I am an Australian with low self-esteem who has gotten to know other people in the same position, and I'm curious about how we make the socially levelling philosophy (pejoratively known as Tall Poppy Syndrome) work to our advantage.
Perhaps I should begin by clarifying that, while 'Tall Poppy Syndrome' is the most popular way to address this unspoken rule of Australian social life, I will be looking at the positive aspects in this post, so I'll be using the more neutral term, 'socially levelling philosophy' - or SLP.
Observing my community, there are people who 'lean in' to the SLP more than others - those that find it's in their interest to find their rightful place in an egalitarian social structure. In my personal experience, it's the people who are socio-economically disadvantaged and/or who have low self-esteem who find the most to gain by associating themselves with this policy.
The SLP instructs us that everybody, no matter how inadequate they may feel, has the right to perform a certain amount of pride (not too much, but not too little) simply by virtue of belonging to the society. We have the right to act 'like a standard member of Team Australia' despite depression, anxiety, or more severe mental illness. Whenever we feel besmirched, we can always (signal that we) fall back on this social principle, to elicit the respect desired.
To signal that we are as worthy members of society as the average person is a way of attaching ourselves to external standards of worth, yet we have learned that we get better treatment when we appeal to others' sense of egalitarianism. Little wonder, then, that we develop a liking for (sometimes dependency on?) the SLP as a way to work the system in our favour, and regulate our emotions.
(If you identify as 'the underdog', there are also avenues you know you can take to boost your standing in society, particularly by appealing to people's sense of the underdog. It's a kind of self-consciousness which binds us to other people, helping us meet our need to be respected. I'm glad it's there for me when I need it.)
I once had a relationship with someone who was in a stigmatised minority group (or three - they were trans, a lesbian and on welfare), and one thing that we recognised in each other is how strongly we relied on the SLP to elicit a sense of worthiness and belonging from other Australians. We never verbally addressed the link between our low self-esteem and this 'urge not to stand out with negative consequences', but I believe it was an important part of our connection.
In a similar vein, I notice people of all kinds of minority groups speaking up and asserting their right to be treated like the status quo - whether they be people of colour reminding a white person that they, too, deserve be taken seriously, or a person who is physically disabled keeping their head up high in their wheelchair, and speaking with accentuated authority. We all adopt our mechanisms for reminding more privileged people that we are owed that specific amount of respect that is the social contract of having an Australian identity.
In an ideal world, I wouldn't need to reference an external set of guidelines to enjoy better treatment, but we do not live in an ideal world. Class divisions within Australia are real (and income inequality, for one, is growing). I have a certain amount of affection for the socially levelling philosophy which allows me to navigate the world with a little more respect and dignity, though. This is why I choose to call it 'the socially levelling philosophy' and not 'Tall Poppy Syndrome'. I feel that it softens the blow of belonging to a variety of marginalised groups, and offers a way to relate to other Australians despite differences such as class and mental health status.
