"The word is the presence of the absence of the thing"(Emphasis mine.)
So, if we are using the word "Australia", that means that there is not, in fact, an Australia in front of us to discuss, and only the theoretical Australias in potentia in our own heads. Since no two peoples' conceptual Australias will match, the mismatching concepts will generate cognitive tension and imbalance in the opposition of "Australia" and "not-Australia". This supplement of secondary and tertiary meanings indicate the unspoken and unconscious agenda of the reader or speaker, thus rendering "Australia" unconnected with any possibly real "Australia" on a fundamental level.
The binary opposition between "Australia" and "not-Australia" is both predicated upon this lack of absolute meaning, yet is simultaneously rendered moot by the same process.
Thus is all language rendered meaningless by impenetrable deconstruction analysis.
I get a kick out of this because I'm into Semiotics and philosophy. No, really, I think this hysterically funny.