic guide, and indeed the early chapter on Australia as a home to innovation and ambition is a worthy antidote to the pessimism that too often pervades our national discussions of history. But all too often, Cater seems to engaged in the same type of dislike rather than disagreement he pins on his opponents, while never quite having the courage to say what he thinks of the changes Australia has witnessed since his arrival. Maybe the marketing people have done a profound disservice to the authors' vision, but you can't help but think Cater has at least been a willing victim. Willing to accept his earnest concerns distorted in the service of more book sales, and greater partisanship. Which is just the sort of thing he seems to have set out to warn this nation against when he began writing.
October 13, 2014
I know lots of people don’t like this book for various reasons but I have to say that I didn’t mind it. There were some things of it that I found interesting, especially in regards to plotting the intellectual history of Australia and the comparison of early Australia to America. But there lots of things I disagreed with. I don’t think Nick Carter really understands the modern reality of who goes to university and why. Not everyone that enters university is there for or will receive what is traditionally known as a ‘liberal education’.
In many ways he is morning for a past era; a golden period of a where education becomes a ‘status maker that indicates those who have received wisdom and those who have not’
He morns the increase of people being admitted to university but doesn’t admit that in many cases you can no longer train to be a nurse or teacher on the job anymore and nowadays a university degree is the only way to gain entry to these professions. That combined with the fact that most employers aren’t willing to train staff and often demand prospective applicants to come fully formed employees. As if a university education does this.
He quotes British academic Joanna Williams in his lament against today’s scholar who says, ‘today’s students seek to have a degree rather than be learners’; they attend universities not to become independent thinkers but simply to claim their entitlement’. With many requiring a degree just to get a job, a liberal education in the traditional sense is not a priority.
I don’t think that graduates are automatically taking over the country in the way that he says they are. While there is an inner city “latte/chardonnay sipping set” that passes judgement of the life style of others does exist, I don’t think the clique is as big or as powerful as he makes it out to be.
Also, with the increase of people entering university and the change to the work environment means that there is a more diverse range of people attending university and I don’t think that students automatically join the “latte/chardonnay sipping set” upon graduation.
He does eventually admit that his nightmare has come true in that because of the growth of the university system since the 1950s, ‘two generations of students and now a third, have been deprived of the enjoyment of intellectual discovery; they follow ever narrower fields of study with fragile and subversive intellectual foundations, antithetical to the journey of a curious mind’. You might not like it but it is the way it is.
In many ways he is morning for a past era; a golden period of a where education becomes a ‘status maker that indicates those who have received wisdom and those who have not’
He morns the increase of people being admitted to university but doesn’t admit that in many cases you can no longer train to be a nurse or teacher on the job anymore and nowadays a university degree is the only way to gain entry to these professions. That combined with the fact that most employers aren’t willing to train staff and often demand prospective applicants to come fully formed employees. As if a university education does this.
He quotes British academic Joanna Williams in his lament against today’s scholar who says, ‘today’s students seek to have a degree rather than be learners’; they attend universities not to become independent thinkers but simply to claim their entitlement’. With many requiring a degree just to get a job, a liberal education in the traditional sense is not a priority.
I don’t think that graduates are automatically taking over the country in the way that he says they are. While there is an inner city “latte/chardonnay sipping set” that passes judgement of the life style of others does exist, I don’t think the clique is as big or as powerful as he makes it out to be.
Also, with the increase of people entering university and the change to the work environment means that there is a more diverse range of people attending university and I don’t think that students automatically join the “latte/chardonnay sipping set” upon graduation.
He does eventually admit that his nightmare has come true in that because of the growth of the university system since the 1950s, ‘two generations of students and now a third, have been deprived of the enjoyment of intellectual discovery; they follow ever narrower fields of study with fragile and subversive intellectual foundations, antithetical to the journey of a curious mind’. You might not like it but it is the way it is.
October 23, 2018
Read this after seeing it was on the holiday reading list of a number of our politicians. It both essentially references and updates Donald Horne's original "The Lucky Country" and provides and interesting insight from Nick Cater, born in the UK but who has been here since 1989, as to the changes in our culture. It covers religion, politics and the rise in the percentage of university qualified people in society - and what these mean for our future. We may be able to continue to rely on some luck - but we are also going to had to start applying some different thinking to seminal changes in our society and place in the world in future decades.
January 6, 2015
Written by a very right wing person me thinks.. Whilst the concepts are sound I think there's some fatal flaws. I think egalitarianism is the myth large corporates perpetuate to ensure the status quo remains.
October 24, 2013
A conclusion desperately searching for supporting argument.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews