Political Theory

Abstract

In the early 1970s the London School of Economics was just emerging from the radical 60s and taking on distinctly conservative hues. Migrating there from classical studies in Sydney through adult education and the London external system, I was scarcely able to avoid at least a light dusting of Oakcshott's aversion to 'rationalism' in politics. I read Plato under K. B. Smellie, better known as a student of local government, who warned me against 'Grossman's distortions and Popper's obsessions' about Plato. At LSE I was a reluctant initiate to the study of constitutionalism, being the last one in line at Leonard Schapiro's seminar after all others had refused the topic, but it kindled an interest that was to have a lasting effect on my engagement with Australian politics. William Letwin's enthusiasm for American federalism did not assuage my misgivings about an incoherent polity, whose advocates gloried in the virtues of the 'incomplete' system of government. It was disturbing to reflect that Australia was saddled with incoherence from the start (Maddox 1973). When I returned to Australia to teach politics it was commonplace to accept that Australia was devoid of any foundation in political thought (cf. Loveday 1983[19791), and despite some brave recent attempts to reassess that judgement (Stokes 1994b; 2004; cf. Patapan 2003a), no great documents of original political thinking have come to light. To find much commentary one had to turn often to historians, philosophers, adult educators and clergymen. Our earliest political thought is implicit in colonial institutions, because the Australian colonies were widely regarded as trailblazers in democratic experiment (cf. Bryce 1921, 181). With only mild birth pangs, European Australia was 'born modern' (Kociumbas 1992, ix), springing fully formed from Zeus's enlightened head.