Business leaders want the Royal Commission into anti-semitism to lead to cultural change.
I sense many feel as I do that we’ve had enough of what is labeled cultural change much of it supported by business.
When institutions fail, the reflexive response is a call for “cultural change.” It sounds constructive, but it often conceals the real problem: weakened authority and absent accountability. Culture becomes the excuse when leadership hesitates.
Increasingly, Australians are not merely asked to adapt to change, but are required to accept imposed cultural shifts even when those shifts clash with deeply held moral frameworks and civic values. Institutions that once upheld common standards now too often act as enforcers of ideology rather than guardians of conduct.
This is not cultural progress; it is institutional drift.
Strong institutions do not mandate belief or compel moral conformity. They set clear rules for behaviour, apply them consistently, and respect the boundary between authority and conscience. When institutions overstep enforcing values instead of enforcing rules they undermine their own legitimacy.
Calls for cultural change usually arise when institutions have lost the confidence to act. Standards remain on paper, but consequences fade in practice. Authority becomes selective, hesitation becomes habitual, and public trust erodes — not because people resist change, but because they reject coercion without justification.
Culture follows structure, not slogans. People respond to what institutions tolerate and what they compel. If ideological enforcement replaces consistent standards, resentment replaces confidence.
What Australia needs is not another cultural directive, but institutional strength: leadership willing to enforce the rule of law, uphold shared values, and exercise authority without fear or favour.
We don’t need cultural change. We need institutions strong enough to enforce standards and respect the moral limits of their power.
