Civic patriotism strengthens our democracy

Strategic competition now extends far beyond military capability and economic strength. Liberal democracies therefore have a strategic interest in cultivating a confident civic patriotism that strengthens social cohesion, reinforces institutional legitimacy and supports national resilience.

South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas said in late March, ‘patriotism is a healthy thing,’ arguing that Australians should feel comfortable displaying their national symbols with pride.

Patriotism begins with a simple idea: love of country. Mature patriotism recognises both achievement and failure in the national story. Civic patriotism values the democratic institutions, freedoms and civic traditions that make a country worth improving.

Political theory distinguishes patriotism from nationalism. Nationalism often demands unquestioning loyalty and frequently defines belonging in terms of ethnicity or exclusion. Civic patriotism rests on different foundations: it centres on commitment to democratic institutions, the rule of law and the shared political community that maintains them.

Open criticism remains one of democracy’s greatest strengths. Democratic societies benefit from rigorous scholarship, investigative journalism and public debate about national history and policy failures. Honest scrutiny exposes injustice and encourages reform. Democratic confidence erodes, however, when national discourse focuses exclusively on failure while dismissing the institutional achievements that sustain political freedom.

Australia illustrates that balance clearly. Australian history contains injustice, exclusion and political mistakes. It also includes peaceful democratic transitions, strong constitutional traditions and one of the most successful multicultural societies in modern history. Patriotism recognises both realities while working to strengthen the latter and address the former.

Public confidence in democratic institutions carries strategic importance. Research by organisations such as the Lowy Institute and the Edelman Trust Barometer shows that institutional trust influences how societies respond to crises, misinformation and political shocks. Societies with higher levels of trust demonstrate stronger resilience during emergencies and greater capacity to sustain democratic governance under pressure.

National cohesion, therefore, is a strategic asset.

Authoritarian governments increasingly understand that reality. Russian and Chinese information operations regularly promote narratives portraying liberal democracies as hypocritical, corrupt or irreparably divided. Russian state media frequently frames Western political debate as evidence of societal collapse. Chinese state messaging often highlights democratic dysfunction while presenting authoritarian governance as stable and effective.

Strategic competition, therefore, extends into the information environment. Adversaries seek to weaken democratic societies by amplifying internal distrust and undermining confidence in institutions. A divided society becomes easier to influence, intimidate or coerce.

Domestic political discourse can unintentionally reinforce those narratives. Some strands of Western commentary emphasise national wrongdoing while dismissing the institutional foundations that sustain democratic freedoms. Historical injustice deserves acknowledgement and debate. But exclusive focus on national failure without recognition of democratic achievement risks producing a distorted picture of democratic societies.

Democracy remains an imperfect but resilient form of governance. Citizens in Australia can criticise their government publicly, organise demonstrations and publish hostile commentary online without fear of arrest. Independent courts protect legal rights. Competitive elections allow voters to peacefully replace governments. Independent media scrutinises political power.

Authoritarian systems operate under very different conditions. Iranian authorities have repeatedly suppressed protest movements and detained demonstrators challenging the regime. Chinese authorities tightly control political expression through censorship, surveillance and restrictions on independent journalism. Citizens criticising political leaders in Tehran or Beijing risk imprisonment. Australians criticising their government online risk little more than political disagreement.

Democratic societies, therefore, possess an unusual strength. Liberal institutions protect citizens’ rights to express views that fundamentally oppose the institutions themselves. Open debate strengthens democratic governance, but democratic resilience still depends on citizens maintaining confidence in the system that protects those freedoms.

Healthy civic patriotism offers a constructive framework for democratic debate. It encourages citizens to criticise government policy, challenge injustice and demand reform while maintaining confidence in the democratic system that enables those activities. Patriotism, therefore, supports accountability rather than suppressing dissent.

Australia possesses strong reasons for national confidence. The country remains one of the world’s most stable democracies. Millions of migrants have chosen to build their lives in Australia because our institutions offer opportunity, stability and freedom.

Public policy should reinforce democratic confidence. Civic education should explain how democratic institutions developed and why they protect individual rights. Governments should strengthen democratic literacy so citizens can recognise disinformation and foreign information operations. Political leaders should clearly defend democratic institutions when adversarial narratives seek to portray liberal democracy as inherently illegitimate.

Democratic resilience ultimately depends on citizens believing their political community is worth defending and improving. Citizens who believe their country has value invest effort in strengthening it. Citizens who are convinced their country is irredeemably flawed disengage from that responsibility.

Confident democracies are resilient democracies.

This article was published by The Strategist.