Question about Australian towns

If you'd like to explore some of the attitudes to war and remembrance, I'd recommend The one day of the year. It's a play about Anzac Day. And a hell of a lot more....

Also, nobody worships war. We remember those that gave their lives. A lot of those country towns lost an entire generation going off to fight a war thousands of miles away.

They shall grow not old,
as we that are left grow old;
Age shall not weary them,
nor the years condemn.
At the going down of the sun.
and in the morning.
We will remember them.

Nah bud. those aren't worship idols.

The first world war nearly wiped out an entire generation. And it coincided with Australia as a nation coming of age. It scarred the fuck out of our psyche, so we have memorials everywhere. Every small town has one for the people from just there who died. That's how bad it was.

None I can think of ? that shit is endemic. Best of luck in your search though.

I now live in a small bumfuck town in Tasmania, the big discussion is a bunch of trees that need trimming, memorial soldier trees lining the street.

You're conflating worship and memorial.

Most small towns sent large portions of their populace to fight in both ww1 and ww2.

These towns wanted their sons remembered and it has become a tradition across Australia to remember the sacrifices made by our military personnel to ensure that our way of life is preserved and that you're able to imegrate here and live how ever you like.

To answer your question I don't think you will find many towns at all. Most Australians are proud of our history and want it celebrated and sacrifices remembered.

You’re living on stolen land that was invaded by divine right. If you can ignore that, you can ignore a few war memorials.

If you haven't heard it before, please listen to the song "The Band Played Waltzing Matilda" by Scottish-Australian songwriter Eric Bogle. That song, as well as "I Was Only 19" by Redgum, perfectly encapsulates the reason for the memorials.

The songs do not glorify our success as a military nation, nor do they portray the soldiers they are about as grand heros or defenders of freedom. They are about very young men, sent away by their country to experience unimaginable horror and suffering, only to return to a home with, at best, minimal support and, at worst, the shame of the community they once were a part of.

Each name on each of those memorials- thousands of them- represent an experience of the unimaginable, and a family irreparably changed. They are a reminder of what was taken, and of the sorrow that was caused. I do not see them as prideful, celebratory or reverential, and I do not know of anyone who does. They are a commiseration.

With regards to ANZAC, and it's place in Australian culture, you are essentially looking at modern Australia's foundational myth. In the 1950s and 1960s when Australia was having its own civil rights moment, the original foundation myth of terra nullius and the "brave", white settlers conquering an untamed land finally began to feel too untrue to most Australians, too much like a myth. Colonial Australia needed a new explanation for its existence and it is around that time that the Gallipoli campaign started to be promoted by various historians and authors as Australia's "coming of age" as a nation.

The intention was to give (white) Australians a point of reference for themselves, something they could point to and say "the things that we are, this is where they came to be". Qualities like mateship, camaraderie, larrakinism, hard work, disdain for authority or aristocracy and resilience in the face of adversity. Those were the qualities promoted as being cemented in the national psyche at ANZAC Cove. It is a manufactured narrative, but those writers were very successful, as you can see.

There's more that can be said for Australia treats it's narrative history, especially that of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, but that's better left for another (long) post. If you're interested in how Australia viewed it's two competing foundational stories in the 1990s and 2000s, and how it effects the way we talk about our history today, look up the History Wars. Let me know if you think there was a winner.

I'll be honest, I think you're going to struggle to find anything that suits you purely because you seem to be looking for ways to be upset and put your views of war onto others.

I think first of all, you're confusing remembrance, and honouring the loss of soldiers lives, for military worship. Many people have lost loved ones who've fought in wars to protect them. So they try remember that honour and sacrifice, to show respect for the lives lost and to remember what they fought for. You're viewing each soldier as a part of a collective, each war as something that could have been avoided. But many see them as friends and family lost forever. As people whom they loved and cared for. Would you not be upset if those close to you died? Would that change if they died fighting in a war? Most monuments and statues I've seen in Australia refer to WW1 and WW2 as well. We lost a lot of good people trying to fight against a powerful, violent enemy.

Military worship would be praising current soldiers and bowing and treating them specially. I've never seen that in Australia. We treat soldiers as regular people. In small towns you'll likely see some show for them, as they've likely been away from home at a military base for a long time and are now returning. They're not celebrating war, they're welcoming the return of family and friends.

Because you seem to dislike war, you're placing the values you see onto others. You need to gain perspective and realise the intent of why we honour the dead and remember our history. It is not to glorify war.

You say it should be like owning a gun and constantly proving you're not doing something wrong? I don't get what you mean by that. There are gun owners in Australia, and they aren't constantly made to prove they're not doing anything wrong. Our military history is far from perfect, especially in modern times. But statues and monuments and parks aren't to ignore that. You see praising the good as ignoring the bad, when that is not the intention.

I see war memorials as a reminder of what we're trying to avoid, not as a glorification.

In many towns, the RSL (Returned Servicemans League) was the only place a family could go that was licensed, but also family friendly. And where there is an RSL, there is ANZAC commemoration.

And on ANZAC day itself, most of Australia turns towards military commemoration, because ANZAC

So you'll be hard pressed finding a town that doesn't have any military commemoration. But in my experience growing up in country town Australia, outside of the RSLs and ANZAC day, most towns don't really have much military interest or history.

It's not our tradition and culture, that's a misunderstanding on your part. Most Australians do not give a shit about military memorials and barely acknowledge their existence. It's a vocal minority who push the "worship" as you call it; the rest of us tolerate or ignore it.

I haven't really thought about this much, because military commemoration is just normal here and I thoughtlessly assumed it was similar around the world. And I didn't really consider how unnecessarily big many of them are. Sure, it's easy for me to point to the US and say 'that's what real military worship is!' but you're right that there are many reminders of war around, most obviously the monuments in parks and national ceremonies (ANZAC Day, Remembrance Day). You mention that you have a foreign background; do you mention this because the monuments are not normal where your background is, or is it because our wars are offensive and seem atrocious to have statues for?

It's important to understand the intended purpose of many of these as similar to a gravestone, it's meant to be a respectful reminder of the town's loss rather than glorifying war, like Aussiemandeus said it's the towns wanting future generations to be aware of their town's sacrifice for the war effort. However, there is also the fact that national ceremonies are sometimes used as propaganda to glorify wars of invasion or imply they were all honourable: the only one of those ANZAC wars where Australia was actually invaded was WWII (various attacks), all the others were joining political allies (first UK, then US) in other continents in imperialist wars, and in many of the wars they were clearly invasive and Australia's participation should be denounced (including the Korean War, Vietnam War and Middle Eastern conflicts).

So while I can tolerate (critically) the community monuments commemorating dead soldiers, especially those built after WWII when sacrifice was in the self-defense of the country, we must also be critical of those trying to glorify war and imperial conflicts, just as we should be critical of those who glorify or trivialize the colonial invasion of this continent.

I dont think there is any military worship in any australian town or city? We do have respect for it, especially around the AZACS. But I couldnt tell you jack shit about the aussie military beyond we screwed the french on some subs a while back.

You don’t notice it as much in suburbs of the cities if you can afford housing there.

Where the hell are you going with military statues that cost “more than the town” to build?! Outside of the big cities I can’t think of many places with more than a small (less than 1m) statue and a plaque. And I’ve lived in every state and territory except Tasmania and New Zealand.

The loss of life from WWI and WW2 in particular had a huge impact on country towns. They planted avenues of trees, named roads, engraved the names of young people on walls.

it seems that the smaller the town, the higher the military worship. They may not even have a public toilet, but they will have a military worship statue that seemed to have cost more than all the town to build.

That's because the vast majority of our towns pre date WW2, and basically every area lost enough people in WW1/WW2 to affect multiple families and the broader local community. For example I grew up in a country village of a couple of hundred people (with several hundred more in the locality and upriver) and it has a war memorial listing what would have been ~50 people killed in WW2 and at least that again in WW1. I think it is understandable that towns (particularly smaller or more closely knit communities) would be in general support of the families and friends wanting a memorial to their dead given that level of losses.

I haven't seen anywhere near the number of memorials for other conflicts, they definitely exist but are significantly less common. If you want to avoid war related stuff your best bet would be towns/suburbs built well after WW2, but these tend to be suburbs of existing centres (which are likely to have a war memorial) instead of completely new towns.

Edit: Also consider that many of our country towns/villages have either not grown significantly or have even shrunk in population in the last half century or so, so historical memorials are more likely to retain the prominence they were originally intended to have instead of being surrounded or crowded out by new development.

Just for some context, where are you from?