Welcome to Eureka Street
Looking for thought provoking articles?Subscribe to Eureka Street and join the conversation.
Passwords must be at least 8 characters, contain upper and lower case letters, and a numeric value.
Eureka Street uses the Stripe payment gateway to process payments. The terms and conditions upon which Stripe processes payments and their privacy policy are available here.
Please note: The 40-day free-trial subscription is a limited time offer and expires 31/3/24. Subscribers will have 40 days of free access to Eureka Street content from the date they subscribe. You can cancel your subscription within that 40-day period without charge. After the 40-day free trial subscription period is over, you will be debited the $90 annual subscription amount. Our terms and conditions of membership still apply.
The inquiry into Indigenous incarceration in Australia recognises and validates widely held concerns. On the other hand, it also represents the abject failure of successive governments around the country to pay heed to what we do know about the incarceration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians.
It seemed enough for many 'progressives' that the majority of the people who had fallen by the dual citizenship wayside were Coalition members, with the added bonus of Malcolm Roberts. I began to wonder why what is essentially an issue of racism and discrimination was not considered a priority for those who state they believe in social justice.
It's entirely possible that reconfiguring our relationship with First Nations peoples, even centralising it, would give us the language and impetus to reconfigure everything else, including the way we resolve conflict, think about the environment, and make decisions about vulnerable members of society.
Jack Latimore is a Goori journalist and researcher, who is invested in the full participation of all people in political and cultural decision-making. In this episode, he reflects on the Black Lives Matter model, some of the positive things taking shape in Australia, and the work that still needs to be done.
Turnbull has been widely criticised for refusing a recommendation by the Referendum Council to enshrine a national Indigenous representative council, saying it was 'contrary to the principles of equality and citizenship'. A recent book provides a rich perspective for reflecting on his decision.
The common thread through all of these stories is the need to have a mature conversation about the ways in which we can afford a meaningful voice to our communities. If human rights are the benchmark, then rights must be afforded to all. It is not right that those with the least power must continue to compromise.
Why go to the trouble of gathering all the great minds to discuss the issue of recognition, giving hope to a great many people, only to determine the idea 'too ambitious'? What right does Turnbull have to predetermine what Australians will or won't accept? This question could be put to Australians in a referendum.
One of the naysayers following ICAN's receipt of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize was Australian journalist Andrew Bolt. What was most shameful was his insulting of one of Australia's own nuclear survivors, the late Yankunytjatjara Elder and anti-nuclear advocate Yami Lester.
The Senate is currently inquiring into the Cashless Debit Card Bill that will further expand the income management program. Welfare is a redistributive mechanism that supports the dignity and self-determination of the individual. In tying conditions to payments government is denying the self-determination of welfare recipients, counter to the very purpose of welfare.
In 1978 Kaurna/Narungga woman, Georgina Williams, said to me that Aboriginal people tend to be first on the receiving end of governmental oppressive practices and, when that works, the practices are extended to other poor Australians. Thirty-nine years later, almost every day brings new evidence of a relentless campaign against the poor, of which Cashless Cards are but one particularly vindictive example.
An interesting aspect was the shift in the mindset and understanding among non-indigenous Australians regarding Aboriginal rights. To note the way in which one dominating western culture moved toward recognising the rights of another culture that was oppressed by it is quite remarkable. We should consider those aspects of the mentality shift (from both cultures and their understanding of what the 1967 referendum meant) if we are ever to revisit that type of federal movement again.
61-72 out of 138 results.