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.
A documentary about the making of 1985’s We Are The World holds many surprises, while raising questions about charity singles. These stars were rich and privileged and largely out of touch with how most of the public lived. But at least they were using their fame for something good, and wasn’t that something to be encouraged?
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.
What links the debate about the conduct of the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, the detention of children in a crowded and under-resourced Cairns watch house, and British legislation to send asylum seekers to Rwanda?
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?
The bandage around my knee drew the practitioner’s eye, and my attempt to talk it away as a minor issue was no match for her professional perseverance. While I waited, she called in a specialist from orthopaedics, who took a good look at the affected area and warned me that unless I presented myself at outpatients very soon, ‘this could kill you’.
Charged with breaching national security for exposing alleged war crimes by Australian forces in Afghanistan, former Australian military lawyer David McBride's trial in Canberra rekindles a debate that tests the boundaries of military obedience and public interest. At the heart of this legal battle lies the question: when does the duty to expose wrongdoing outweigh the duty to follow orders?
Just two days before the opening of the recently concluded Synod on Synodality, five senior Cardinals — German Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, United States Cardinal Raymond Burke, Guinean Cardinal Robert Sarah, Hong Kong Cardinal Joseph Zen and Mexican Cardinal Juan Sandoval Ìñiguez — brought to public notice the five ‘Dubia’ (Doubts).
Next week, former army lawyer David McBride will face trial, accused of leaking classified defence information. Meanwhile, the prospect of meaningful whistleblower reforms that would shield Australian public servants who contemplate exposing wrongdoing through the media seems remote.
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?
The voices of Australia's First Nations communities are asking to be heard. With the upcoming referendum, the nation faces a decision both about equity and identity. How might genuine hope and understanding impact Australia's path forward and address longstanding disparities?
Novak Djokovic's on-court triumphs are undeniable, yet off-court controversies spark widespread debate. Navigating the complex interplay of admiration, critique, and understanding becomes essential in grasping the narrative of this unparalleled yet enigmatic champion. Can we disentangle his sporting prowess from off-court controversies?
25-36 out of 200 results.