What do you think?
Rate this book
The Lucky Country
When it was first published in 1964, 'The Lucky Country' caused a sensation. Horne took Australian society to task for its philistinism, provincialism and dependence. The book was a wake-up call to an unimaginative nation, an indictment of a country mired in mediocrity and manacled to its past.
300 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1964
150 people are currently reading
1441 people want to read
About the author
Donald Horne
56 books13 followersDonald Richmond Horne AO was an Australian journalist, writer, and public intellectual. He was editor of The Bulletin, The Observer, and Quadrant, and was best known for his 1964 book The Lucky Country.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews
February 8, 2026
Australia has long been characterised as a nation whose prosperity sits uneasily alongside doubts about its leadership. The most influential articulation of this view appears in Donald Horne’s The Lucky Country (1964), asserting that “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 so lack curiosity about the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise…. According to the rules, Australia has not deserved its good fortune.”
Australia was considered an innocent and happy country, personified by “a man in an open-necked shirt solemnly enjoying an ice-cream. His kiddy is beside him.” Horne, however, was concerned about Australia’s future. We were a “nation without a mind.” He argued that our intellectual life had no connection to practical life, which was so banal as to represent a “victory of the anti-mind.” Innovation and technology were adopted from overseas rather than created domestically. Australians were impervious to the vast array of challenges facing them, and the nation was moving “very slowly in doing anything about any of its problems.”
Australia—politically and socially—had ossified despite the vast changes affecting the world. There were no great debates about what Australia is or ought to be. Horne asserted that “there are few new men gathered together in the precincts of power to revisualise the images of the nation so that change may become possible.” The leaders seemed exhausted and so pleased by their achievements that they were unwilling to hear that they had become obsolete. “There is no longer in Australia a generally accepted public sense of a future.”
Taken as an assessment of its time, Horne’s polemical style is humorous and, for the most part, a fair critique of Australian society in the 1960s. The Lucky Country has since become a Penguin classic because it accurately assessed the changing political headwinds, and because it raised its head above the parapet in offering a self-critique of the country. This, in turn, gave Australians a language to question their success and its ongoing feasibility under extant policy, rather than simply celebrate it. We were a country that had not seriously acknowledged nor challenged its colonial mindset.
At the time, many—especially Menzies—considered themselves British. We were dominant in colonial practices that favoured exports to the mother country, namely agriculture. We had some of the worst innovation rates in the developed world outside of these sectors. Australians thought we were an island in the Atlantic, rather than Southeast Asia, and still enforced the White Australia Policy. Taken together, these attitudes and policies limited Australia’s capacity to imagine itself as an independent nation. We were, according to Horne, a provincial country that lacked an identity.
Yet there is an inherent tension in Horne’s argument when he states that “according to the rules, Australia has not deserved its good fortune.” What, then, were these rules? While Horne was right to diagnose Australia’s habits of complacency and intellectual thinness, his polemical intensity led him to understate the country’s relatively adroit governance, which enabled it to become one of the most prosperous nations in the world. There must have been some inherent wisdom within the ruling elite, reflected in a national way of life, that produced such outcomes.
Horne asserts that because Australia did not fight for its independence like the Americans or the French, it became successful by luck rather than vision. This is an odd claim, considering that the American War of Independence lasted eight years and that the French Revolution transmogrified into the Terror. Why endure such hardship when one can adopt the liberal institutions of Britain—which had taken hundreds of years to evolve, including civil war—and the apposite aspects of American federalism to suit Australia’s political needs? Indeed, this is precisely what Australia did.
These adopted institutions underpinned a robust democratic system that fostered individual prosperity, including an enviable work–life balance. Their significance was both constitutional and material. At the time The Lucky Country was published, Australia had one of the highest union membership rates in the world, with unions exercising significant political influence as the powerbrokers of the Labor Party. Horne, however, contends that “the unions play little part in what modern Australians are really interested in—getting homes, raising their children, going on holidays.”
This assessment is deeply flawed. The very purpose of unions is to protect workers’ rights, including secure employment and stable incomes that enable home ownership, regulated working hours that allow time to raise children, and paid leave that makes holidays possible. These liberties were fought for over more than a century and were achievable precisely because Australia preserved and strengthened its democratic ethos following independence. National prosperity was not a matter of luck alone, but of sustained labour and institutional continuity.
Horne also ignores Australia’s political stability when asserting a national culture of complacency. This is a curious oversight, considering the very nations he admires for their independence movements. France, in the post-war period, experienced significant social unrest as its colonial empire collapsed. The United States in the 1960s was marked by political violence and upheaval. By contrast, Australia’s effective governance, liberal democratic institutions, and a broadly shared ethos of giving others a “fair go” helped mitigate such upheavals and sustain democratic stability.
Of course, this assessment of Australia necessarily occludes the plight of First Nations people, who, at the time of publication, were not counted as citizens and generally lived in squalor. This exclusion was foundational to the stability being described. Horne was a loud dissenter from the great Australian silence, stating that the “savage” dispossession of the land “should remain on the conscience of every Australian.” He advocated a policy of “assimilation,” in which Aboriginal people were to attain the same manner of living as other Australians and live as members of a single Australian community.
This was a radical view at the time. Horne later revised his position to support self-determination as Indigenous rights advanced, a shift he articulated in a preface to a new edition of the book in the 1990s. He also reflects on the gendered language used to describe Australia. Returning to his depiction of Australia as a man eating an ice cream, he notes that “it was only when the second-wave-of-feminism books began to come out that the passage was reinterpreted, correctly, if retrospectively, as sexist.” Yet Horne expressed no regret about the enduring thesis of his book.
Horne argued that there were three challenges facing Australia: accepting “our place on the map,” recognising the need for “a revolution in economic priorities,” and undertaking “a bold redefinition of what the whole place adds up to now.” In the preface to my edition, Horne pillories the “long misuse of the phrase ‘the lucky country’, as if it were praise for Australia rather than a warning, [which] has been a tribute to the empty-mindedness of a mob of assorted public wafflers…. Twisting it around to mean the opposite of what was intended has silenced these warnings.”
It is worthwhile considering how Australia has fared in the sixty years since. Australia has significantly increased relations with Asia. China is our largest trading partner, with Japan, Korea, and India among the top five. The White Australia Policy has long been abolished, with Australian citizens of Asian descent constituting around 20% of our population. Australia is also a comprehensive strategic partner of the ASEAN. This is telling. Although we are more accepting of where we are on the map, we are not quite ready to say that we are an Asian nation.
Australia proudly proclaims its membership of the West, which has gradually expanded beyond its racial and geographic origins and its erstwhile settler colonies, to include military vassals of the American Empire in Japan, South Korea, and, to some extent, Taiwan. It is the US, and to a lesser extent Europe, that we look to for our security, most emblematically evinced via AUKUS. Even as the reliability of the US as an ally weakens, Australia has not looked to Asia to increase its security, but to Europe, with the Security and Defence Partnership being signed in mid-2025.
While this posture offers benefits such as shared culture and political and economic institutions, Horne argued that the American-Eurocentric worldview ultimately inhibits Australia’s development of an independent national identity. This immaturity was revealed by the failed 1999 republican referendum and Australia’s continued deference to American militarism in the 21st century. Horne anticipated a problem that persists today: Australia’s head of state remains in London, while its core geopolitical decisions are made in Washington.
Horne lamented Australia’s lack of innovation. Our role as an economy as part of the British Empire was to export primary industries for consumption like wool and wheat. This endures today, except it is now minerals that are exported. This is the crux of Australia’s prosperity, being founded on a literal gold mine. There has been little impetus to resolve our inherent lack of innovation, with Australia ranking 105th out of 145 on the Economic Complexity Index. Our research output is much better, yet we are less able than comparable countries to turn it into commercial success.
Relations with First Nations have indubitably improved over the last sixty years. Citizenship, land rights, and even a treaty in Victoria have been granted. However, they are the most incarcerated race in the world, have some of the highest suicide rates globally, and often live in third-world conditions despite residing in a first-world country. Only in the last couple of weeks, a man attempted to kill people at a protest against Australia Day, and it took over a week to declare that it was a terrorist attack. As Marcia Langton noted in response, the great Australian silence arguably endures.
In the 1990s preface, Horne noted that “those who attacked [the Mabo High Court decision] were gasping out one hopes are amongst the last expressions of white racist superiority in Australia…. In the case of Pauline Hanson, all the political elites knew how to behave - with one remarkable exception: John Howard, as prime minister.” Nonetheless, Horne declared that Australia had become “for the first time in its existence, a declaredly tolerant and diverse society.” Assessing this declaration in early-2026, Horne may have been premature in his declarations.
Ironically, Howard helped legitimise Hanson, who now draws on the nationalist and protectionist policies of the Menzies era, while the Liberals themselves have lost much of their identity and continue to lose support to the very force he enabled. This reflects Horne’s critique of 1960s complacency: although some reforms have been achieved, many remain contested and fragile. Horne’s proposals for redefining Australia and forging an independent identity have been only partially realised, so The Lucky Country continues to serve as a sober warning.
For more of my writing, check out my Substack: https://callumscolumn.substack.com/
Australia was considered an innocent and happy country, personified by “a man in an open-necked shirt solemnly enjoying an ice-cream. His kiddy is beside him.” Horne, however, was concerned about Australia’s future. We were a “nation without a mind.” He argued that our intellectual life had no connection to practical life, which was so banal as to represent a “victory of the anti-mind.” Innovation and technology were adopted from overseas rather than created domestically. Australians were impervious to the vast array of challenges facing them, and the nation was moving “very slowly in doing anything about any of its problems.”
Australia—politically and socially—had ossified despite the vast changes affecting the world. There were no great debates about what Australia is or ought to be. Horne asserted that “there are few new men gathered together in the precincts of power to revisualise the images of the nation so that change may become possible.” The leaders seemed exhausted and so pleased by their achievements that they were unwilling to hear that they had become obsolete. “There is no longer in Australia a generally accepted public sense of a future.”
Taken as an assessment of its time, Horne’s polemical style is humorous and, for the most part, a fair critique of Australian society in the 1960s. The Lucky Country has since become a Penguin classic because it accurately assessed the changing political headwinds, and because it raised its head above the parapet in offering a self-critique of the country. This, in turn, gave Australians a language to question their success and its ongoing feasibility under extant policy, rather than simply celebrate it. We were a country that had not seriously acknowledged nor challenged its colonial mindset.
At the time, many—especially Menzies—considered themselves British. We were dominant in colonial practices that favoured exports to the mother country, namely agriculture. We had some of the worst innovation rates in the developed world outside of these sectors. Australians thought we were an island in the Atlantic, rather than Southeast Asia, and still enforced the White Australia Policy. Taken together, these attitudes and policies limited Australia’s capacity to imagine itself as an independent nation. We were, according to Horne, a provincial country that lacked an identity.
Yet there is an inherent tension in Horne’s argument when he states that “according to the rules, Australia has not deserved its good fortune.” What, then, were these rules? While Horne was right to diagnose Australia’s habits of complacency and intellectual thinness, his polemical intensity led him to understate the country’s relatively adroit governance, which enabled it to become one of the most prosperous nations in the world. There must have been some inherent wisdom within the ruling elite, reflected in a national way of life, that produced such outcomes.
Horne asserts that because Australia did not fight for its independence like the Americans or the French, it became successful by luck rather than vision. This is an odd claim, considering that the American War of Independence lasted eight years and that the French Revolution transmogrified into the Terror. Why endure such hardship when one can adopt the liberal institutions of Britain—which had taken hundreds of years to evolve, including civil war—and the apposite aspects of American federalism to suit Australia’s political needs? Indeed, this is precisely what Australia did.
These adopted institutions underpinned a robust democratic system that fostered individual prosperity, including an enviable work–life balance. Their significance was both constitutional and material. At the time The Lucky Country was published, Australia had one of the highest union membership rates in the world, with unions exercising significant political influence as the powerbrokers of the Labor Party. Horne, however, contends that “the unions play little part in what modern Australians are really interested in—getting homes, raising their children, going on holidays.”
This assessment is deeply flawed. The very purpose of unions is to protect workers’ rights, including secure employment and stable incomes that enable home ownership, regulated working hours that allow time to raise children, and paid leave that makes holidays possible. These liberties were fought for over more than a century and were achievable precisely because Australia preserved and strengthened its democratic ethos following independence. National prosperity was not a matter of luck alone, but of sustained labour and institutional continuity.
Horne also ignores Australia’s political stability when asserting a national culture of complacency. This is a curious oversight, considering the very nations he admires for their independence movements. France, in the post-war period, experienced significant social unrest as its colonial empire collapsed. The United States in the 1960s was marked by political violence and upheaval. By contrast, Australia’s effective governance, liberal democratic institutions, and a broadly shared ethos of giving others a “fair go” helped mitigate such upheavals and sustain democratic stability.
Of course, this assessment of Australia necessarily occludes the plight of First Nations people, who, at the time of publication, were not counted as citizens and generally lived in squalor. This exclusion was foundational to the stability being described. Horne was a loud dissenter from the great Australian silence, stating that the “savage” dispossession of the land “should remain on the conscience of every Australian.” He advocated a policy of “assimilation,” in which Aboriginal people were to attain the same manner of living as other Australians and live as members of a single Australian community.
This was a radical view at the time. Horne later revised his position to support self-determination as Indigenous rights advanced, a shift he articulated in a preface to a new edition of the book in the 1990s. He also reflects on the gendered language used to describe Australia. Returning to his depiction of Australia as a man eating an ice cream, he notes that “it was only when the second-wave-of-feminism books began to come out that the passage was reinterpreted, correctly, if retrospectively, as sexist.” Yet Horne expressed no regret about the enduring thesis of his book.
Horne argued that there were three challenges facing Australia: accepting “our place on the map,” recognising the need for “a revolution in economic priorities,” and undertaking “a bold redefinition of what the whole place adds up to now.” In the preface to my edition, Horne pillories the “long misuse of the phrase ‘the lucky country’, as if it were praise for Australia rather than a warning, [which] has been a tribute to the empty-mindedness of a mob of assorted public wafflers…. Twisting it around to mean the opposite of what was intended has silenced these warnings.”
It is worthwhile considering how Australia has fared in the sixty years since. Australia has significantly increased relations with Asia. China is our largest trading partner, with Japan, Korea, and India among the top five. The White Australia Policy has long been abolished, with Australian citizens of Asian descent constituting around 20% of our population. Australia is also a comprehensive strategic partner of the ASEAN. This is telling. Although we are more accepting of where we are on the map, we are not quite ready to say that we are an Asian nation.
Australia proudly proclaims its membership of the West, which has gradually expanded beyond its racial and geographic origins and its erstwhile settler colonies, to include military vassals of the American Empire in Japan, South Korea, and, to some extent, Taiwan. It is the US, and to a lesser extent Europe, that we look to for our security, most emblematically evinced via AUKUS. Even as the reliability of the US as an ally weakens, Australia has not looked to Asia to increase its security, but to Europe, with the Security and Defence Partnership being signed in mid-2025.
While this posture offers benefits such as shared culture and political and economic institutions, Horne argued that the American-Eurocentric worldview ultimately inhibits Australia’s development of an independent national identity. This immaturity was revealed by the failed 1999 republican referendum and Australia’s continued deference to American militarism in the 21st century. Horne anticipated a problem that persists today: Australia’s head of state remains in London, while its core geopolitical decisions are made in Washington.
Horne lamented Australia’s lack of innovation. Our role as an economy as part of the British Empire was to export primary industries for consumption like wool and wheat. This endures today, except it is now minerals that are exported. This is the crux of Australia’s prosperity, being founded on a literal gold mine. There has been little impetus to resolve our inherent lack of innovation, with Australia ranking 105th out of 145 on the Economic Complexity Index. Our research output is much better, yet we are less able than comparable countries to turn it into commercial success.
Relations with First Nations have indubitably improved over the last sixty years. Citizenship, land rights, and even a treaty in Victoria have been granted. However, they are the most incarcerated race in the world, have some of the highest suicide rates globally, and often live in third-world conditions despite residing in a first-world country. Only in the last couple of weeks, a man attempted to kill people at a protest against Australia Day, and it took over a week to declare that it was a terrorist attack. As Marcia Langton noted in response, the great Australian silence arguably endures.
In the 1990s preface, Horne noted that “those who attacked [the Mabo High Court decision] were gasping out one hopes are amongst the last expressions of white racist superiority in Australia…. In the case of Pauline Hanson, all the political elites knew how to behave - with one remarkable exception: John Howard, as prime minister.” Nonetheless, Horne declared that Australia had become “for the first time in its existence, a declaredly tolerant and diverse society.” Assessing this declaration in early-2026, Horne may have been premature in his declarations.
Ironically, Howard helped legitimise Hanson, who now draws on the nationalist and protectionist policies of the Menzies era, while the Liberals themselves have lost much of their identity and continue to lose support to the very force he enabled. This reflects Horne’s critique of 1960s complacency: although some reforms have been achieved, many remain contested and fragile. Horne’s proposals for redefining Australia and forging an independent identity have been only partially realised, so The Lucky Country continues to serve as a sober warning.
For more of my writing, check out my Substack: https://callumscolumn.substack.com/
March 2, 2015
Pungent. Much of the analysis still applicable today 2015 with a conservative government in Canberra, a prime minister exhuming knighthoods on Australia Day. Is progress an illusion?
The chapter on Menzies, a valuable record for future reference.
The chapter 'Living with Asia' worth reading again today, gives an understanding of how Asia views Australia.
Other topics I'd highlight are:- Nation without a mind, The first suburban nation, Snobs, Women, Between Britain and America, Lost bearings, Provincial Australia, A Republic?, Men in power, Who runs Australia?, Forming Opinions, inc. Censors, Schools, Images of life, The press.
The chapter on Menzies, a valuable record for future reference.
The chapter 'Living with Asia' worth reading again today, gives an understanding of how Asia views Australia.
Other topics I'd highlight are:- Nation without a mind, The first suburban nation, Snobs, Women, Between Britain and America, Lost bearings, Provincial Australia, A Republic?, Men in power, Who runs Australia?, Forming Opinions, inc. Censors, Schools, Images of life, The press.
July 13, 2016
Mainly an interesting period piece, but always good to know where hackneyed phrases come from, particularly if, as in this case, they get misused: Australia is a lucky country, it turns out, because even though our politicians and other 'leadership' types are entirely incompetent, the state somehow struggles on. Horne writes well, and he's funny, but it's unclear to me whether his fundamental argument was true: was Australia really a country being held back by a lack of ambition and gusto at the highest levels? Was Australia really being held back at all? In cultural terms, yes, but keep in mind that when Horne published this, White had just published Voss and Riders in the Chariot, modernist art was getting going, and Peter Sculthorpe was about to publish Sun Music I. So things were really on the upswing. Horne's book itself might have been a part of that.
On the downside, it's very irritating to read a book this long that avoids proper nouns almost entirely. I say White had just published Voss, and Horne does mention that novel--but not in the section on literature. There are few to no names at all, regardless of the context. So one doesn't really learn much about who or what Horne thought was to blame, or who was helping, or even that there were people in Australia in the late '50s and early '60s at all.
More amusingly, he says the Young Liberals were energetic, while the other political parties were totally moribund. Somewhere, Whitlam is laughing.
On the downside, it's very irritating to read a book this long that avoids proper nouns almost entirely. I say White had just published Voss, and Horne does mention that novel--but not in the section on literature. There are few to no names at all, regardless of the context. So one doesn't really learn much about who or what Horne thought was to blame, or who was helping, or even that there were people in Australia in the late '50s and early '60s at all.
More amusingly, he says the Young Liberals were energetic, while the other political parties were totally moribund. Somewhere, Whitlam is laughing.
July 10, 2016
"The lucky country" is a phrase any Australian is familiar with, one often applied with beaming happiness to things like Vegemite advertisements or Australia Day speeches. Yet few Australians would be able to quote the sentence it originally appeared in: "Australia is a lucky country, run mainly by second-rate people who share its luck."
Donald Horne wrote The Lucky Country in the early 1960s as a stark assessment of a nation he felt had lost its way. Australia possessed fabulous natural resources and enjoyed one of the highest standards of living in the world; yet, unlike other advanced nations, he felt it had done little to earn its success. It rested on its luck and was unimaginative, uninspired and unexceptional. It was almost a dependency, looking to Britain and the United States to tell it what to do and unable to shake the feeling that it was an unimportant backwater, albeit a pleasant one. It reminded me of an assessment by Ted Simon in Jupiter's Travels, when he visited Australia in the early 1970s:
Like most people everywhere they spent most of their time just getting by, but there was no collective dream or mythology that told them what it was they were supposed to be doing.
Now, The Lucky Country was written half a century ago and much of it is irrelevant today - the influence of the Australian Communist Party, the White Australia Policy, and the tension between Catholics and Protestants, to name a few things. But a larger portion of the book is surprisingly relevant.
The most striking thing to a modern reader is how little has changed. Horne knew Australia was at a tipping point in the 1960s, like much of the world, and that if it was ever going to seize its own destiny, that was the time. And indeed, the 1970s saw the election of Gough Whitlam, a prime minister who stood up to Washington, engaged with Asia, introduced universal healthcare and began the process of recognising Aboriginal land rights. But he was dismissed after only a few short years, and Australia sank back into a swamp of lazy complacency. And now here we are in 2012: still not a republic, still looking to America and Europe for guidance in cultural, political and economic matters, and still relying entirely on our natural resources to maintain our economy. Australia was renowned in 2008 for being the only OECD country which did not enter recession, but virtually the only reason this was so was because our economy is centred around selling ore to China. How lucky.
And our current leaders hardly inspire confidence - indeed, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott regularly poll less than 40% as preferred prime ministers, among the lowest ratings of all time. Say what you will about John Howard and Kevin Rudd, but they were both titanic figures who led with vision (my vision of hell, in the case of Howard, but vision nonetheless) and imposed themselves mightily upon the Australian psyche. Gillard and Abbott, on the other hand, feel like understudies thrust into the spotlight. They might make able politicians, but in the grand narrative of history, they will never go down as great leaders.
So the Australia of today is strikingly similar to the Australia of The Lucky Country. It reminded me of what Nick Bryant, the BBC's Sydney correspondent for many years, wrote upon leaving the job in 2011:
The anger and hostility [in Australian politics] is currently being compared with the mood in 1975 during the Gough Whitlam dismissal crisis. But it also has a late-60s feel - a post-Menzies, pre-Whitlam interlude when the country appeared to be treading water, and waiting for something to happen.
The curious thing when reading The Lucky Country is that Horne seemed to be optimistic, to believe that change really was around the corner, that the next generation - John Howard's generation - would prove to be far less stagnant and conservative than their predecessors and lead Australia into a bold new future. (He seemed particularly convinced that a republic would happen any year now.) That didn't happen. And while I myself am optimistic that Australia might grow up a little in the coming decades, in an era of global connectivity and an emerging Asia and a rising Green Party, I can't help but feel that perhaps we'll just see a repeat of the last 50 years.
The question is whether this time our luck will run out.
Donald Horne wrote The Lucky Country in the early 1960s as a stark assessment of a nation he felt had lost its way. Australia possessed fabulous natural resources and enjoyed one of the highest standards of living in the world; yet, unlike other advanced nations, he felt it had done little to earn its success. It rested on its luck and was unimaginative, uninspired and unexceptional. It was almost a dependency, looking to Britain and the United States to tell it what to do and unable to shake the feeling that it was an unimportant backwater, albeit a pleasant one. It reminded me of an assessment by Ted Simon in Jupiter's Travels, when he visited Australia in the early 1970s:
Like most people everywhere they spent most of their time just getting by, but there was no collective dream or mythology that told them what it was they were supposed to be doing.
Now, The Lucky Country was written half a century ago and much of it is irrelevant today - the influence of the Australian Communist Party, the White Australia Policy, and the tension between Catholics and Protestants, to name a few things. But a larger portion of the book is surprisingly relevant.
The most striking thing to a modern reader is how little has changed. Horne knew Australia was at a tipping point in the 1960s, like much of the world, and that if it was ever going to seize its own destiny, that was the time. And indeed, the 1970s saw the election of Gough Whitlam, a prime minister who stood up to Washington, engaged with Asia, introduced universal healthcare and began the process of recognising Aboriginal land rights. But he was dismissed after only a few short years, and Australia sank back into a swamp of lazy complacency. And now here we are in 2012: still not a republic, still looking to America and Europe for guidance in cultural, political and economic matters, and still relying entirely on our natural resources to maintain our economy. Australia was renowned in 2008 for being the only OECD country which did not enter recession, but virtually the only reason this was so was because our economy is centred around selling ore to China. How lucky.
And our current leaders hardly inspire confidence - indeed, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott regularly poll less than 40% as preferred prime ministers, among the lowest ratings of all time. Say what you will about John Howard and Kevin Rudd, but they were both titanic figures who led with vision (my vision of hell, in the case of Howard, but vision nonetheless) and imposed themselves mightily upon the Australian psyche. Gillard and Abbott, on the other hand, feel like understudies thrust into the spotlight. They might make able politicians, but in the grand narrative of history, they will never go down as great leaders.
So the Australia of today is strikingly similar to the Australia of The Lucky Country. It reminded me of what Nick Bryant, the BBC's Sydney correspondent for many years, wrote upon leaving the job in 2011:
The anger and hostility [in Australian politics] is currently being compared with the mood in 1975 during the Gough Whitlam dismissal crisis. But it also has a late-60s feel - a post-Menzies, pre-Whitlam interlude when the country appeared to be treading water, and waiting for something to happen.
The curious thing when reading The Lucky Country is that Horne seemed to be optimistic, to believe that change really was around the corner, that the next generation - John Howard's generation - would prove to be far less stagnant and conservative than their predecessors and lead Australia into a bold new future. (He seemed particularly convinced that a republic would happen any year now.) That didn't happen. And while I myself am optimistic that Australia might grow up a little in the coming decades, in an era of global connectivity and an emerging Asia and a rising Green Party, I can't help but feel that perhaps we'll just see a repeat of the last 50 years.
The question is whether this time our luck will run out.
February 2, 2011
2 February 2011
Update
One of the things that makes Australians feel so lucky is, having satisfactorily subjugated the indigenous population, it has never really faced an external threat. We have sent, I suspect, more than our fair share of men to fight other people's wars, if you like, but despite Japanese bombing of part of Australia in WWII, we are rarely concerned with such issues.
And yet.
We have this incredible balancing enemy within: the weather. To have watched the bushfires a couple of years ago in Victoria where two hundred died, whole towns razed to the ground; the devastating floods a couple of weeks ago in Queensland and then Victoria where a vast unnatural inland unanchored sea floated about; followed by what is happening this moment as I write:
The cyclone that is hitting Queensland, which sounds like it will be even worse when that is hard to imagine.
Natural enemies abound and they have their impact in unexpected ways. Julia Gillard's government is in a precarious position at the best of times. Evidently rallying together is not on the mind of the Liberal (ie conservative) Opposition leader. He is begging for donations to finance a fight against the idea of a national once off tax levy to pay for the rebuilding which must next take place. It is almost enough to make one laugh.
--------------------
So I'm sitting on the pavement at the Marion Shopping Centre, covered in blood and thinking, yes, indeed, Lucky Country.
My mother had caught her foot on some loose pavement, and fallen down hitting her head which bled horribly for a while.
Two lovely girls independently stop. One of them gives me her mobile so I can call a friend to come and get us. The other one gives me a packet of tissues. Shane, Security from the Shopping Centre comes out and deals with phoning an ambulance while dishing out sensible advice and first aid.
The ambulance comes and a couple of great guys give my mother a thorough examination, the bleeding has stopped, they think she can go home as long as she is happy to.
Honestly. We are the luckiest people in the world to live in this country.
I'm with Mikael on this one: 'who cares if donald horne meant it ironically, it bloody is a fucken lucky cuntree' http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...
Update
One of the things that makes Australians feel so lucky is, having satisfactorily subjugated the indigenous population, it has never really faced an external threat. We have sent, I suspect, more than our fair share of men to fight other people's wars, if you like, but despite Japanese bombing of part of Australia in WWII, we are rarely concerned with such issues.
And yet.
We have this incredible balancing enemy within: the weather. To have watched the bushfires a couple of years ago in Victoria where two hundred died, whole towns razed to the ground; the devastating floods a couple of weeks ago in Queensland and then Victoria where a vast unnatural inland unanchored sea floated about; followed by what is happening this moment as I write:
The cyclone that is hitting Queensland, which sounds like it will be even worse when that is hard to imagine.
Natural enemies abound and they have their impact in unexpected ways. Julia Gillard's government is in a precarious position at the best of times. Evidently rallying together is not on the mind of the Liberal (ie conservative) Opposition leader. He is begging for donations to finance a fight against the idea of a national once off tax levy to pay for the rebuilding which must next take place. It is almost enough to make one laugh.
--------------------
So I'm sitting on the pavement at the Marion Shopping Centre, covered in blood and thinking, yes, indeed, Lucky Country.
My mother had caught her foot on some loose pavement, and fallen down hitting her head which bled horribly for a while.
Two lovely girls independently stop. One of them gives me her mobile so I can call a friend to come and get us. The other one gives me a packet of tissues. Shane, Security from the Shopping Centre comes out and deals with phoning an ambulance while dishing out sensible advice and first aid.
The ambulance comes and a couple of great guys give my mother a thorough examination, the bleeding has stopped, they think she can go home as long as she is happy to.
Honestly. We are the luckiest people in the world to live in this country.
I'm with Mikael on this one: 'who cares if donald horne meant it ironically, it bloody is a fucken lucky cuntree' http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...
February 24, 2008
who cares if donald horne meant it ironically, it bloody is a fucken lucky cuntree
July 20, 2016
Funny - I don't feel very lucky.
I know! Horne was just being sarcastic, much like Men At Work were when they wrote "Land Down Under".
But really, I don't feel lucky. We’re fast heading for a healthcare crisis, housing is unaffordable for most of the population, we are the most over-taxed, and over-governed nation in the world, yet we hand out way too much in welfare payments and of course, there’s Australia’s “Greed Tax”. Greed Tax? Anything we import (which is almost everything because we’ve imported a hell of a lot of unemployment) ends up costing us twice as much as it does in America or the UK...or anywhere else. Questions have been asked and no satisfactory answers forthcoming, because our complacency allows it. It explains why internet purchases are booming here. But now...the government is figuring out a way to tax those too.
I digress. Some of what Donald Horne wrote about in the ’60’s is still relevant. If it weren’t for this country’s incredible natural resources, we’d be a third world country hanging off the UK’s apron strings, or more likely, we would have been invaded long ago. It also seems we will never be ready for independence and stuck in the role of a country with “strings attached” . Strings pulled by our US friends. Apathy rules. Greed drives us now (and sport - any sport).
Must be feeling negative today.
I know! Horne was just being sarcastic, much like Men At Work were when they wrote "Land Down Under".
But really, I don't feel lucky. We’re fast heading for a healthcare crisis, housing is unaffordable for most of the population, we are the most over-taxed, and over-governed nation in the world, yet we hand out way too much in welfare payments and of course, there’s Australia’s “Greed Tax”. Greed Tax? Anything we import (which is almost everything because we’ve imported a hell of a lot of unemployment) ends up costing us twice as much as it does in America or the UK...or anywhere else. Questions have been asked and no satisfactory answers forthcoming, because our complacency allows it. It explains why internet purchases are booming here. But now...the government is figuring out a way to tax those too.
I digress. Some of what Donald Horne wrote about in the ’60’s is still relevant. If it weren’t for this country’s incredible natural resources, we’d be a third world country hanging off the UK’s apron strings, or more likely, we would have been invaded long ago. It also seems we will never be ready for independence and stuck in the role of a country with “strings attached” . Strings pulled by our US friends. Apathy rules. Greed drives us now (and sport - any sport).
Must be feeling negative today.
January 10, 2022
Donald Horne gave Australia the kick in the arse it required in 1964, with this book. Well-traveled, Horne focused on Australia's racism, provincialism, and to some extent, sexism, and a lack of intellectual and cultural leadership. Ahead of his time, Horne places our country within Asia, and examines international trade and political systems. Our racist prime minister and defence minister should be forced to read this book, and it's sequel.
August 26, 2023
4.5 Stars!
“Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second-rate people who share its luck.”
This is a book I’ve wanted to read for a while, and it doesn’t take long to see why this has remained such an enduring piece of work. Horne has a deep and thorough understanding of his country and the mentality of it. He describes his homeland and the people within it, along with their hopes, dreams, fears and all the rest with clarity, perception and insight.
I really enjoyed his style, and there’s some lovely writing in here, his prose and his descriptions of each of the then biggest cities of Australia. He doesn’t hold back on what he perceives to be some of the biggest limitations of the nation and its mindset, and he is particularly ruthless on Australia longest serving PM, Robert Menzies.
This is a snapshot of Australia in the early to mid-60s, a nation in transition, stuck between the powerful influences of Uncle Sam and Mother England, and all the complexities that come along with that baggage. Enriched by colourful and expansive descriptions of the cities all the way to the sun baked interior, this stubbornly resists stereotypes and often confronts them producing some memorable detail as well as some finely crafted points.
In here we find a nation which remains shackled by its own toxic masculinity and its anti-intellectualism and a deep distrust of foreigners, a country which remains uncertain about its identity and its place in the wider world, and just as confused about what the future might bring.
It’s easy to see why this remains one of the most popular books written on Australia by an Australian and it still more than holds its own six decades on proving to still be a fresh and engaging read.
“Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second-rate people who share its luck.”
This is a book I’ve wanted to read for a while, and it doesn’t take long to see why this has remained such an enduring piece of work. Horne has a deep and thorough understanding of his country and the mentality of it. He describes his homeland and the people within it, along with their hopes, dreams, fears and all the rest with clarity, perception and insight.
I really enjoyed his style, and there’s some lovely writing in here, his prose and his descriptions of each of the then biggest cities of Australia. He doesn’t hold back on what he perceives to be some of the biggest limitations of the nation and its mindset, and he is particularly ruthless on Australia longest serving PM, Robert Menzies.
This is a snapshot of Australia in the early to mid-60s, a nation in transition, stuck between the powerful influences of Uncle Sam and Mother England, and all the complexities that come along with that baggage. Enriched by colourful and expansive descriptions of the cities all the way to the sun baked interior, this stubbornly resists stereotypes and often confronts them producing some memorable detail as well as some finely crafted points.
In here we find a nation which remains shackled by its own toxic masculinity and its anti-intellectualism and a deep distrust of foreigners, a country which remains uncertain about its identity and its place in the wider world, and just as confused about what the future might bring.
It’s easy to see why this remains one of the most popular books written on Australia by an Australian and it still more than holds its own six decades on proving to still be a fresh and engaging read.
August 5, 2024
“Australia has not been a country of great innovation or originality. It has exploited the innovations of others and much of its boasting is that of a parasite.”
September 11, 2025
The greatest critique on Australia I have ever read. It's hard to summarise, because he goes through everything with incredible layers of nuance and detail. For something written in the 1960's it is a timeless work. Many of the problems he mentioned then, still exist today. He discusses the economy, administration, work life, politics, the communist party, religion, intellectual life, aboriginal affairs, trade, military, and more. To give a summary of his main point, Australian in the upper echelons of society are mediocre, and that we've inherited our ideas from Europe, Britain, and America. That we lack a cohesive intellectual tradition that binds the people together, we have an amnesia of the past, we copy other people's models and ideas, we have no innovation, our technological advancement is copied from the US, we are bought off by foreign firms, our intellectuals aren't cross disciplinary but are siloed off into specialisations with no relevance between the public and the higher ups, that the youth culture is homogeneous. It doesn't seem like the 1960's at all. It almost seems like a timeless problem that we have in ths country that he is referring to. Everything is mediocre, he calls Australians stupid and dumb at one point in the book. A deeply cynical but strangely wise critique. He sees the future of Australia as being one that increases migration of Asians, with Asians enriching the intellectual tradition, and with intermarriage helping migrants assimilate, and that racial change is Australia's "Destiny", quite prophetic words given that the immigration has increased to such a high level in the modern age. Whether this demographic shift will help Australian identity, I don't know. It might disappear altogether or become something new entirely.
I highly recommend every Australian read this, regardless of their position on the political or religious spectrum.
I highly recommend every Australian read this, regardless of their position on the political or religious spectrum.
July 21, 2018
We are now fifty odd years since The Lucky Country's publication, and it's hard to see what all the fuss was about. Donald Horne provides rambling short essays about a dozen aspects of society (a form many of his other publications also take) . His greatest intellectual strength is a non-doctrinaire opinion, but other than not saying what has already been said, it's unclear what is valuable about what he does say.
If you've heard the book's most famous line, "Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second-rate people" you know most of the content. I hesitate to call it an 'argument' because the book's central theme is pursued in the same way as it offers short asides: quickly asserted in broad, blurry generalities. Where Horne does tackle specifics, such as his disdain of Menzies, he can write with some verve. But generally The Lucky Country is as languid and lazy as the country he describes.
I remember trying to read this "classic" at least twice before, and a bookmark 30-odd pages in suggests I tried a third time a few years back. I only pressed through this time since I'm trying to get a better sense of Australia in the 1960s for a piece of writing. But I don't feel much closer having reached its end. Time is always unkind to works targeted towards the contemporary. The impact of the book proves it resonated back then. But today, at least in my reading of it, the vibrations have rung silent and all we are left with is a historical shell.
If you've heard the book's most famous line, "Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second-rate people" you know most of the content. I hesitate to call it an 'argument' because the book's central theme is pursued in the same way as it offers short asides: quickly asserted in broad, blurry generalities. Where Horne does tackle specifics, such as his disdain of Menzies, he can write with some verve. But generally The Lucky Country is as languid and lazy as the country he describes.
I remember trying to read this "classic" at least twice before, and a bookmark 30-odd pages in suggests I tried a third time a few years back. I only pressed through this time since I'm trying to get a better sense of Australia in the 1960s for a piece of writing. But I don't feel much closer having reached its end. Time is always unkind to works targeted towards the contemporary. The impact of the book proves it resonated back then. But today, at least in my reading of it, the vibrations have rung silent and all we are left with is a historical shell.
June 23, 2022
some amazing insight in here on the direction australia has travelled and still continues to travel. i think the author is fairly prophetic about topics such as the arts, culture, education and general attitude. unfortunately to get to any of that you have to read about such topical issues of communism, global trade and labour unions. the chapters on 60s politics are just as boring as politics today. this is however a great resource for 60s attitude, unfortunately much surrounding women and indigenous people is flown through or disregarded ironically a lot like the australia this author seems to despise.
August 1, 2024
A bit too dumb for this book at times but interesting + some parts eerily relevant still + author is funny
Thx @callimopie ❤️
Thx @callimopie ❤️
July 21, 2023
A really evocative read on the ill found “luck” Australians continue to believe in since the book’s publication. Covers a lot of ground but at times I wish it did so in more depth. Also seemed irrelevant in very few parts but the chapters that sparkled made the entire read worthwhile. Would be interesting to read Horne’s take on 2023 Australia with a side by side comparison of his predictions.
April 10, 2024
Excellent
January 7, 2018
Horne's controversial 1964 book is a problematic read in 2018, because at times one is expected to know and understand the Australia that he was writing about, and at others one is diverted or focused on how different (or same) contemporary Australia is to the vision he posited 54 years ago.
The first thing that does need to be said is that Horne's criticisms 'feel' valid, insofar as they are the starting points for much of the critical discourse about Australia since the book was published. Those Australians who have looked askance at our nation, its body politic, culture, society, economy, geopolitics etc have either echoed, reconfigured or riffed off the critiques Horne made. When one reads the book you can hear echoes of the voices of Paul Keating for example. Also, from my own experience as someone who was born just after the book was published, I can recall with significant clarity aspects of the Australia that Donald Horne describes being still in effect in the 1970s and 1980s, and of course not entirely eradicated since the turn of the century.
If one is to take two central arguments of the book, i.e. that Australia is led and organised by mediocrities, and that it needs to realign its engagement with the multiple facets of 'Asia', then I think it would be safe to say we have not done well on the first account but have done much better on the second. I suspect that Horne would see the likes of Pauline Hanson and Lyle Shelton as being characters that would fit right at home in the mediocre, isolationist Australia he describes.
I would suggest however that Horne is not always right about both the Australia he knew as well as the future that he posits for the country. It is surprising how vapid and shallow Horne is when it comes to examining Australia's migrant history and the (then) recent influx of non-Anglo European immigrants. He also also less substantive than a modern reader would wish when it comes to his assessment of indigenous issues.
Another aspect of the book which is both a strength and a weakness is 'The Lucky Country' is at times like a compilation of op.ed. pieces written by a very cynical and idiosyncratic observer who has set himself a little too apart from his subject. Obviously the book is a flag post in post-WW2 Australian literature and analysis, however I wonder how much of its impact is because it takes such a big axe to then contemporary shibboleths about Australian exceptionalism. I would argue that a more learned, less opinionated series of articles on the subjects Horne raises would be more credible as criticism, though obviously less engaging for the public.
The prose in 'The Lucky Country' is mostly engaging, though at times Horne writes overly complex and semi-redundant passages that might make the readers' eyes glass over (such as his discussion of business and the economy). At other times he works with a clear and accurate language that cleavers his subject. Also, this book is not one that requires great hours of contemplative reading; it is a relatively brief work that moves from topic to topic with much ease.
Perhaps the most important value of 'The Lucky Country' in 2018 is two-fold; first as a historical document it presents a fascinating vision of Australia that those born since it was written or in the future can read and critique with alternate sources. Secondly, this book can be used a yardstick to measure how far Australia has come since 1964, how much it has stayed the same, and if in fact it has regressed.
I would suggest anyone with a serious interest in Australian history and/or its recent political, economic, social and cultural development should read 'The Lucky Country'
The first thing that does need to be said is that Horne's criticisms 'feel' valid, insofar as they are the starting points for much of the critical discourse about Australia since the book was published. Those Australians who have looked askance at our nation, its body politic, culture, society, economy, geopolitics etc have either echoed, reconfigured or riffed off the critiques Horne made. When one reads the book you can hear echoes of the voices of Paul Keating for example. Also, from my own experience as someone who was born just after the book was published, I can recall with significant clarity aspects of the Australia that Donald Horne describes being still in effect in the 1970s and 1980s, and of course not entirely eradicated since the turn of the century.
If one is to take two central arguments of the book, i.e. that Australia is led and organised by mediocrities, and that it needs to realign its engagement with the multiple facets of 'Asia', then I think it would be safe to say we have not done well on the first account but have done much better on the second. I suspect that Horne would see the likes of Pauline Hanson and Lyle Shelton as being characters that would fit right at home in the mediocre, isolationist Australia he describes.
I would suggest however that Horne is not always right about both the Australia he knew as well as the future that he posits for the country. It is surprising how vapid and shallow Horne is when it comes to examining Australia's migrant history and the (then) recent influx of non-Anglo European immigrants. He also also less substantive than a modern reader would wish when it comes to his assessment of indigenous issues.
Another aspect of the book which is both a strength and a weakness is 'The Lucky Country' is at times like a compilation of op.ed. pieces written by a very cynical and idiosyncratic observer who has set himself a little too apart from his subject. Obviously the book is a flag post in post-WW2 Australian literature and analysis, however I wonder how much of its impact is because it takes such a big axe to then contemporary shibboleths about Australian exceptionalism. I would argue that a more learned, less opinionated series of articles on the subjects Horne raises would be more credible as criticism, though obviously less engaging for the public.
The prose in 'The Lucky Country' is mostly engaging, though at times Horne writes overly complex and semi-redundant passages that might make the readers' eyes glass over (such as his discussion of business and the economy). At other times he works with a clear and accurate language that cleavers his subject. Also, this book is not one that requires great hours of contemplative reading; it is a relatively brief work that moves from topic to topic with much ease.
Perhaps the most important value of 'The Lucky Country' in 2018 is two-fold; first as a historical document it presents a fascinating vision of Australia that those born since it was written or in the future can read and critique with alternate sources. Secondly, this book can be used a yardstick to measure how far Australia has come since 1964, how much it has stayed the same, and if in fact it has regressed.
I would suggest anyone with a serious interest in Australian history and/or its recent political, economic, social and cultural development should read 'The Lucky Country'
August 20, 2023
Not Particularly Flattering
16 August 2023
You know, it is not surprising that the media have co-opted the title of a book that is rather critical of Australia and turned it into something to be proud of, but the reality is that we are indeed a lucky country because there are many countries out there that have been given much more and have produced much less. Like, Australia was really only a side product of the British Empire because they needed a place to dump their convicts. Even then they weren’t the first Europeans to discover the place. The Dutch, who had known, and mapped, Australia much earlier, didn’t even bother setting up a port for their ships to stop at on the way to the East Indies.
The full quote is that Australia is a Lucky Country, led by second-rate men who share in its luck. Looking at the state of our politics, and our pressure groups, I completely understand, and honestly nothing has changed since the book was written back in the 60s. Hell, even Australia’s longest-serving Prime Minister turned out to be pretty useless, and the only reason he kept on getting elected was that the opposition was in a complete shambles. In fact, it got to the point that just getting elected was good enough for the party leadership.
The really frustrating thing is that even if we get a half-decent Prime Minister elected, they don’t last, and are frustrated at every turn, not by the people, but by the elite who pretty much pull the strings. Even if they do manage to implement some policies, once the conservatives get elected they pretty much start ripping everything up. The reality is that there is no boldness in our politicians because they learn pretty early on that being bold is a quick road to a quick exit. Fortunately, the punters have started to get sick of that rubbish and we are now seeing minor parties being elevated to the halls of power.
So, why do we get such mediocre leaders – well, Horne points out that the only way to get to a position of influence, such as a ministry, is to spend years warming a seat, and occasionally handling citizen queries – but then again you have staff to deal with that. Mind you, what is even worse is that when a politician gets a ministry, they are so busy that they never have any opportunity to meet with their constituents. However, some of them are good and do respond (though they are usually the backbenchers, namely because they don’t have anything better to do).
One of the reasons that I do prefer Labour over the Coalition is because the Coalition is basically stuck in an era that has long past. In their mind Asia is an annoyance that we have to deal with, and they don’t have time to deal with all of the problems that the South Pacific has to deal with. Labour at least accepts that we live in a multipolar world, and all of our traditional allies sit on the other side of the world.
That wasn’t always the case, but then World War II, and the Vietnam War, changed all of that. While the war in the Pacific was in part a Sino-Japanese War, it was also a war against Western colonial oppression. The main reason that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour was because they wanted to cripple the United States before invading the Philippines (which at the time was a US protectorate). The Chinese Civil War was pretty much the same – it was a war between the Chinese people (being the communists) against the Western-backed government. Okay, things have changed, but the end result of World War II was that Europe was effectively expelled from the Asian continent, yet there are still people here that have this belief that Europe will come and protect us. To be honest, ever since I was a kid we have known that we are on our own, but the people in power seem to be oblivious to this.
Okay, we do have a strong relationship with the United States, and it turns out that they have a vested interest in having us remain who we are, and we have a vested interest in keeping them onside, since their navy keeps the direct trade route between our East Coast, and their west Coast, open. Mind you, things have changed a lot, especially since Horne finished is last edition – we now have China as a world power, and are being hemmed in by the Americans by sea. Sure, Japan was occupied, but since the US was never an occupying power, they ended up withdrawing, however when the communists won the civil war in China it became evident that they still needed influence in the region – of which Australia plays a very important role.
I still remember a time when Japan was one of our most important trading partners – it was a world economic power – however these days it is basically a US aircraft carrier in East Asia. Singapore is fiercely independent, as are the other countries in the area. I remember Indonesia being referred to as ‘the arc of instability’ but I’m not entirely sure if that is the case anymore. Honestly, I’m not even sure if much has changed, considering most people's image of Asia is white beaches and good food.
Well, not quite – things have changed dramatically. First of all, Australia has opened up – back in the era of the White Australia Policy there was a resentment, we had land, we were incredibly wealthy, but our borders were pretty much closed to everybody except for the English and the Americans (and Australia, when you consider its immigration laws, is still notoriously difficult to get into – much like the United States). I can understand the resentment, especially considering that a lot of Asia is quite crowded, yet the reality is that 90% of Australia is desert, and we simply cannot support a huge population.
Still, the Australia of my childhood, and the Australia of now is a much different place. I think we are starting to accept our position in the world, though of course we still have a bunch of second-rate men ruling from Canberra. Like, Labour is still tied down by its interest groups, and we tend to forget that they aren’t the party of the intellectuals, they are the party of the working person – which in Australia is mining. While they are progressive in a lot of ways, and realise that we need to work with our neighbours as opposed to pining for a world that has long gone.
Yeah, it was a pretty good book, and quite enlightening, and it was interesting actually discovering that Menzies was actually a bit of a tool (he got dumped as Prime Minister while he was in England, and was literally just about to hand leadership of Australia over to Winston Churchill). In fact, I can understand why the Howard years were so painful, and that was because he literally took after Robert Menzies – yeah, he pretty much did nothing, and just coasted along on Australia’s luck, and the fact that the Labour Party were way to disorganised to get rid of him.
16 August 2023
You know, it is not surprising that the media have co-opted the title of a book that is rather critical of Australia and turned it into something to be proud of, but the reality is that we are indeed a lucky country because there are many countries out there that have been given much more and have produced much less. Like, Australia was really only a side product of the British Empire because they needed a place to dump their convicts. Even then they weren’t the first Europeans to discover the place. The Dutch, who had known, and mapped, Australia much earlier, didn’t even bother setting up a port for their ships to stop at on the way to the East Indies.
The full quote is that Australia is a Lucky Country, led by second-rate men who share in its luck. Looking at the state of our politics, and our pressure groups, I completely understand, and honestly nothing has changed since the book was written back in the 60s. Hell, even Australia’s longest-serving Prime Minister turned out to be pretty useless, and the only reason he kept on getting elected was that the opposition was in a complete shambles. In fact, it got to the point that just getting elected was good enough for the party leadership.
The really frustrating thing is that even if we get a half-decent Prime Minister elected, they don’t last, and are frustrated at every turn, not by the people, but by the elite who pretty much pull the strings. Even if they do manage to implement some policies, once the conservatives get elected they pretty much start ripping everything up. The reality is that there is no boldness in our politicians because they learn pretty early on that being bold is a quick road to a quick exit. Fortunately, the punters have started to get sick of that rubbish and we are now seeing minor parties being elevated to the halls of power.
So, why do we get such mediocre leaders – well, Horne points out that the only way to get to a position of influence, such as a ministry, is to spend years warming a seat, and occasionally handling citizen queries – but then again you have staff to deal with that. Mind you, what is even worse is that when a politician gets a ministry, they are so busy that they never have any opportunity to meet with their constituents. However, some of them are good and do respond (though they are usually the backbenchers, namely because they don’t have anything better to do).
One of the reasons that I do prefer Labour over the Coalition is because the Coalition is basically stuck in an era that has long past. In their mind Asia is an annoyance that we have to deal with, and they don’t have time to deal with all of the problems that the South Pacific has to deal with. Labour at least accepts that we live in a multipolar world, and all of our traditional allies sit on the other side of the world.
That wasn’t always the case, but then World War II, and the Vietnam War, changed all of that. While the war in the Pacific was in part a Sino-Japanese War, it was also a war against Western colonial oppression. The main reason that the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour was because they wanted to cripple the United States before invading the Philippines (which at the time was a US protectorate). The Chinese Civil War was pretty much the same – it was a war between the Chinese people (being the communists) against the Western-backed government. Okay, things have changed, but the end result of World War II was that Europe was effectively expelled from the Asian continent, yet there are still people here that have this belief that Europe will come and protect us. To be honest, ever since I was a kid we have known that we are on our own, but the people in power seem to be oblivious to this.
Okay, we do have a strong relationship with the United States, and it turns out that they have a vested interest in having us remain who we are, and we have a vested interest in keeping them onside, since their navy keeps the direct trade route between our East Coast, and their west Coast, open. Mind you, things have changed a lot, especially since Horne finished is last edition – we now have China as a world power, and are being hemmed in by the Americans by sea. Sure, Japan was occupied, but since the US was never an occupying power, they ended up withdrawing, however when the communists won the civil war in China it became evident that they still needed influence in the region – of which Australia plays a very important role.
I still remember a time when Japan was one of our most important trading partners – it was a world economic power – however these days it is basically a US aircraft carrier in East Asia. Singapore is fiercely independent, as are the other countries in the area. I remember Indonesia being referred to as ‘the arc of instability’ but I’m not entirely sure if that is the case anymore. Honestly, I’m not even sure if much has changed, considering most people's image of Asia is white beaches and good food.
Well, not quite – things have changed dramatically. First of all, Australia has opened up – back in the era of the White Australia Policy there was a resentment, we had land, we were incredibly wealthy, but our borders were pretty much closed to everybody except for the English and the Americans (and Australia, when you consider its immigration laws, is still notoriously difficult to get into – much like the United States). I can understand the resentment, especially considering that a lot of Asia is quite crowded, yet the reality is that 90% of Australia is desert, and we simply cannot support a huge population.
Still, the Australia of my childhood, and the Australia of now is a much different place. I think we are starting to accept our position in the world, though of course we still have a bunch of second-rate men ruling from Canberra. Like, Labour is still tied down by its interest groups, and we tend to forget that they aren’t the party of the intellectuals, they are the party of the working person – which in Australia is mining. While they are progressive in a lot of ways, and realise that we need to work with our neighbours as opposed to pining for a world that has long gone.
Yeah, it was a pretty good book, and quite enlightening, and it was interesting actually discovering that Menzies was actually a bit of a tool (he got dumped as Prime Minister while he was in England, and was literally just about to hand leadership of Australia over to Winston Churchill). In fact, I can understand why the Howard years were so painful, and that was because he literally took after Robert Menzies – yeah, he pretty much did nothing, and just coasted along on Australia’s luck, and the fact that the Labour Party were way to disorganised to get rid of him.
September 16, 2011
Horne's sprawling though concise work of social criticism exposed Australia and Australians not to sheer vitriol but to a reasoned lament of the mediocrity of it's "elites" and many the negative elements of Australian society in the 1960s, especially of general apathy and malaise.
Yet even today many of the things he talks about are not only as relevant as ever (for instance, his assessment of Australian republicanism still holds mostly true 50 years, which is actually quite sad) and even when they are not (as times have obviously changed over the ensuing decades) they still are very informative from a historical point of view and inform the debates Australians are having as of now, and our place in the world.
I highly recommend this book to not only Australians but those who wonder at why this nation is almost this odd, somewhat grey speck in the consciousness of the world.
Yet even today many of the things he talks about are not only as relevant as ever (for instance, his assessment of Australian republicanism still holds mostly true 50 years, which is actually quite sad) and even when they are not (as times have obviously changed over the ensuing decades) they still are very informative from a historical point of view and inform the debates Australians are having as of now, and our place in the world.
I highly recommend this book to not only Australians but those who wonder at why this nation is almost this odd, somewhat grey speck in the consciousness of the world.
July 17, 2010
This book was written in the mid-1960s but is relevant today because Australia still faces similar dilemmas. Having said that, Australia has come a long way from those days so it is helpful and interesting to understand which paths we chose to take and why, and why we are the people we are.
I found the middle section dull because I am more interested in the social changes than politics. Although, it was interesting to learn about the role the Communists played in Australian politics and some of the secret deals that took place.
To be honest, it isn't a page turner (at times) but it is an important book for Australians to read so I recommend it.
I found the middle section dull because I am more interested in the social changes than politics. Although, it was interesting to learn about the role the Communists played in Australian politics and some of the secret deals that took place.
To be honest, it isn't a page turner (at times) but it is an important book for Australians to read so I recommend it.
June 20, 2019
I have a lot of issues with my country. And while it wouldn’t be possible to air these grievances with my fellow countrymen, it’s comforting to know that someone recognised those very same issues 60 years before.
December 11, 2010
as a time capsual yes it has some interest but read in todays light it's just 200 pages of whinging
January 2, 2026
There was a lot here. This is an iconic book with a much quoted and mis-quoted title. In this book Donald Horne AO, an Australian (specifically Sydney) journalist, writer, social critic, and academic gives his views on Australia, Australians and the world they inhabited back in the 1960's.
It is a pretty weighty book and dated of course, as it is now the 2020's but I think it is interesting to read about where were were then, it gives us a better appreciation of where we are now.
Horne had his biases, a Sydney through and through bias toward the urban environment - he barely even mentions the bush or the outback save as somewhere not too many people live. He is a little condescending toward Melbourne culture and has a strange mix of affection for, and looking down on all the cultural trends that are uniquely Australian. Not saying some are not worth criticising; they are, but Horne does not seem to be sure himself how he feels about them. A sense of humous gleams through in in such delightful ways as on page [36] in chapter 2 What Is An Australian; Fair go, mate:
" Men stand around bars asserting their masculinity with such intensity that you half expect them to upzip their flys."
Now, THAT is Australian humour, without a doubt.
Later chapters, where he talks about politics, business and most especially the Menzies government lose all sense of humour, he is angry about a lot of trends that he sees, or believes he sees in the Australia of the 60's. To be fair, I don't know anyone personally who was not angry about the Menzies years.
Horne was clearly unorthodox in a lot of his views, more outward looking toward Asia - the region we actually belong to - than many of his contemporaries and far more inclined to look upon our connection to Britain unsentimentally and our shared association with America analytically. While not an easy read for a modern, younger reader I think it is well worth while.
Now, I think I tried to read this first in the 80's and did not get much out of it. A strong political, historical and maybe some constitutional knowledge might be a prerequisite for getting a lot out of this book. You might rely on google to fill some of the gaps, where Horme clearly imagined his readers to know as much about stuff as he did, but google will not help you all the time.
Overall, an interesting, erudite look at the Australia of the 1960's with a lot of relevancy to the 2020's if you are curious about how we got to where we are. Professionally and nicely written with rare humour shining through in the early chapters and some grace in the conculsion.
It is a pretty weighty book and dated of course, as it is now the 2020's but I think it is interesting to read about where were were then, it gives us a better appreciation of where we are now.
Horne had his biases, a Sydney through and through bias toward the urban environment - he barely even mentions the bush or the outback save as somewhere not too many people live. He is a little condescending toward Melbourne culture and has a strange mix of affection for, and looking down on all the cultural trends that are uniquely Australian. Not saying some are not worth criticising; they are, but Horne does not seem to be sure himself how he feels about them. A sense of humous gleams through in in such delightful ways as on page [36] in chapter 2 What Is An Australian; Fair go, mate:
" Men stand around bars asserting their masculinity with such intensity that you half expect them to upzip their flys."
Now, THAT is Australian humour, without a doubt.
Later chapters, where he talks about politics, business and most especially the Menzies government lose all sense of humour, he is angry about a lot of trends that he sees, or believes he sees in the Australia of the 60's. To be fair, I don't know anyone personally who was not angry about the Menzies years.
Horne was clearly unorthodox in a lot of his views, more outward looking toward Asia - the region we actually belong to - than many of his contemporaries and far more inclined to look upon our connection to Britain unsentimentally and our shared association with America analytically. While not an easy read for a modern, younger reader I think it is well worth while.
Now, I think I tried to read this first in the 80's and did not get much out of it. A strong political, historical and maybe some constitutional knowledge might be a prerequisite for getting a lot out of this book. You might rely on google to fill some of the gaps, where Horme clearly imagined his readers to know as much about stuff as he did, but google will not help you all the time.
Overall, an interesting, erudite look at the Australia of the 1960's with a lot of relevancy to the 2020's if you are curious about how we got to where we are. Professionally and nicely written with rare humour shining through in the early chapters and some grace in the conculsion.
January 16, 2025
The main feeling I have in finishing this book is disappointment that I wasn't able to read it in its own time. So much of the subject matter is hard to take seriously without 60 years of hindsight colouring my view.
At times Horne seems to be no more than a painful crank who is loathe to give Australia its chocolates in any particular way, while at other times this critical look at Australia is able to cut to the core of some of our biggest issues. The main contention of Australia being a "Lucky Country" (in a dumb luck sense) is still absolutely true, we remain a country with mediocre leadership, unsure of our place in the world.
He raises other key issues with Australia, the spirit of the wowser that lingers "... even in the mind of the most libertarian Australian", the willingness of Australians to censor often and extremely. These are things with which we still suffer. The main issue with his pieces on these subjects, though, is that they are over almost as soon as they start. The book itself is much more a series of think pieces, rather than a well formulated assessment of Australia.
Ideologically I feel that I depart from Horne a significant amount, but it is always good to pay mind to writing from those with whom you would disagree. It's clear from this that often, irrespective of ideology, we can reach the same conclusions - understand the same problems - it's just the getting there, and the where to in which we might disagree.
At times Horne seems to be no more than a painful crank who is loathe to give Australia its chocolates in any particular way, while at other times this critical look at Australia is able to cut to the core of some of our biggest issues. The main contention of Australia being a "Lucky Country" (in a dumb luck sense) is still absolutely true, we remain a country with mediocre leadership, unsure of our place in the world.
He raises other key issues with Australia, the spirit of the wowser that lingers "... even in the mind of the most libertarian Australian", the willingness of Australians to censor often and extremely. These are things with which we still suffer. The main issue with his pieces on these subjects, though, is that they are over almost as soon as they start. The book itself is much more a series of think pieces, rather than a well formulated assessment of Australia.
Ideologically I feel that I depart from Horne a significant amount, but it is always good to pay mind to writing from those with whom you would disagree. It's clear from this that often, irrespective of ideology, we can reach the same conclusions - understand the same problems - it's just the getting there, and the where to in which we might disagree.
May 25, 2025
3.5 stars - a ‘frank’ view of Australia, especially how it’s “second-rate” leaders who “lack curiosity” have been and still are one of the countries greatest weaknesses.
Some comments from Horne have lost their contemporaneity, whilst others are remarkably relevant in 2025. It’s a refreshing view through the looking glass at (some of) what the country has been through to become the Australia we know.
At times, I would have enjoyed some more considered views from Horne on how we can change for the better. Parts of the book feel as if reading about a country so uninspired it is a lost cause, but this is contrary to the heart and soul demonstrated by Australian people I meet everyday. In spite of the average leadership and lacklustre political domain in Australia - which seems devoted to emulating the ‘ways’ of US/UK rather than forging its own unique and admirable reputation - it is a rare and bountiful slice of the world which offers many overlooked contributions.
This book would be interesting for people to glimpse what ‘life was like’ and see how Australia has progressed, with limited considerations on how international relations (and other phenomena around the world) influenced changes over time. Horne’s work is best treated and read as one instalment in an enduring evolutionary tale of Australia who now, more than ever, has to forge its own identity in the ‘modern age’.
Some comments from Horne have lost their contemporaneity, whilst others are remarkably relevant in 2025. It’s a refreshing view through the looking glass at (some of) what the country has been through to become the Australia we know.
At times, I would have enjoyed some more considered views from Horne on how we can change for the better. Parts of the book feel as if reading about a country so uninspired it is a lost cause, but this is contrary to the heart and soul demonstrated by Australian people I meet everyday. In spite of the average leadership and lacklustre political domain in Australia - which seems devoted to emulating the ‘ways’ of US/UK rather than forging its own unique and admirable reputation - it is a rare and bountiful slice of the world which offers many overlooked contributions.
This book would be interesting for people to glimpse what ‘life was like’ and see how Australia has progressed, with limited considerations on how international relations (and other phenomena around the world) influenced changes over time. Horne’s work is best treated and read as one instalment in an enduring evolutionary tale of Australia who now, more than ever, has to forge its own identity in the ‘modern age’.
January 4, 2026
Having had this recommended to me by just about every economics lecturer, I assumed reading this would be a complement to what has taken up the past 3 years of my life.
Horne raises some good points about the lack of curiosity exhibited by most of the country and our disdain for intellectualism, which has most likely only grown since the book's publication in 1964.
The shattering of rural Australia's mythos is satisfying, and Horne's suggestion we don't have much of a celebration of urban life in Australia still rings true as the United States can characterise themselves with both James Dean and John Wayne, and Britain boasts Dickens' and Tolkien's works as national touchstones.
Australia is still stuck on Banjo Patterson.
However Horne often uses four sentences to explain something when one would've been fine, and his anti intellectualism rant meant he could dismiss any criticism of the text as that same vapidness he targeted. This text is not infallible, and more often than not it is dated to its period.
Was interesting to see how quaint the section on First Nations peoples was, yet (as mentioned in the preface from 1998) it was quite radical and forward thinking for the the time. Glad to see progress has been made since 1964.
Not a regrettable read, but definitely not the document of truth it was held up to be.
Horne raises some good points about the lack of curiosity exhibited by most of the country and our disdain for intellectualism, which has most likely only grown since the book's publication in 1964.
The shattering of rural Australia's mythos is satisfying, and Horne's suggestion we don't have much of a celebration of urban life in Australia still rings true as the United States can characterise themselves with both James Dean and John Wayne, and Britain boasts Dickens' and Tolkien's works as national touchstones.
Australia is still stuck on Banjo Patterson.
However Horne often uses four sentences to explain something when one would've been fine, and his anti intellectualism rant meant he could dismiss any criticism of the text as that same vapidness he targeted. This text is not infallible, and more often than not it is dated to its period.
Was interesting to see how quaint the section on First Nations peoples was, yet (as mentioned in the preface from 1998) it was quite radical and forward thinking for the the time. Glad to see progress has been made since 1964.
Not a regrettable read, but definitely not the document of truth it was held up to be.
September 27, 2023
It's a bit depressing that much of what Horne first wrote in the 1960s could still be applied to the Australia of today. The Lucky Country is an indictment of some of the worst aspects of Australian society, but it's not entirely bleak in its outlook.
Horne's observations cover a range of aspects of Australian life, to the extent that trying to label The Lucky Country as a political book doesn't feel completely accurate. Across these various facets of Australia, a sense of contented mediocrity, comfortable ignorance, and friendly hedonism prevails, which would be troubling for an intellectual but far less so for an average member of a fairly prosperous society. This book was recommended to me by a friend so that I could appreciate the difficulties in trying to affect positive change in the country, and on that front it succeeded. A lot of what people like about Australia and its people are what makes it so hard for advancement to take off.
The Lucky Country is a product of its time and that diminishes its applicability and framing, which does have an impact on how useful it can be as an informative text. However, Horne's diagnoses of the problems afflicting the country remain sharp, and make for essential reading for anyone interested in Australia.
Horne's observations cover a range of aspects of Australian life, to the extent that trying to label The Lucky Country as a political book doesn't feel completely accurate. Across these various facets of Australia, a sense of contented mediocrity, comfortable ignorance, and friendly hedonism prevails, which would be troubling for an intellectual but far less so for an average member of a fairly prosperous society. This book was recommended to me by a friend so that I could appreciate the difficulties in trying to affect positive change in the country, and on that front it succeeded. A lot of what people like about Australia and its people are what makes it so hard for advancement to take off.
The Lucky Country is a product of its time and that diminishes its applicability and framing, which does have an impact on how useful it can be as an informative text. However, Horne's diagnoses of the problems afflicting the country remain sharp, and make for essential reading for anyone interested in Australia.
June 24, 2022
Horne was ahead for his time in much of what he predicted, such as Australia turning towards the USA and Asia as economic partners. Many of his arguments, such as Australia (and its leaders) mimicking other cultures, rather than coming up with their own ideas is accurate, albeit harsh. However, his anti-republicanism tone came across as rather Anglo-phobic, and particularly towards the end, his criticisms of anyone with some respect for the current constitutional system seemed short-sighted. His claim that nobody of a younger generation would support a monarchy was naive at best, especially given the result of the Republic Referendum in the '90s, though it would be unfair to assume that Horne was able to predict the future.
It is understandable that Horne did not support Sir Robert Menzies, but the chapter on Menzies seemed like an entire rant about how inefficient he was as Prime Minister, all because he had some sympathy for the constitutional monarchy. Although I can understand why this was such a radical and powerful book for its time, this bias against the UK detracted from otherwise strong points.
It is understandable that Horne did not support Sir Robert Menzies, but the chapter on Menzies seemed like an entire rant about how inefficient he was as Prime Minister, all because he had some sympathy for the constitutional monarchy. Although I can understand why this was such a radical and powerful book for its time, this bias against the UK detracted from otherwise strong points.
July 25, 2018
First published in 1964, The Lucky Country by Donald Horne reveals the typical character of the Australian people, their national spirit, their strengths, weaknesses and the possible direction for our future.
What I liked
✅ witty, robust, insightful writing
✅ lays bare the basic truths of Australian life which linger under the surface, expressing it in an easy-to-digest way
✅ valid and insightful criticisms on the weaknesses of Australia and its people
What I didn't like
✖ the book overestimated the influence of communism on modern Australia
✖ the book was slightly alarmist, not predicting the middle route which Australia would walk down as it moves into the future
Rating
4.5/5 🌟
View my bookstagram here.
More reviews and writing tips here.
What I liked
✅ witty, robust, insightful writing
✅ lays bare the basic truths of Australian life which linger under the surface, expressing it in an easy-to-digest way
✅ valid and insightful criticisms on the weaknesses of Australia and its people
What I didn't like
✖ the book overestimated the influence of communism on modern Australia
✖ the book was slightly alarmist, not predicting the middle route which Australia would walk down as it moves into the future
Rating
4.5/5 🌟
View my bookstagram here.
More reviews and writing tips here.
December 17, 2018
Surprisingly interesting and relevant for a book about Australia written over 50 years ago.
- insights into the society in which I was being raised and which clearly implanted certain notions
- a tart assessment of Australian intellectual, business, and political leadership (or lack thereof), that is not entirely unrecognisable today
- some excellent predictions of where the country needed to go and which have held up strongly
- some others that thankfully didn’t pan out
- a window into conventions, assumptions, and prejudices of the time, and how much things have improved (the role of women is dealt with in one sub-chapter, and the use of the generic “men” when describing all actors in society, are very jarring to modern sensibilities, something Horne himself acknowledges in the introduction written for the mid-90s reissue)
- insights into the society in which I was being raised and which clearly implanted certain notions
- a tart assessment of Australian intellectual, business, and political leadership (or lack thereof), that is not entirely unrecognisable today
- some excellent predictions of where the country needed to go and which have held up strongly
- some others that thankfully didn’t pan out
- a window into conventions, assumptions, and prejudices of the time, and how much things have improved (the role of women is dealt with in one sub-chapter, and the use of the generic “men” when describing all actors in society, are very jarring to modern sensibilities, something Horne himself acknowledges in the introduction written for the mid-90s reissue)
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews