Yes, australia is a colony.
The answer should be glaringly obvious to anyone — Australia was founded on settler colonialism, refers to itself as a colony in its official wording and legislation, and is regarded as such by both academics and laypeople from across the political spectrum.
Yet despite this fact, there is a minority trend among fringe settler think tanks that seek to deny and erase this truth — along with it the unceded and inherent rights to sovereignty, self-determination, and land that First Nations’ people retain.
This article will address two key points by responding to a recent article by a fringe socialist organisation, titled “Is Australia a colony”. First, it will dismantle the factually incorrect historical revisionism that claims “Australia is no longer a colony.” Second, it will examine why certain individuals and groups would advance such a ridiculous assertion in the first place.
The Article’s Core Argument
The article in question rejects the idea that Australia remains a colony, instead framing it as an independent imperialist state. While it acknowledges Australia’s settler-colonial foundations, it incorrectly argues that since Australia is apparently no longer economically or politically dependent on Britain, it has ceased to be a colony in any meaningful way.
This perspective is rooted in a classic Marxist-Leninist analysis that prioritises class struggle and relationships between capitalist states—often at the expense of recognising ongoing settler colonialism as a distinct system of oppression. Furthermore, the arguments made do not reflect reality and are instead riddled with half-truths and misrepresentations.
Where This Falls Short
Settler Colonialism is Not Just a Phase — It’s a Structure
One of the most significant flaws in this argument is that it treats colonialism as something that happened rather than something that is happening. Australia was not merely founded on colonial violence—it continues to function as a settler-colonial state. The fact that it is not formally controlled by Britain on a day-to-day basis does not mean it has "decolonised."
Settler colonialism differs from classical colonialism, where a foreign power extracts resources and then departs—it is a permanent structure that aims to eliminate Indigenous peoples, whether through direct violence, forced assimilation, or erasure. Indigenous people are still actively being dispossessed of land, incarcerated at obscene rates, and killed by police. The Australian government continues to expand mining projects on sacred land and refuses to negotiate treaties. These are all symptoms of ongoing colonial occupation.
The article dismisses the idea that Australia remains a colony based on the incorrect assumption that it is politically independent from Britain. Even if this assumption were true, it still fails to grasp the framework of what settler colonialism is.
Indigenous Sovereignty as the Primary Contradiction
Marxist-Leninist analysis often focuses on class as the "primary contradiction," seeing capitalist exploitation as the main driver of oppression. However, this approach fails to acknowledge that settler colonialism is a distinct contradiction that both underpins and persists alongside capitalist exploitation.
Indigenous sovereignty is not just an "identity issue" or something that will be resolved through class struggle—it is a fundamental political question. Australia exists because of the dispossession of Indigenous land. The entire economic base of Australia—its wealth, state power, and ability to act as an imperialist force—is built on stolen land, stolen resources, and stolen labour.
By dismissing the colonial relationship between the Australian state and Indigenous nations, the article erases Indigenous struggles for sovereignty, reducing them to a secondary concern behind class struggle.
The Function of the Australian State Today
The article argues that Australia is now an imperialist power rather than a colony. While it is true that Australia plays an imperialist role globally (e.g., its exploitation of Papua New Guinea and Nauru, and its military role in upholding US hegemony), this does not negate the fact that it remains a settler colony. The two are not mutually exclusive.
In fact, Australia’s ability to act as an imperialist force relies on its settler-colonial foundation. The theft of Indigenous land, suppression of Indigenous governance, and control of resources are all necessary for Australia to operate as an imperialist state. It is not contradictory to say that Australia is both a settler-colonial state and an imperialist one.
Australia’s Ongoing Political Dependence on Britain
A central claim of the article is that Australia is no longer a colony because it has achieved political and economic independence. The idea that Australia is fully independent is one of those narratives that gets reinforced everywhere — mainstream history, education, media — so even when critiquing colonialism, it can still shape the analysis if it is not actively challenged or fully understood through a legal framework.
The assertion that Australia is independent is one built not on actual, legal analysis but upon assumptions and mainstream facades. This assertion of independence actively misrepresents the fact that Australia is actually not fully independent from Britain — it remains constitutionally tied to the British Crown in ways that directly impact its governance and sovereignty.
The Governor-General’s Power to Dismiss the Prime Minister
The clearest example of Australia’s lack of true political independence is the Governor-General’s ability to dismiss an elected government—an authority that has already been exercised. In 1975, during the constitutional crisis, Governor-General Sir John Kerr dismissed Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, despite Whitlam leading a democratically elected government. This event, known as The Dismissal, was one of the most blatant demonstrations that Australia remains subject to British authority.
Britain Retains the Power to Dissolve Australian Parliament
Another undeniable fact contradicting the article’s claim is that Britain still holds the legal power to dissolve Australia’s parliament. The Australian Constitution remains an Act of the British Parliament (Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1900), meaning its legal foundation is still British law. The Australia Act 1986 merely limited Britain’s ability to intervene in Australian affairs — it did not sever all constitutional ties.
Why This is Important for Indigenous Sovereignty
This is not merely a technical issue—it has major implications for Indigenous sovereignty and decolonisation. If Australia is not even sovereign over itself, how can it claim sovereignty over Indigenous lands? This exposes a key hypocrisy in Australian politics: settlers and their collaborators deny Indigenous sovereignty, claiming Australia is a fully independent nation-state, yet Australia itself is not fully sovereign and remains subject to colonial rule.
The Motivation Behind Such an Article
What would motivate an individual to engage in such behaviour? Before exploring motivations, we need to first assess and categorise the actual behaviour on display here. To do so, let us explore the definition of Treason. Treason is generally defined as the act of betraying one's nation or sovereign authority, typically by aiding its enemies or working against its fundamental interests. In legal terms, many states define treason as actions that attempt to overthrow the government, assist foreign powers, or undermine national security.
While accusations of treason might at first appear to be overly-charged, dramatic, or embellished, it is important to contextualise this within the broader struggle for Indigenous Nations to retain their nationhood and sovereignty in the face of complete erasure and domination by a foreign power. The nationhood and sovereignty of Indigenous Nations isn’t some metaphorical or symbolic notion that lacks real world application and that can be dismissed on a whim; it is foundational to the survival, dignity, and self-determination of Indigenous peoples, whose identities, lands, and futures continue to be directly threatened by the ongoing structures of colonialism.
By this definition and through this understanding, we see that the author is actively engaging in treason against Indigenous Sovereignty. Their claims that "Australia isn't a colony" serve not only as historical revisionism but as a direct betrayal of First Nations Sovereignty and along with it our inherent rights to land, resources and self-determination.
Undermining Decolonisation – The author provides ideological cover for continued colonial occupation, reinforcing the structures that dispossess First Nations people.
Attacking Indigenous Sovereignty – Denying that Australia is a colony directly contradicts the reality of ongoing Indigenous sovereignty, legitimizing the theft of land and the suppression of our governance systems.
Aiding a Foreign Imperialist Power – The comprador’s rhetoric aligns perfectly with the interests of the Australian state and its imperialist allies, whose legitimacy relies on maintaining the colonial lie. By parroting this narrative, they act as an ideological foot soldier for settler-colonial rule.
The True Nature of Their Actions:
While they may dress it up as "progressive" or "pragmatic," this article is a textbook case of comprador normalisation dressed up as radical thought. The author's role is clear: they are collaborators working to secure the continued dominance of the Australian settler-state at the direct expense of First Nations people. This is treason in its purest form—betraying the sovereign rights of their own people to serve a foreign colonial power.
Possible Motivations for Such Betrayal:
There are several possible reasons why a comprador like this would dedicate themselves to undermining decolonisation and Indigenous sovereignty:
Personal Advancement – Many compradors see collaboration as a fast track to personal success. Settler institutions reward those who reinforce the status quo, offering grants, media platforms, and career opportunities in academia, government, the arts or NGOs.
Settler Validation – Some crave legitimacy and recognition from settler society, believing that aligning with colonial narratives will earn them a seat at the table—no matter how hollow or conditional that seat may be.
Fear of Radical Change – Genuine decolonisation threatens the comfort of those who have learned to navigate the existing system. Many compradors prefer to tweak colonial rule rather than dismantle it because they fear the uncertainty of true self-determination.
Ideological Capture – Some have internalised colonial logic so deeply that they genuinely believe in the system, mistaking subservience for strategy and colonial appeasement for progress.
Material Interests – Those with financial, political, or social investments in the colonial order may see Indigenous liberation as a direct threat to their wealth, influence, or lifestyle.
Ultimately, whether out of self-interest, cowardice, sheer ideological blindness or a desperation to appease their colonial handlers, the effect is the same: they serve as tools of colonial control, willingly or otherwise, and must be called out as such.
Final Thoughts
The article is a masterclass in missing the point with confidence. It falls into a common trap among Marxist-Leninists who prioritise economic contradictions over settler-colonial ones. By arguing that Australia is no longer a colony, it dismisses material reality and ignores the lived reality of Indigenous peoples and excuses settlers—especially settler leftists—from having to reckon with their ongoing role in colonisation.
A correct decolonial perspective written by someone who actually understands the subject would recognise that:
Australia is still a colony because it continues to occupy stolen land and deny Indigenous sovereignty.
Settler colonialism is an ongoing structure, not a historical event.
Class struggle and Indigenous sovereignty are not separate fights—land theft and Indigenous dispossession are foundational to capitalism in Australia.
Socialist movements must centre Indigenous liberation rather than treating it as an afterthought to economic struggle.
The comprador’s minor footnote of settler apologism is not just historically false—it is an act of ideological treason against Indigenous sovereignty, designed to obscure the ongoing colonial occupation of our lands.
In conclusion, Australia remains a settler-colonial state, a fact that is irrefutable when considered through the lens of its ongoing occupation of Indigenous lands and the continued denial of Indigenous sovereignty. The argument that Australia has "decolonized" and is no longer a colony fails to recognize the persistent structural oppression of Indigenous peoples and the ongoing ties to British colonial power. This misconception not only erases the lived reality of First Nations peoples but also provides ideological support for the continuation of colonial domination. The article that denies Australia's colonial status serves to undermine decolonization efforts, attacking Indigenous sovereignty and reinforcing colonial structures. The motivations behind such denial are rooted in personal, ideological, and material interests that maintain the colonial status quo at the expense of Indigenous self-determination and sovereignty.