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.
There are more than 24 results, only the first 24 are displayed here.
Become a subscriber for more search results.
From 2027, NSW students will undertake a mandatory study of First Nations Peoples’ experiences of colonisation. This is welcome in the wake of the failed national referendum and the increasing insistence on reconciliation at the local level.
Anxieties about democracy around the world today are well-founded. While we rightly celebrate our democratic institutions, it's crucial to acknowledge the vast wealth disparities and the growing influence of powerful corporations.
As Australia faces numerous moral crises from domestic inequality to global militarization, a proposed national charter of principles could to reshape our society and redefine our global role. This declaration would acknowledge Indigenous dispossession, prioritize human rights, and shift focus from military alliances to human security.
There is no doubt that laws for determining refugee status and onshore protection are complex. The cases of NZYQ and ASF17 demonstrate that when laws regarding asylum and protection intersect with laws regarding character and protection of the community, the results can be extremely messy.
None of us — even those experiencing vulnerability, whether temporary or resulting from a permanent infirmity of some kind — should be perceived as an object of protection; instead, each one of us is a collaborator in our own care, and in the care of others.
In Still Alive: Notes from Australia’s Immigration Detention System (2021), artist Safdar Ahmed shares the harrowing stories of asylum seekers through comic art. He vividly depicts their plight by incorporating artwork from a drawing group he started at Villawood Detention Centre.
The Albanese government’s refugee and asylum policy is in a mess. When Minister Giles introduced his Migration Amendment Bill, they bypassed typical parliamentary procedures, wanting to be seen as tougher than Peter Dutton in getting unvisaed non-citizens out of the country. It’s time for the government to return to due process in this whole field.
For a national day of celebration, Australia Day has had a varied, higgledy-piggledy and divisive history. In this, it echoes Australia itself and so provides a useful lens for reflecting on our national life.
Throughout recent decades of Australian history, the stance every government has taken on asylum seekers has reflected the shifting political landscapes and challenging humanitarian issues that have continually shaped Australia's response to those seeking refuge.
Accusing someone of being ‘un-Australian’ is easily done, but what crimes or potential threats to the security and safety of Australians should trigger the practice of stripping someone of their citizenship?
On 8 November, the High Court ordered a stateless Rohingya refugee known only as NZYQ to be released from detention. He could not be granted a visa because he was found gulity of sexually assaulting a minor, and he could not be sent anywhere because he is stateless. Until 8 November, he was stuck in indefinite mandatory detention.
Last month, the High Court overturned a controversial 2004 decision, reaffirming the principle that asylum seekers cannot be detained indefinitely without prospects of deportation. This ruling not only corrects a historical misstep but also reasserts the High Court's commitment to limiting executive overreach.
13-24 out of 24 results.