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.
An Arabunna man, Uncle Kevin Buzzacott devoted himself to the protection of that delicate, glorious country of north eastern South Australia with its Great Artesian Basin’s ancient waters threatened by the succession of powerful mining companies operating Roxby’s Olympic Dam.
Nam Le is one of the strangest writers in the history of Australian literature and is also one of the most incandescently brilliant — which is very weird if you bear in mind that his primary claim to legendary status is a book of short fiction published in 2008. With 36 Ways of Writing a Vietnamese Poem, Le returns with a new work that encapsulates the brilliance and complexity that fans and critics have come to expect.
How do we live and work happily together with people whose views on the world and human nature are fundamentally different to our own? Can different beliefs within organisations be lived with, or even celebrated, without necessarily undermining the organisation’s own core mission?
Sam Kerr’s alleged comment to a UK police officer has divided opinion as to whether it constitutes racism. The central question involves whether a structural understanding of racism should supersede a universal, neutral sense of racism of the kind that is enshrined in law.
Palm Sunday stands at the intersection of the world of justice and goodness and the brutal political realities in human societies. It mocks the pretensions of power that considers only the expediency of actions and not the human reality of the people affected by them. At that intersection today, refugees lie in the centre.
Times are changed and we are changed with them. As societal norms evolve, from fashion to expressions of freedom and political attitudes, how does each of us adapt while preserving our core selves?
As challenges to anti-discrimination exemptions are likely to persist within Catholic education, how can the government and religious institutions collaborate effectively to balance the freedom of expressing religious beliefs with safeguarding the rights and freedoms of everyone involved?
Two books about a 1942 massacre of Australian nurses were released last year. One is reliable, the other is notable for factual omissions. If we leave something out, are we then guilty of censorship? Alternatively, if our truth-telling offends someone else, what is our justification for so doing?
To encourage young men to adopt a more fully human understanding of what it means to be a man and to live by more expansive rules is an urgent task. It lies at the heart of reducing the level of domestic violence.
Since its release, audiences, critics and philosophers have grappled with Groundhog Day’s take on time and eternity. Like all great art, Groundhog Day resists easy categorisation and is a story that, in a wonderful irony, we can go to again and again.
A coffee shop used AI technology to track and measure the activity of its employees and customers to 'optimise' team performance. Not only does this raise a slew of ethical issues, but also leads us to consider: can the human element that makes a team or business successful ever be truly quantifiable?
How can we make progress on the question of whether debate can do harm, and if it can, whether that’s a sufficient reason to suppress particular debates? Or should we adopt a ‘no debate!’ approach to particular topics ourselves?
37-48 out of 200 results.