Colleagues,

In the social media some people especially those proposing and supporting a rail trail come up with arguments about why the NSW Government closed regional train services? Eg.declining numbers. In this context,  it is important to read what a researcher says about the subject before resorting to emotionally laden arguments. Strongly recommend this thesis for you. 

Here is a summary of thesis titled Countrymindedless: 

Countrymindless' Rural Railway Closure: Destabilising a Social Exchange Relationship Between Country and City in New South Wales by James Longworth.

 Despite the title, it was not primarily an investigation of the late-1980s closures themselves. Rather, it examined community reactions to proposed and actual rural railway closures in New South Wales, especially the 2003 controversies surrounding the New England passenger line and grain branch lines. 

The central finding:

 "Countrymindlessness"
Longworth argued that railway closures were perceived by rural communities not simply as transport decisions but as symbolic acts showing that governments no longer valued country people. He coined the term "countrymindlessness" as the opposite of the traditional Australian political idea of Countrymindedness.

In essence:
Rural residents believed railways represented a longstanding social compact between city and country.
Closing services signalled that governments were becoming indifferent to rural interests.
The anger generated by closures was often greater than could be explained by passenger numbers or economic impacts alone because railways carried strong cultural and political meaning. 

What the thesis found about why communities opposed closures
Longworth identified several recurring themes in rural reactions:

Railways were seen as symbols of government commitment to rural areas. Closure suggested abandonment by metropolitan decision-makers. 

Economic rationalism was viewed with suspicion. Communities believed decisions were based narrowly on financial calculations while ignoring broader social and regional consequences. 

Rail services had social value beyond transport. Even where usage was modest, trains were seen as maintaining community connections, accessibility and regional identity. 

Closure damaged trust between rural communities and government. The thesis framed this as a disruption of a historically stable "social exchange relationship" in which country communities supported governments in return for services.
Country culture mattered. Previous studies had focused on economics and transport planning, but Longworth argued that cultural values and rural identity were essential to understanding the intensity of opposition. 

Relevance to the late-1980s closures
Although the thesis was centred on events around 2003, its analysis helps explain reactions to the major NSW rail retrenchments of the 1980s and 1990s. It suggests that many closures provoked resistance because communities interpreted them as part of a broader shift toward commercial and metropolitan priorities, rather than merely transport restructuring.

 Similar arguments about economic rationalism and declining commitment to country passenger rail appear in later Australian rail research. 

One-sentence summary

Longworth's conclusion was that rural railway closures were politically and culturally significant because country communities saw them as evidence that governments had become "countrymindless"—forgetting the obligations and relationships that had historically linked the state to rural Australia.