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.
The 2025 election marked a pause in Australia’s political life. As old policy narratives falter, we have an opportunity to ask ourselves: what kind of society are we trying to build? Across faiths and traditions, the idea of the common good offers a path forward beyond division and drift.
In the wake of an unexpectedly decisive election, Australians rejected grievance politics from both right and left. What emerged instead was a quiet preference for stability, civility, and competence: qualities that don’t often headline campaigns, but this time shaped the outcome. In 2025, trumpery just didn’t cut it.
While much of the world drifts toward political extremes, Australia did something quietly radical: it chose the centre. In a night of subdued triumphs and unexpected grace, it was a reminder that democracy’s strength may still lie in its capacity for moderation, mercy, and surprise.
In an era of reflex opinion and vanishing accountability, moral seriousness can seem an anachronism. Yet history teaches that ideas — and the people who defend them — shape lives and nations.
Faith, once a quiet undercurrent in Australian elections, is now entangled in questions of ethnic identity, foreign policy and cultural grievance. Religion has returned to the centre of political life, only to find itself more divided, and more contested, than ever before.
Despite a lot of talk about education, neither of the major parties has talked about the funding of universities. However this federal election is likely to be determined by voters under the age of 45, the very group that rising university fees and HELP (higher education loan program) debts are hitting the hardest.
As Australia heads toward a federal election, the government’s latest budget offers relief but fails the deeper test of justice. In a nation facing rising inequality and entrenched disadvantage, what’s missing is a vision anchored in the common good, a politics that serves not just voters, but the voiceless.
Australia’s Federal Budget offers a mix of tax cuts, spending increases, and modest relief for households, but fails to address the seismic shifts in global economics. With rising defense spending and minimal solutions for mounting debt, it remains unclear whether this budget can navigate the country’s economic vulnerabilities in an unpredictable world.
Amid rising hate speech and tighter laws, something deeper festers. In a culture wired for outrage and shaped by tribal algorithms, we’re learning not just to disagree, but to despise. What happens when identity is built on enmity, and public debate becomes less about ideas and more about who we’re against?
Australia’s political class might make grand promises, but for those on the margins — homeless, underemployed, struggling with addiction — these pledges mean little. The people who have been left behind know the game is rigged. As elections approach, they watch from the outside, knowing their vote was never meant to count.
As Australia heads towards another federal election, the influence of big money in politics looms larger. In the U.S., billionaires and corporate interests have eroded trust in government. Campaigns there cost billions of dollars, while ours, for now, do not. But can we keep it that way?
With cuts to USAID, international aid programs confront mounting challenges. Amid evolving power dynamics and strategic realignment, humanitarian assistance now faces fundamental questions about its future.
1-12 out of 24 results.