Travel teaches you quickly that dates are never neutral.
We mark them on calendars, book flights around them, and photograph their parades and fireworks as if they were natural phenomena — like monsoons or cherry blossom season. But public holidays are not weather. They are decisions. They are curated memories, pinned down and repeated until they feel inevitable.
In Australia 🇦🇺, January 26 sits uneasily in the landscape.
Drive beyond the coastal cities — past eucalyptus scrub, red dust roads, saltbush plains — and the land itself seems older than the stories told about it. This continent does not begin in 1788. It carries tens of thousands of years of movement, songlines, trade routes, fires lit with intention, rivers named and renamed long before maps arrived.
Yet the national holiday marks the arrival of the First Fleet: a moment of European arrival framed as “beginning,” while for many First Nations people it marks rupture — the start of dispossession, disease, and systematic erasure. What one narrative calls a birthday, another experiences as an anniversary of loss.
Travelers often talk about authenticity, but rarely about discomfort. And yet, the most honest travel moments come when the two collide.
Standing in places like Sydney Cove, the story on the plaque does not always match the story in the ground. The water reflects skyscrapers now, but it also reflects a quieter question: who is this day for? Who is being asked to celebrate — and who is being asked to swallow history for the sake of unity?
The phrase seen on protest banners — “Always was, always will be” — is not a slogan aimed at the past. It is a statement about continuity. About the fact that culture does not vanish simply because a flag is raised or a date is fixed.
From a travel perspective, this matters. Because destinations are not just coordinates; they are negotiated memories. When a nation chooses a holiday, it chooses which version of place becomes official — which stories are foregrounded, and which are treated as footnotes or “complexities.”
January 26 reveals that tension sharply.
The debate is often framed as political, but it is equally geographical. It asks whether a national day should be anchored to an event of arrival, or to something more expansive: shared civic life, survival, plural histories, or even simply a date unburdened by inherited trauma.
Other countries quietly adjust their calendars over time. Dates move. Meanings shift. Landscapes stay.
For travelers, especially those drawn to cultural depth rather than postcard certainty, this debate is a reminder to look beyond the celebration itself. To ask what a place remembers when the music stops. To notice whose voices are amplified, and whose are absent from the official itinerary.
Changing a date does not erase history. It acknowledges that history did not begin with the arrival of outsiders — and that belonging is not something granted by a calendar.
In the end, travel is an act of listening. And sometimes, the most respectful thing a nation can do — like a good traveler — is to admit that the story it has been telling about a place is incomplete.
Leave a Reply