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 200 results, only the first 200 are displayed here.
The Australian Indigenous Voice referendum has been rejected, as anticipated by many, with the meaning and consequences now up for debate. This debate may be as crucial as the referendum debate itself to determining the future of reconciliation and what it means to be Australian in the 21st century.
As Australia approaches a pivotal referendum, voters face a critical choice: endorse a new chapter in the Constitution providing a 'First Nations Voice' or leave it untouched. Whichever way the vote goes, we will be left with a Constitution not fit for purpose in the 21st century.
Later this year, Australians will vote on a referendum to enshrine an Indigenous Voice to Parliament, but many Indigenous Australians remain undecided, reflecting the complexities of the issue. The debate over the Voice to Parliament extends beyond the referendum question to encompass broader concerns about the constitution, treaties, and achieving true equality.
Can a journalist responsibly undertake impartial reporting while receiving benefits? For an industry founded on the principle of publishing with neither fear nor favour, the acceptance of favours has possibly outweighed journalistic responsibility towards an Australian public seeking objective knowledge.
As the world thawed post-Cold War, a debate raged over global supremacy, with Western powers predicting a unipolar world dominated by liberal democracy. Contrarily, others envisioned a future shaped by cultural and religious divides. In a shifting geopolitical landscape, the echoes of this debate continue to challenge long-held assumptions on global power dynamics.
I am on a study tour of Israel and Palestinian Territories. It is my eighth visit over 12 years, and each time I come away with less clarity and more questions about the tensions that plague this tiny land. Who is the oppressor? Who is the oppressed? It all depends upon the lens you look through at any given moment. (From 2019)
Religion and politics are frequent bedfellows. Despite many clerics and bishops holding strong political views, and many lay Catholics being active within political parties, the successful embrace of synodality depends upon finding middle ground, and leaders who respect a diversity of views.
In a global landscape increasingly marked by fluid alliances, Prime Minister Albanese's diplomatic foray from Washington to Beijing had the dual aim of warming frosty relations with China and reinforcing the significance of foundational ties. This is not merely diplomatic choreography; it’s a story of Australia redefining its place in a complex global narrative.
In the midst of the fifth and deadliest war between Israel and Hamas, a retrospective analysis uncovers a history of missed chances and rising extremism that fueled this crisis. From Netanyahu's policies bolstering Hamas to declining support for the two-state solution, the situation raises a pivotal question: could a different approach have averted this catastrophe?
Following the Hamas attack on October 7, the world is forced to grapple with the profound complexities of the Israel-Palestinian conflict, a mire of historical grievances, selective narratives, and devastating violence. With both sides weaponising the weight of their tragedies for the international stage, the tragedy's core remains: innocent lives lost in a perpetuating cycle of violence.
In a world where every politician has something to say, only a select few wield their words well. As we grapple with the failure of the recent Voice referendum, it's worth drawing from these leaders and questioning what truly guides political decisions - morality or self-interest?
13-24 out of 200 results.