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.
This Reconciliation Week and Sorry Day, we consider the defeat of the Referendum and the substantial failure to close the gap between the living conditions of Indigenous Australians and other Australians. It means that for many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, this week will be less about days of celebration than of grief and of grim resolve to continue to seek justice.
Following the failure of the Voice referendum, many believed that the path to constitutional recognition is closed for Indigenous Australians. But they may be wrong.
With the Queensland Government changing the Youth Justice Act, detention of children will no longer be seen as a last resort, causing widespread dismay among youth justice advocates. It invites reflection on what we should expect when we advocate for a cause, ranging from climate change to perceived injustice, and how we should evaluate our efforts.
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.
Much like Australia's recent Indigenous Voice Referendum, the recent Irish referendum sought to change constitutional perspectives on family and marriage met with overwhelming defeat. What does this reveal about the relationship between public sentiment and the process of enacting constitutional changes?
Recognition is not simply an acceptance of facts. It involves also entering the experience of the people affected. Reconciliation must begin with truth telling, flow into empathy, and be followed by a conversation aimed at building decent relationships.
In our more routine lives, most of us have people and groups whom we ignore, we instinctively look down on and we keep away from and people whose beliefs we scorn. We need to be attentive to the people who are commonly regarded as second-class citizens.
Months after the referendum, can we allow this referendum to die while preserving the essence of its vision and optimism? This is akin to our response to the loss of a loved one — we hold onto their memory, reluctant to let go. How do we keep the deeply treasured aspirations of the referendum journey alive while facing the reality of its death?
Today, the claims of Christianity are no longer common knowledge among a Catholic student cohort that comes from many faith traditions and none, but the Catholic school has a place for them all. Has the classroom become the ecclesial face of the Catholic Church in the 21st Century?
Kevin Rudd's Apology to the Stolen Generations in 2008 seems to belong to a different age. It can never be unsaid. It can, however, be disregarded. For that reason it continues to be important. It is a measuring stick by which both Parliamentary behaviour and the treatment of Indigenous Australians can be judged.
The referendum result was a disaster for the country and a tragedy for First Australians and there has been little appetite for public discussion about lessons to be learnt from this abject failure. If we are to move forward, it’s time to begin the conversation about past mistakes.
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?
13-24 out of 200 results.