Are self-identifications above the national level -- identifying with supranational identities usually weaker/stronger?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Trimac20

I don't think Australians still don't have a very strong sense of identity with a group of nations.

If so, I would say the Commonwealth nations and the Anglosphere. While we're in the 'Asia-Pacific region' Australians still see Asia as culturally foreign, although less so than before, especially as many Australians are now of Asian descent.

I like this assessment. I'd say the idea of a larger Anglosphere out there is probably a fairly important thing for Australia, given its location.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by french user

I agree with your conception of "concentric circles".
But sometimes it is not that much easy. Because you can feel different kind of similarities; on would be for exemple the language/culture and the other the geography. Yourself, as a north American of french-speaking culture, would you relate more with north Americans of English-speaking culture or to french speaking Europeans. I guess that on some points you might feel closer to the other north Americans; and probably on others you might feel closer to french-speaking Europeans than anyone else...
I have been living one year in Quebec, and when I was there I felt it quite strangely; to be a place at once very close and very distant. Close for the language and the things that originated from France; but in the same time quite distant to the many typically north American things (+also to the things related to Britain)
.

Interesting observations and questions.

I would say the level on which I feel closest to the rest of North America is ''the lay of the land'', which is to say the geography and everything that goes with it, and also practical life (consumer products, stores, banking, telephone, cars, highway system and driving, etc.).

Other aspects of life are a bit of a mix. It is difficult for a Québécois person to feel totally North American because the North American identity is generally portrayed as a single way of being, and based on the U.S. The fact that there might be something different here is almost always completely ignored, not just by people here but also around the world. (Note that English Canadians also have issues with the North American identity...)

Whereas the image of what is European has a lot more room for diversity, from saunas in the woods in Finland to dense villages with white houses on a Greek island.

[Trimac20]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Interesting observations and questions.

I would say the level on which I feel closest to the rest of North America is ''the lay of the land'', which is to say the geography and everything that goes with it, and also practical life (consumer products, stores, banking, telephone, cars, highway system and driving, etc.).

Other aspects of life are a bit of a mix. It is difficult for a Québécois person to feel totally North American because the North American identity is generally portrayed as a single way of being, and based on the U.S. The fact that there might be something different here is almost always completely ignored, not just by people here but also around the world. (Note that English Canadians also have issues with the North American identity...)

Whereas the image of what is European has a lot more room for diversity, from saunas in the woods in Finland to dense villages with white houses on a Greek island.

That's why attaching yourself or defining yourself by one label is silly. We're all multi-faceted individuals with different identities and roles. We wear different hats depending on the situation and who we are relating to.