Australia's commemorations of the First World War have thus far been massive at both the government and local levels, reflecting and affirming the dominance of the memory of war and the ANZAC ‘legend’ in the national political culture. The commemorations in 2014–15 triggered some debate about the commodification of the memory of war and the possibility of commemoration fatigue, but the centenary of the key commemorative event, the landing at Gallipoli on 25 April, attracted large crowds and blanket media attention. Whether Australians of culturally diverse backgrounds engaged with these centenary commemorations, and how strongly they identify with the ANZAC legend as the dominant narrative of Australian nationalism, however, remains unclear.澳大利亚对一战的纪念迄今在政府和地方层面都大张旗鼓，反映并肯定了在国家政治文化中战争记忆以及澳洲军团传说的岿然不移。2014-15年的纪念活动引发了关于战争记忆被商品化以及纪念疲劳症的辩论，虽然一些关键事件如4-25的加里波利登陆的百年纪念日吸引了大众以及媒体的关注。不过文化背景各色各样的澳大利亚人士是否都参与了这些百年庆典，他们在多大程度上将澳洲军团的传说当做澳大利亚民族主义的主流叙事，这些都不清楚。

Many historians of Australian political thought have attributed its pragmatic and anti-speculative tendencies to a Benthamite influence. Without denying the influence of Bentham and Benthamism on Australian thought and institutional development, this article challenges the assumption that the abovementioned tendencies necessarily betray a Benthamite heritage. By analysing the theoretical justifications for pragmatic, anti-speculative approaches to institutional design in the Federation debates (1890–1898), this article shows that there was a very strong Burkean impulse behind the sort of pragmatism that is usually attributed to Bentham. If the argument of this article is correct, then it is an invitation for historians and political scientists to reconsider significantly the nature of Australian political thought.研究澳大利亚政治思想的史家将澳大利亚政治思想的实用、反思辨倾向归之于边沁的影响。本文并不否认边氏对澳大利亚思想以及制度发展的影响，但对上述倾向为边氏遗产的说法不能赞同。笔者分析了联邦辩论（1890—1898）中实用的、反思辨的制度设计，指出通常被归到边沁的实用主义，其背后跃动的实乃伯克的思想。如果此论不谬，历史学者和政治学者就应好好考虑澳大利亚政治思想的性质了。

This article reviews and analyses the evidence on the distribution of income and wealth in Australia since the 1960s. A number of scholars – most prominently among them Thomas Piketty – suggest that inequality has been increasing across the advanced capitalist world. Kuznets’ benign picture of an ‘inverted u-curve’ depicting declining inequality in modern industrial society is replaced with an altogether different and potentially quite alarming one. Does this hold for Australia? Surveying 25 income trend and 17 wealth distribution studies, we draw on the best available evidence and find that overall there has been far less of a rising inequality trend than is often assumed or argued.本文分析了1960年代以来澳大利亚的收入及财富分配。有一些学者——其中最著名的是托马斯·皮凯提——认为所有发达资本主义国家的不平等都在加大。库兹涅倒U曲线所描绘的近代工业社会不平等不断减弱的美丽图画被一个全然不同、令人震惊的景象所取代。那么澳大利亚也是这样么？笔者考察25种收入趋势、17种财富分配的研究后发现，总的来说，不平等远并不像人们所常说的那样增加。

This article compares offline and online petition signing in Australia, to examine whether online forms of political activity can mobilise citizens who would otherwise not participate. Using data from the 2010 Australian Election Study and a model of civic voluntarism comprising online and offline resources, the article presents several unexpected findings. First, women are significantly more likely than men to sign both written and e-petitions, and this will likely continue with the increasing circulation of e-petitions and corresponding decline in written petitions. Second, Australians from a non-English-speaking background are underrepresented in the signing of written petitions but not of e-petitions. Civic skills gained in the workplace and voluntary organisations positively predict both forms of petition signing, but language, gender and income do not constitute barriers to the signing of e-petitions. This article contributes to emerging evidence the internet can mobilise traditionally underrepresented groups to participate in political activity.本文对澳大利亚脱线和在线请愿做了比较，以了解在线的政治活动能否动员起本来不参与政治的公民。笔者使用了2010年澳大利亚选举研究的数据以及比较在线与脱线资源的公民志愿行动模型，获得了若干意想不到的发现。首先，比起男子，妇女联署纸本及电子请愿书的可能性会大得多，这种情况会伴随着电子请愿的流行和纸本请愿的式微而继续下去。公民在工作单位以及志愿者组织那里获得的技能有助于他们积极参与两种请愿，而语言、性别、收入也不构成电子请愿的障碍。本文印证了互联网可以动员以往不大被代表的人群参与政治活动的说法。

Noel Pearson and Jon Altman are two of the central intellectual figures in the contemporary debate on how to address the poverty and disadvantage of Indigenous Australians living in remote regions. This article compares their visions for Indigenous economic development. Pearson advocates greater integration of Indigenous people into what he calls the ‘real economy’, but Altman has produced an alternative approach to Indigenous development – the ‘hybrid economy’ approach – which he suggests is more in keeping with the aspirations of many Aboriginal people to maintain a degree of autonomy from non-Indigenous Australians and to continue living close to ancestral lands. This article argues that both men should be understood as advocates for Indigenous self-determination, but different ways of conceptualising Indigenous autonomy and cultural survival has led them to contrasting policy positions.在如何解决边远地区澳大利亚原住民的贫困及弱势问题的当代辩论中，诺埃尔·皮尔森和章·沃特曼是两位核心思想者。本文比较了这两个人对于原住民经济发展的愿景。皮尔森主张原住民更多地融入他所谓的实际经济，而沃特曼的思路却不一样，他是一种杂糅思路，认为应该依从许多原住民的愿望，在一定程度上独立于澳大利亚非原住民，继续生活在祖先的土地上。本文认为，两人都是原住民自觉的提倡者，只是他们思考原住民的自治及文化生存的思路有所不同，从而导致了矛盾的政策立场。

The judiciary has not been the subject of sustained scrutiny within the political science discipline. The High Court plays a central role in the Australian political system, however, and the exercise of judicial power has far reaching consequences for the legislative and executive branches of government. This article presents a historiography of the study of the High Court by political scientists, using Helen Irving's ‘The Constitution and the judiciary’ as a foil. In order to foster cross-disciplinary study and research within the political science discipline, this article concludes by setting out a new research agenda for the future study of the High Court and the law by political scientists. This research agenda provides new insights into (among other topics) how judges exercise power and the changing relationship between the judiciary and the legislative and executive branches.在政治学里，司法并不一直是审视的对象。不过，高等法院在澳大利亚的政治体系内扮演了关键的角色，司法权力对于立法和行政部门有着深远的影响。本文将政治学者对高等法院的研究做了历史的梳理，采用了海伦厄万的“宪法和司法”理论为参照。本文为将来政治学者研究高等法院及法律提出了新的研究课题，希望以此促进跨学科以及政治学科的研究。这些课题探讨法官如何行使权力，探讨司法与立法以及行政部门之间变动不居的关系。

It is sometimes claimed that compulsory voting violates a particular right not to vote. For some, this assumed right is as fundamental as the right to vote. The existence of such a right, however, has attracted little sustained scholarly attention. This article explores from a political theory perspective whether the alleged ‘right not to vote’ is deserving the same legal and moral protection as the right to vote. I argue on two broad grounds that it is not. First, not all rights are capable of being legally waived and voting is one of them. Second, voting is a right but it is also a duty; it is a duty-right. Therefore, even though many people do fail to vote, doing so does not seem to constitute the exercise of any particular right, nor should it be legally recognised as such.有人认为强制性投票侵犯了不投票的权利。对于很多人来说，不投票的权利跟投票的权利同等重要。不过这种权利却未得到学术界的持续关注。本文从政治学的角度探讨了所谓的“不投票权”是否应像投票权一样享有法律上和道德上的保护。笔者基于更宽泛的理由认为不应当。首先，并非所有权利都是可以在法律上免除的，投票权即是。其次，投票是权利，也是义务；是权利—义务。所以，尽管许多人没有投票，但这并不构成某种权利，法律上也不应被视作权利。

This article critically evaluates the agenda and strategy of the Australian American Leadership Dialogue (AALD) for protecting and strengthening the Australia–US alliance. Nominally an exercise in informal diplomacy dedicated to fostering mutual understanding, the AALD functions more like a pro-American lobby group as it seeks to preserve orthodox thinking and eschew dissenting perspectives. The AALD performs this function in three main ways: by carefully framing discussion and debate, by socialising Australian elites into the alliance orthodoxy and by serving as a ‘gatekeeper’ of the status quo.本文对保卫、加强澳美联盟的澳美领袖对话提出批评。该对话虽然名义上只是加强共同理解的非正式外交实践， 但其作用更像是亲美游说集团，因为它要保持正统的思路，回避不同的观点。该对话用三种方式实现这一功能：小心地设置讨论和辩论；向澳大利亚精英灌输联盟的正统观；充当现状的守门人。