Publicly accessible
URL: http://www.nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/collections.html
copyright 2016, by the Victoria University of Wellington Library
All unambiguous end-of-line hyphens have been removed and the trailing part of a word has been joined to the preceding line, except in the case of those words that break over a page.
Some keywords in the header are a local Electronic Text Collection scheme to aid in establishing analytical groupings.
In order to make new content available faster this work has been uploaded but does not have comprehensive name authority mark up for sub-works and corresponding authors. We will endeavour to add this mark up as soon as possible.
Plus 7 pages of letters and lots a bits and pieces
Last year's Annual General Meeting of the New Zealand Insurance Company was a brief and quiet affair, with only about 60 people present. This year it was different. About 400 people packed into NZI Auckland offices on Tuesday of last week to witness the start of a new chapter in New Zealand's protest movement against apartheid.
About 50 of the people present had come along as shareholders to protest at the company's involvement in South Africa. They were in support of a motion moved by Nancy Sutherland, a Christchurch City Councillor and a substantial shareholder in the company. That this company cease all activity in the Republic of South Africa, Rhodesia and the Portuguese territories of Africa.'
Most of the supporters of the motion were students who through local and national student associations have been buying up a minimal number of shares to give them voting rights in the company. Other support came from shareholdings of religious groups and individuals. There was a marked difference in the appearance of the shareholders present — between the students and the preponderance of aged investors who had been especially urged to come to the meeting by the worried management.
Unusual security precautions were taken by the management, including having police men outside, and a fireman, a first aid attendant and security officers inside. Before beginning the meeting, the Chairman of the Board of Directors, Mr D.H. Steen, checked that, no tape recorders were operating in the audience. (It was later found out that NZI made their own tape of the entire proceedings.)
The first signs of the debate to follow came after the chairman's annual report had been presented by Mr Steen when the Rev. Don Borrie (General Secretary of NZSCM) asked if the directors supported apartheid. This question was ruled out of order. NZUSA International Vice President Alick Shaw then asked: "In view of the fact that this company is involved in commerce in Rhodesia, have the directors of the company taken legal advice about whether this is a breach of UN sanctions and NZ law?" In asking the question he told the directors that a group of experts in constitutional and commercial law are preparing a case in Wellington which will entail the sueing of the directors of the company for such a breach of NZ law. There was laughter around the room and the Chairman said the question was not relevant to the report.
A minor shareholder, Mr Peter Boshier asked about wage differentials between white, coloured and black employees of NZI in South Africa. This question was also ruled out of order.
A shareholder with an American accent asked for discussion relevant to the motion, instead of "all these irrelevant questions." Cries of hear! hear! rang round the room. Alick Shaw pointed out that the chairman's report had six paragraphs referring to South Africa, a not insubstantial part of the report. He said that resolution 6 on the agenda about withdrawal from South Africa could only be properly discussed if the directors were prepared to tell the shareholders exactly what the situation was in regard to NZl's operations in Southern Africa.
A question was then asked about the effects of terrorism in Northern Ireland, Argentina, Rhodesia, South Africa and Mozambique on the company's activities. The chairman said this was "quite irrelevant". He said shareholders were present to discuss the domestic affairs of the company, not politics.
Before the South African motion was moved, Mr Steen made some comments on it on behalf of the company. He said that legally NZI did not operate in South Africa, although it held a majority in the New Zealand Insurance Company (South Africa) Ltd, which was largely independently controlled. He said the company made no apology for operating via a subsidiary in the Republic of South Africa and Rhodesia, although it had never carried on direct business in the Portuguese territories.
Mr Steen said the NZ Government didn't interfere in trade with South Africa and was clearly not discouraging this trade. (Wrong — the government has just dropped South Africa's trade preferences). In Rhodesia, the company was in the same position as the majority of British and US companies there, which were operating through South African companies. He claimed the relevant NZ legislation did not prohibit NZ services being offered in the area. He said the company was being criticised for helping apartheid, but its share of the South African non-life insurance business was very small. Thus, he said, NZI's presence is not likely to be of great concern to the South African Government. The company failed to see that withdrawal would benefit its African staff — about 12 in all — "who would have to seek alternative improvement." Then Mr Steen revealed that he was somewhat disconcerted and that he was patronising toward Africans — he had meant "alternative employment".(He was also rattled at another stage of the meeting when he accidentally declared the company's divident to be 20%. instead of the actual 14%.)
The fault in the anti-apartheid groups' argument was, he said, that they claimed that by withdrawing from South Africa NZI would weaken apartheid. But NZI's operations in South Africa were far too small to do this. In conclusion Mr Steen said he was not prepared to allow a private meeting of shareholders to become a forum for undue political propaganda. He thought that NZI should not be dictated to by a 'local minority group' i.e. the students at the meeting. This was an ironic touch, as a main contention of the students argument was that NZI was being dictated to by a minority white regime in South Africa. The decision on the motion should. Mr Steen said, be based solely on commercial grounds.
Moving the resolution Mrs Sutherland said she took exception to the use of the term political at the meeting. "Politics has nothing to do with my motion." she said, "morals has everything." She said the time was long overdue for a decision on the company's involvement in South Africa. "I blame myself and all our shareholders that this matter was not raised long ago," she said, adding that she was grateful to the directors for allowing her motion to be discussed and that she was also grateful to NZUSA for encouraging her to move the motion. Her main reason for doing so was her concern for the oppressed people of Southern Africa. New Zealand, she said, should
Mrs Sutherland said she believed the company should be guided by moral considerations as well as profit motive.
"Is it acceptable to us that in our South African subsidiary white and non-white employees cannot have lunch together or use the same washroom facilities?" she asked.
"Is it acceptable to us that in our South African subsidiary no non-white employee can hold a senior position over white employers? Is it right that as an employer in South Africa NZI should have to administer the pass laws?"
She said that because NZI (SA) had to invest in South African Government securities and pay taxes in South Africa, the company was bound to support institutions based on racism.
NZI should follow a policy aimed at the breakdown of apartheid. The World Council of Chruches, the NZ National Council of Churches and the non-whites of Southern Africa had called on companies like NZI to withdraw from South Africa, Namibia, Rhodesia and the Portuguese territories. She said she wasn't asserting that NZI's withdrawal would bring about the collapse of apartheid but she did assert that withdrawal would reduce international support for apartheid.
Seconding the motion David Cuthbert said he was speaking not only as a shareholder and Chairman of the National Anti-Apartheid Committee but on behalf of the people who weren't able to be present at the meeting — the black and coloured people of South Africa. They had called for a total economic boycott of South Africa, Rhodesia and the Portuguese territories. "Essentially the argument for withdrawal of the New Zealand Insurance Company from South Africa is very simple. Not only does this company, we as shareholders and you as directors, by operating in South Africa accept the inhumanity of apartheid, but we moreover support the whole oppressive economic system of South Africa."
Alick Shaw pointed out that NZUSA had only mounted its shareholder's campaign after very lengthy discussions with the board and senior management of NZI. In his report the Chairman of Directors had claimed that NZI enjoyed a reputation as a good and fair employer. But what does being an employer in South Africa entail, or rather what does being an employee in South Africa entail. For instance if a black African is absent from work for more than 24 hours without the permission of the company he is working for he has committed a criminal offence. He is subject to a fine and imprisonment. "NZI employs people in South Africa according to the law of that country. It enforces the law of that country and it pays the wages defined by that country.
"If we look at the wage differentials for people of different races in South Africa we will see that the gap is not only great, but it is ever widening. South Africa's total wage bill for a year is 3,670 million rand. Of this black South Africans who form 70% of the population, receive only 610 million rand, or less than 20%."
An elderly gentleman asked whether the young gentleman had ever lived in South Africa, Rhodesia, and Zambia or had experience in their affairs. He also asked whether the South African Government would tell New Zealand how to treat what he called "our Maoris". Another elderly gentleman said how nice it was to hear Mrs Sutherland speak. He said that for many older shareholders their investments in NZI were a "sentimental matter", as well as providing income. The South African Government had its problems, but eventually they would solve them themselves he hoped. He expressed the sentiment that NZI should not be blamed for the situation in South Africa, which was acclaimed by the older shareholders.
Another speaker against the motion was a red faced, sixtyish racist. South Africa and Rhodesia, he said, "have these problems right on their plate. We ought to sympathise with these people and give them help, and we can't give them help by knocking down every institution they've got.
He quoted a case of an African farmer with 16 wives, 12 of whom were pregnant (laughter). He went on to talk about black millionaires in the Transkei and claimed there is opportunity for black Africans in South Africa and Rhodesia "On account of their breeding proclivities and their particular style of life its a bit difficult to give everybody something out of the pot. But I will tell you that Rhodesia is doing her best. I know Mr Smith, he's got his troubles — anybody would have with a population growing as quickly as the blacks are.
"Anybody who goes to Zambia or Tanganyika for a holiday needs his head examined, and if the doctor says he's all right get the doctor examined (laughter). Now the black man has taken over these countries he's wrecked them, and he'll wreck this company. The greatest need South Africa has is for companies like this. If the company moves out someone else will just move in. And I don't like religion, politics and insurance being mixed up together." (loud applause)
One disgruntled shareholder suggested that the Company's Act should be amended "so we wouldn't have to listen to this sort of discussion." An elderly shareholder said that supporters of the motion were quite happy to draw dividends from NZI. If they were genuine they should withdraw their shares (loud applause). A young businessman replied "the last speaker may like to know that the small dividend I get from this company goes to the World Council of Churches." He said the issue was a clearcut one. It was a moral and ethical issue or "plain moneygrubbing".
Stephen Chan, President of NZUSA, rose to speak. (Muttered comments of "Oh, he's a Chinese!" round the room). "If I were in South Africa I could not be president of the South African Students Association. If I had chosen a career in insurance rather than in the university I would not be able to rise to any managerial position. This is because I am coloured. Although my skin is only slightly darker than the skin of most of the people in this room it makes all the difference. I have a New Zealand girl as my wife. If I were in South Africa I could not have a white girl as my wife." He repeated that NZI's operations in South Africa were regulated by South African law and therefore had to abide by it.
Speaking in her right of reply, Nancy Sutherland said she was ashamed that people of "my age and my kind" had behaved worse than the students at the meeting. She praised the students for their ideals, "without which no progress would be made" and thanked them for supporting her motion. She said that apart from a few inconsiderate people present it had been "a magnificent meeting."
She promised that next year the churches, the students and "people like myself" would continue the campaign in NZI for the right of the African people for self-determination and freedom. She said the churches had substantial investments in NZI "and they will come in greater numbers and will be with us."
Finally she asked the directors to prepare a report on NZI (SA)'s operations, including the extent to which racial discrimination exists within that company.
The results of the voting, announced after the meeting, was predictable — the protestors were swamped by about three and a half million share votes to twenty thousand. But far from being dispirited, they were jubilant. "We regard it as a success that we were able to put our case before the shareholders and get them to think about it," said David Cuthbert. "This will be a long term campaign, perhaps as long as five years. This is just the beginning."
Similar action is planned for the meetings of the South British Insurance and the Guardian Trust in December, and NZI itself may be hearing from the campaigners even before its next AGM.
The idea of this form of campaign did not originate in New Zealand. Ralph Nader used similar tactics in the States, and inspired the Haslemere group in Great Britain to have a go at Barclay Banks investments in the Cabora Bassa dam in Mozambique. Since then various other companies, including Polaroid, Rio Tinto Zinc and Gulf Oil have been under fire from within for their various economic imperialist activites.
Now the campaign has reached New Zealand, and company directors and shareholders are being informed that there are more aspects to business than just making money. The protestors will probably never get a majority at an annual meeting, but if shareholders are made more aware of the moral implications of their investments, and if company directors are made aware that the reputations of their companies may be impaired, they may one day ask themselves whether what they are doing in South Africa is worth it.
A small booklet is being prepared on the New Zealand Insurance Company's involvement in South Africa and the initial stages of the shareholders' campaign against it in New Zealand.
It is available from the Apartheid Information Centre P. O. Box 704 Auckland
for 15c post free. Send for a copy right away!
In the issue of "Salient" dated
Salient Vol. 36 No. 25, is the last of a species. Only emergent in the early months of this year the full bloom has now to be cut short as the end of the academic year arrives and the student press goes into hibernation. The Salient of
Here scrambled across the next few paragraphs are the Salient workers. The editors, Franks and Steele, who were predicted to fly apart in April. Roger, son of a colonel from Rotorua, began the year talking of anarchism but with a bit of self criticism and social practise soon followed the mass line. Peter, son of a civil servant from working class Eastbourne, became an international traveller and briefly our man in Peking. Neil Pearce and Bruce Robinson, when not character assassinating each other, seemed to work in the general field of layout and sub-editing, except that sometimes the latter's uncontrollable ravings created more work than it produced. Graphics, graffiti, and cartoons were done by Bob Brockie, Gordon Clifton, Tom Scott, Don Franks (who also sat on the right side of the magistrate as our court reporter until Janet Oakley look over these onerous duties), Steve Smith, Oliver Robb, Gilbert Shelton, Ron Cobb, Robert Crumb . . . Typesetting was done mainly by our girl in Moscow, Claire Smith, but also by Irene Kennedy, Meg Bailey, and Diana Francis. Frank Pitcairn, Graeme Collins and Karen O'Neil performed innumerable and nameless tasks. Legal advisors Les Atkins and Warwick Flaus helped keep the size of the issues down. Remarkable photographs were taken by Keith Stewart, aided and abetted ably by Hilary Watson, Gyles Beckford and Mike Curtis. General staff consisted of Freda Cook (London correspondant), H. T. Lee (Sydney Bureau Chief), Joris de Bres (Auckland correspondant), David Tripe, Kathy Baxter, Gyles Beckford, Don Carson, David Cunningham, Cheryl Dimond, Debbie Tait, Rob Campbell, Rona Bailey, Jonathan Hughes, Meg Bailey, our man in Stalingrad (T.S. Auld), Graeme Clarke, Graeme Collins (a former colour separation expert), Lloyd Weeber, Susan Williams, Bruce Kirkland (who says he's been a source of inspiration all year), Helen Pankhurst, Wong Ahfo (who also provided many brilliant gourmet meals for the Salient workers as they rose to the occasion at all hours of the night), Karen Stewart, Les Slater (war correspondant), Ted Sheehan, Tony Ward, Stephen Hall, Uncle Tom Cobbly and all. Thanks to Cock Robin Wheeler and Mike Murphy for their work on the supplement in Salient 13. Special thanks to Patsy, Sharron, and Mrs Good-all in the office downstairs, to Joe Smith, and to the cleaners who had to fight their way through the chaos of our office.
1st Floor, University Union Building, phone 70-319 (ext. 75, 81 & 56). P. O. Box 1347, Wellington, New Zealand.
Printed by Wanganui Newspapers, P. O. Box 433 Wanganui, and published by the Victoria University Students Association, Victoria University of Wellington, Private Bag, Wellington.
Last Monday, as the Portuguese Trade Mission began its money grubbing visit to New Zealand, the People's Assembly of Guinea-Bissau proclaimed the country's independence from Portugal.
The liberation movement in Guinea-Bissau began 17 years ago when six people formed the African Independence Party of Guinea and the Cape Verde Islands (PAIGC). Now the PAIGC has established its own administration, schools and hospitals in three quarters of the country.
Although they have been utterly defeated in Guinea-Bissau, and are on the defensive in Angola and Mozambique, the Portuguese colonialists refuse to grant the people the right to self-determination. As the Portuguese Prime Minister, Caetano, once put it:
"Africa is more than an area which must be exploited. Africa is for us a morally just cause and our raison d'etre as a state. Without Africa we would be a small nation; with Africa we are a big power."
The Portuguese have used napalm, defoliants, bombs and all the other modern military hardware supplied to them by NATO to smash the African people's independence struggle. But this policy of genocide has not been successful.
The PAIGC has defeated the Portuguese because it has worked among the people, defended them against repression and shown them how they could build a new society in the middle of a war. A milcar Cabral, the founder of the PAIGC who was murdered by Portuguese agents in January, once told his fellow party members:
"Always bear in mind that the people are not fighting for ideas, for things in anyone's head. They are fighting to win material benefits, to live better and in peace, to see their lives go forward, to guarantee the future of their children." These words are an important lesson to revolutionaries all over the world.
Like the Paris Peace Agreement, which sent the Americans packing from Vietnam, the PAIGC's declaration of independence is a great victory in the world struggle against imperialism.
Already 12 countries have recognised the Republic of Guinea-Bissau — Algeria, the People's Republic of China, Guinea, Mauritannia, Morocco, Rumania, Senegal, Somalia, Tanzania, Togo, Upper Volta and Yugoslavia. Other countries, including the Soviet Union and the Eastern European states, arc expected to follow shortly. The PAIGC told the Auckland Apartheid Information Centre in a recent letter that 40 countries had promised to recognise Guinea-Bissau. If Mr Kirk is genuine in his statements supporting "the legitimate wishes of the people (of Portuguese Africa) to have a choice in their own affairs and shape their own future," the New Zealand Government should follow suit.
Last Sunday, September 30, Herr Philip of the South African Consulate burst into print in the 'Sunday Times' with a full page advertisement headed: "Should the Black peoples of South Africa rule themselves? The South African Government answered 'Yes', years ago." The text of the ad boasted "Today 6 of the Black nations living in South Africa already have local self government in their historic homelands".
It goes on to say that the land area, the population, the annual budget, and the per capita income of the Transkei (Xhosa nation) and Kwa Zulu (Zulu nation) arc greater than some random countries named. Or arc they so random? The land areas and populations are bigger than the Bahamas, Bahrain, etc. and richer than Burundi, Guinea, etc. — in fact a selection of countries designed to distort the true picture about as far as it could be distorted.
If anyone still doubts that the white South African rulers are fascists, that Vorster and his henchmen supported the Nazis in World War II (they were actually jailed for it at the time), then Herr Philip's propagandising in New Zealand surely proves it. Philip must have learned his tactics from Goebbels, who based his on the theory that the bigger the lies you tell, the more people will believe them.
Docs Philip's latest advertisement compare the budget or the percapita income of the blacks to the whites in Southern Africa? Of course not. Have his figures about land areas and populations any relevance to living standards in the countries compared? Does the bit about the South African Black nations having self-government actually mean anything, e.g. are they independent of the cruel white-imposed pass laws and similarly fascistic legislation? Not likely.
The "Sunday Times" advert is the work of a desperate man. Thanks to the efforts of the anti-apartheid movement and the Labour Government's opposition to apartheid, Philip is now finding people are increasingly sceptical of his propaganda. Lately he has given up trying to rebut UN and other statistics which illustrate the miserable life of non-whites in South Africa. He is now given to saying that because things are moving so quickly in South Africa, all statistics arc out of date!
While Philip still wins the prize as number one ratbag in the diplomatic corps in Wellington, he is very closely followed by the Malaysian High Commissioner, Mr Jack De Silva. They arc similar in their politics and the arrogant way in which they have interfered in New Zealand's internal politics. Like Philip, De Silva is an experienced diplomat who has come to New Zealand with a sinister purpose — to ruthlessly weed out any Malaysian students who are the least bit critical of the Malaysian Government.
De Silva claims to have been a communist sympathiser in his youth. That admission means he is either a renegade or a long established agent of the Malaysian security service. In either case no New Zealander or Malaysian student can trust him.
To date De Silva has been unsuccessful in his attempts to bully Malaysian students. His charges of "communist propaganda" against the Otago Chinese Language Club have been effectively rubbished by that group. The Students Associations and a few academics with guts like Victoria's I.D. Campbell have exposed his cries about "communist subversion" as direct intimidation of Malaysian students in New Zealand. And the Labour Government has refused to co-operate in his witch-hunt.
Newspaper reports from Kuala Lumpur indicate that the Malaysian Government is supporting De Silva's campaign. So it is clear that the Malaysian High Commission's efforts to make all Malaysian students toe the government line will continue. For this reason NZUSA and its constitutent students associations must continue to ensure that Malaysian and other overseas students enjoy the same rights of free speech as local students.
Salient has been accused by De Silva and his friends of being "anti-Malaysian". In fact our only crime has been to print a few articles explaining the reality of life in Malaysia, and scores of letters from Malaysian students of all points of view. De Silva's real objection is that we have allowed Malaysian students the right of free speech, a right they do not enjoy in their own country.
NZUSA has recently made protests to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs about Philip's advertisements and De Silva's hysterical mouthings. Because they have flagrantly violated accepted diplomatic practice by interfering in New Zealand's internal affairs, Philip and De Silva deserve to be booted out of New Zealand. This country has enough grubby little right-wingers without these two reminders of the Third Reich swelling their numbers.
This is the twenty-fifth and last issue of Salient for
But its impossible to analyse the effect of this year's Salient. The reactions we receive are diverse. Some people grumble about the paper, but few have told us why. And everybody still grabs their copy off the piles, and reads substantial parts of it. One tangible reaction we do get is the letters, which are overwhelming, and the many positive responses we have had, often from unexpected sources, have been very gratifying.
We like to believe that we're open to criticism, so if you have restrained yourself this year in the hope that the revolutionary tide will ebb, then be warned that it may not. Salient next year will be continuing the line it has developed during
Of course a very useful way to criticise is to suggest areas of interest that we should be covering, even if you don't write articles yourself. I hope that our readers do spend a minute or two in the coming holidays thinking about the content and direction of Salient, and what they can suggest or do to alter it.
A couple of areas that we have delved into and that we'd like to go further in, are course criticism within the university, and specialised reporting beyond it. We would like to help students make whatever attacks they think are appropriate on departments they feel need shaking up. Beyond the university one area we have begun reporting is the courts. But we have been hampered by a shortage of staff. If we could get a few concerned, responsible people to spend one or two mornings a week on the reporters' bench in court we could extend what has become one of our most worthwhile and effective preoccupations.
There are many more areas that any or all of our readers could get involved with — too many to enumerate here. These holidays, look back over the pages of Salient
The next major building project on Victoria campus will be the Von Zedlitz Tower, which is to be a ten-storey building sited at 26 and 28 Kelburn Parade. It is the first stage of a project which will eventually embrace most of the lower part of Kelburn Parade.
The total scheme is designed to allow the university to accommodate a roll of 10,000 students. The various stages after the Von Zedlitz Tower do not yet have a completion date, but are planned to be completed as they are required and as the necessary funds become available. If the funds become available at faster rate than the student roll rises the University will certainly make use of the space. The university authorities would ideally like to see a staff-student ratio of half the current figure.
The Von Zedlitz Tower is planned to be used by the departments of sociology and of language and literature.
I cannot be denied that the university has a pressing problem of shortage of space. But does it follow that the type of development typified by the Von Zedlitz Tawer and the rest of the Kelburn Parade scheme, is the ideal sort for Victoria? Must it be accepted that it is the only possible one?
Many of the planning assumptions and objectives behind the Von Zedlitz Tower have practical and preferable alternatives. The overriding objective of present planning is having the maximum number of lecture theatres and main buildings in as compact an area as possible all preferably linked by covered passageways. This diminishes the grassed area on campus, as what courtyards that would exist within the main area would be paved. One reason for this is to keep the lecture change period down to ten minutes. If the campus were more spread out a longer period might prove necessary. A more dubious reason is the wet and windy Wellington climate.
These planning objectives have effects beyond the physical environment of learning. If priority at the campus's centre is given to academic requirements then it will be no surprise that facilities such as the creche are so far from the centre. Similar difficulties over the placing of a marae will occur.
When considering developments such as the Von Zedlitz Tower something more than aesthetics are at stake. The very concept and function of the university must be determined. If a university is to be nothing more than a 'learning factory' then the Von Zedlitz Tower is fine, but if the university is to be a place with a social dimension involving all aspects of student life, then some other type of development is called for.
The university must recognise that the Kelburn area is essentially residential, and should adopt a type of development that would fit this background. This does not mean that future growth should or could be accommodated in houses which were not originally designed for university use, though it is worth realising that moving into Von Zedlitz would probably meet with mixed reactions from the department involved. While some such as sociology will be happy to shift closer to campus, others like classics and German will be happier where they are.
Future development should be of the low-rise type. Modern city planning has several ways of achieving high-density usage with relatively low-rise structures. There should in addition be a recognition that in the life of the student the social role of the university is very important, and a policy which gives it low priority is likely not only to stunt the personal growth of the student but is likely to be self-defeating, in that it will result in an environment likely to hurt the learning function of the university.
The Von Zedlitz plans as they stand have met with strong disapproval from the City Council, which has requested an environmental impact report before building permits are issued. While the university has in the past tried to meet council objections, its schemes are government projects and hence they are not obliged to do so.
An environmental impact report should be insisted upon now for the entire Kelburn Parade scheme. This involves three towers, one of which is two stories higher than Von Zedlitz is planned to be. It clearly makes no planning sense for the council to have to approve the scheme bit by bit as the university needs building permits. It is the environmental results of the project as a whole which are the most important, and therefore the project should be reviewed now in total for its total impact.
A new type of youth club is being pioneered in Karori by university students working in close co-operation with local young people, some of whom are from the (so-called) '"Karori Gang ".
Meeting originally in the Karori Community Hall (
Resisting police opposition and attempts to close the youth club down by snob elements in the suburb, Kacori young people have over two years created for themselves a presentable club room known simply as the "Karori Teen Centre".
The centre can comfortably seat 50 people and is normally packed out on both Friday and Sunday evenings. A "Friday Youth Forum" has proven popular attracting guest speakers on a wide range of topics of interest to youth. A Sunday night coffee hour, musical or film programme also attracts a keen crowd most of whom are young workers. A team of counsellors is being built up for those who need them.
The centre is equipped with a movie projector for film screenings, a public address system for speakers and musical groups, plus full catering facilities in the kitchen. This equipment has all been paid for by fund-raising within the Karori community and is actually the property of the members of the youth club.
All this equipment is normally left set up in the centre which is left unlocked at all times. There are also facilities for repairing cars, and a large open air barbecue site on the half acre of land held in trust for the centre. It is proposed over the next few months to re-develop this land as a sort of farm, for whatever use the young people want to put it to.
The Karori Youth Club and its facilities are completely open to any young people who may be interested in coming. The centre is run by an action committee consisting of local young people from a wide range of different backgrounds, and with widely differing experience of life. Each member of the committee takes responsibility for one facet of the youth club's organisation e.g programme arrangements, publicity, catering, finance — banking or fund-raising.
Fund raising is carried on every Saturday and includes from time to time door to door collecting, raffles, car rallies, fairs and bottle drives. A grant is being negotiated with the new government's Department of Recreation and Sport for a dollar for dollar subsidy of all funds raised.
It is hoped eventually to be able to find sufficient voluntary staff to be able to organise activities and fully operate the facilities of the teen centre every night of the week. Towards this end the Karori Teen Centre is sponsoring a comprehensive 16 week Youth Workers Training Programme during November and early December. Although completely open to all who are interested in doing youth work, this course will be of particular interest to university students. It will be a part-time course consisting of weeknight (Mondays and Tuesdays) lectures and seminars.
Anyone interested in further information about this course or opportunities to do youth work is warmly invited to contact Richard Wardle at the Karori Teen Centre, 448 Ailington Road, Karori by day, phone 768207 or phone 554348 evenings.
John Arnold Govan was charged with failing as an alcoholic to report to the Salvation Army Home "The Bridge". Apparently under the impression that he was no longer welcome there he had gone to Palmerston and got a permanent job for himself. He also said that the AA was prepared to help him and that he didn't want to go back to 'The Bridge'.
The Magistrate said that as he was drunk when arrested he didn't seem to be doing very well on his own, so he was sentenced to 14 days in prison while "The Bridge" decided whether they wanted him back.
It would seem that this country has too many alcoholics to look after to be able to discourage those who want to be independent and help themselves.
******************
After the Germaine Greer case New Zealand got a reputation as a prudish country with regard to its obscene language laws.
An 18-year-old girl was convicted and fined $25 this week for swearing as police were arresting her for being underage in a hotel.
The prosecution said that there were a number of people standing around at the time. There was no evidence however that they were offended or that they had even heard. They were probably over 20 and as both offending words had been passed in written material by the Indecent Publications Tribunal it seems that adult New Zealanders are presumed to be unusually sensitive to spoken words.
Although obscene language may be upsetting or embarrasing at the time, is it sufficiently important to give an 18-year-old girl a conviction for?
******************
A not guilty plea to a charge in the Magistrate's courts takes time, witnesses and care on the part of the police. A guilty plea can be dealt with far more expediently. In the magistrate's court this week the police asked for a fortnight's remand in a case involving a not guilty plea. The explanation was that the police witness was ill. But it was the fifth remand they had asked for. All the Magistrate could suggest in granting the remand was that the defendant should make a fuss about costs when the case was finally heard. It seems that even the magistrates may be getting a little tired of a tactic that is being used increasingly often by the police. It costs them nothing, it costs the magistrate nothing — only the defendant suffers the inconvenience and the loss of money and time.
******************
Underaged drinkers found in a hotel with a glass of beer in front of them are charged with being under age and also with possession of an intoxicating liquor. Magistrates usually convict and fine $10 on the first charge and convict and discharge on the second. Thus there are two convictions and sometimes two fines from one small incident.
******************
A man who had been told to leave a hotel was standing on the footpath outside. He was told to move three times by a constable and when he refused he was arrested for obstructing the footpath. He pleaded guilty and was fined $20. Generally accepted definitions of obstruction are "to block up, to hinder from passing, to shut off or to hamper".
Merely standing on a footpath, even if a policeman has told you to move doesn't appear to fit into any of these definitions.
******************
NZUSA is looking anew for a President for
It is, of course, bad practice for any organisation to vote a representative out of office before he or she has even taken up office. On the whole this is the fault of those conservative elements in NZUSA who responded too hastily to provocations from the other candidate for the presidency at August, Graeme Clarke, and who voted Newman into office without giving adequate thought to the abilities he possessed in his own right. The vote at Otago was thus not so much for Newman as it was against Clarke. Anyway, should anyone reading this be interested in the presidency of NZUSA for
The National Executive also reviewed the successful results to date of the campaign against NZI and changes secured in the forthcoming Rent Appeals Bill by NZUSA representative John Blincoe. Who together with International Vice-President Alick Shaw, received a round of applause.
Sound moves were also made in the field of NZUSA administration, where the position of Administrative Officer was abolished and agreement reached on the need to get in a part-time accountant to keep track of the organisation's financial aspects. How the other administrative requirements of NZUSA are to be met will be decided on the basis of a report Stephen Chan is to prepare concerning the delegation of the total work load among all NZUSA officers.
The creation of a position of General Research Officer accompanied the abolition of the post of Education Research Officer. The new research post will provide essential information for all areas of NZUSA's social and political work, though the emphasis on educational research will remain. This again is a step forward, one which could hopefully pave the way for a much more integrated basis to NZUSA's work and an avoidance of any narrow over specialisation.
As one of the more fruitful execs, the meeting had a balance of destruction and construction plus a soccer match thrown into the middle in which Wai-kato's Carl B. Gordon as goalie, finally cracked thus allowing a 1—0 victory to the progressive forces from the South led by Arts Council Director Bruce "Bomber" Kirkland.
Last Monday the ownership of the Blythswood flats on the corner of Willis and Aro Streets passed into the hands of the Waitangi Trading Company. Before that, they were owned by the Druids Grand Lodge, a "friendly society" which in the five years they had been the owners had raised the rents of unprotected tenants by as much as a half, but had done almost nothing in the way of repairs. The buyers wanted to renovate the flats and sell them as own-your-owns (being careful to spend at least 20% of the purchase price on repairs and so avoid the speculators tax).
Five-hundred and ninety-eight of Waitangi Tradings' $2 shares are owned by John Readei Hastings, 280 Oriental Parade, one by his wife Anne, and one by Donald George Mcllroy. The directors are Hastings and Michael Spensley Gilkison, 38 Raroa Road, of Mcllroy, Gilkison and Heal, barristers and solicitors. Hastings lives in a block of flats, the Olympus flats where just the same process was used. The Blythswood flats were unlucky to get caught by him. By some extraordinary good fortune, both the flats and the property next to them, 318 Willis Street, have been left out of the Aro Street Redevelopment plans. A man who wished to turn Blythswood flats into own-your-own flats would be required to provide at least one off-street car park for each flat: by the same good fortune the 28 parks he would require could be placed on the adjacent property, if he could buy it. Such a lucky man is J.R. Hastings.
The people who stood to suffer most from this were the tenants; on August 17 those tenants who were home were visited by "plumbers". They came to inspect the stoves and bathrooms, but spent their time asking who owned the furnishings. Then, as they left, they handed the unsuspecting tenants envelopes which "authorise us (the plumbers) to come in at any time and make repairs" — these were notices to quit. Some of the tenants had been there more than 30 years; some only six weeks. All had just one month to move out.
Some of them moved out at once. Tenants have been bought and sold so often that few question the right of landlords to throw them out for any or no reason at all. But some of the tenants, at least, decided to stay and fight. At the moment there are 11 flats still occupied, although the notice to quit expired on September 24. The tenants are holding out until Waitangi Trading offer them alternative accomodation and compensation for shifting. But as the number of tenants reduces, the chances of a satisfactory settlement become more remote.
The tenants went to the local MP Gerald O'Brien, who helped them present a petition to Parliament, "craving relief". Their prayers were heard before Norm Douglas's Labour Bills Committee last Wednesday. So were the prayers of Hastings' fellow-director, Gilkison, who turned up to present the case for the other side. They managed to sit in on the tenants submissions and then, in their answers, correct any 'false impressions' the tenants might have given. As the lawyers and parliamentarians joked together, some of those on the tenants side had a sinking feeling in their stomachs. Only when the committee makes it its report will they know if there was any real hope at all.
Hastings, however, did not seem to be waiting for a decision from Parliament. He declined to meet with tenants saying "wait until after the hearing and then we'll see what the story is." A fortnight before he was due to take possession of Blythswood, painters turned up and began to work on the ceilings and walls in the corridors. Some of the tenants' friends countered by smearing the walls with patches of vaseline to prevent the paint from sticking and put oil in the workmen's boots. Hastings returned with patrols from Freightways Security Services, who moved through the building with torches, trying door handles, several times a night. When the circumstances of this harrassment were made clear to them, Freightways decided to send someone to Hastings explaining that they would not be used in any way in what was a civil dispute between a landlord and his tenants. Legally, those who remain after the notice to quit has expired become tenants at suffrance, and can be only removed after an order has been obtained from a Court for an eviction.
Hastings is a man who will always act within the law because he wants people to buy his flats and doesn't want them, or himself, to get a bad reputation. So he treads a wary legal path.
The $72,000 he must spend to avoid speculators tax will be swallowed up by the sad mess that owners such as the Druids have left Blythswood in. By law Hastings must make special arrangements for those tenants protected by the Tenancy Act, who occupy three flats of the II remaining. He will probably offer the other eight some alternative accommodation, which with increasing pressure they may finally take, so that the issue will collapse; but an attempt is being made to obtain from those tenants who have already left some estimate of the costs and hardships involved, so that some adequate compensation can be obtained.
The tenants formed their own committee for the fight with Hastings and with very little outside help have gone a long way towards a settlement. Most important, they have made an example that can be followed by anyone else in a similar situation. People like Hastings should find it more difficult to carry out their schemes if tenants are prepared to organise themselves. Parliament may give some help by extending the minimum period of notice to quit, but the tenants strength will always lie in their ability to co-operate in the defense of their interests. Though many Blythswood tenants who left at Hastings nod have weakened the position of those still fighting, the example of those left will serve to underlie the importance of solidarity in any struggle with a landlord-speculator of this kind.
You're a first year overseas student at Vic. Before coming to this country you decide to try for accommodation through the Universities Grants Committee's body OSAC and Victoria University. When you arrive in New Zealand the University shoves a piece of paper in front of you and tells you to 'Sign!' You do so without understanding that if, you leave your accommodation you'll lose some or all of the $100 you paid to get to Vic.
You're a first year New Zealand student coming to Vic. Before arriving in Wellington you decide to apply for a place in a hostel or hall of residence. You're told you have to pay $30 in advance just in case you don't agree to live in the hostel where you've gained a place.
So overseas students have to pay 3 times as much as locals.
Next year things may change. The Welfare Services and the Students Association have been discussing the situation but to date they both have yet to recognise just what changes should be made. At present the university seems to assume that it has a right to 'compel' an overseas student to live where he or she is told to whether or not the place is suitable for them—at pain of a penalty not exceeding $I00. The NZ student faces a penalty of not exceeding $30.
An incident at Rudman House this year illustrated the problem.
Several students, both locals and overseas students, moved out. As a consequence the NZers lost their deposits ($10 each) but two Malaysian students had $60 and $33 respectively, deducted from their $100. When their case was taken up with the Welfare Services these sums were paid back to the two overseas students. But the Welfare Services should not have taken the money in the first place.
The University and the Welfare Services also fail to understand that the overseas student is just as likely as a New Zealander to find that hostel life docs not suit him, especially as he is coming to a new country. He must not be required to remain in a hostel for a full year if he doesn't want to — no student should.
The Students Association must take action to ensure that overseas students arc not discriminated against in New Zealand. For example overseas students should be contacted personally or in writing to ensure that they understand what their rights are.
The administration of overseas students' hostel accommodation has been only one area in which the Welfare Services have come in for criticism this year. The only real solution to this and other welfare problems is the establishment of the Welfare Services Committee, through which students can direct all the Welfare Services operations.
this Friday 8 pm Union Hall
Neil Newman, the
A NZUSA general meeting at Palmerston North last weekend passed a vote of no confidence in Newman by 19 votes to 9 with 17 abstentions, and incumbent President Stephen Chan ruled that Newman had been deemed to resign.
Newman was elected with the minimum number of votes necessary at NZUSA's August Council. But following a barrage of unfavourable comment in the student press and grumbles from NZUSA officers, student leaders decided Newman had to go. VUWSA President Wilson gives his views on page 5.
Enrolment for next year will be from Tuesday February 19 until Thursday February 28, 1974.
Earlier this year a group of people mostly teachers and students, decided to meet regularly to discuss aspects of the Education System. Many felt that a federation of teachers from all areas of the system could help to break down the artificial barriers between the pre-school, primary, secondary and tertiary institutions. However it was decided that the interests of education could best be served if the organisation, at this stage, remained as free and open as possible. So there is no formal structure. There are two groups in Wellington. Members range from kindergarten teachers to University lecturers. All are on a equal footing. Each group arranges its own finance and decides what it will publish. Students and members of the public are welcome to attend (all human beings are teachers of some sort or another.) If you are in forested in joining or forming a group please write to NZTF c/o P.O. Box 3084, Wellington
Last week's front page story contained a couple of typographical errors. The important one changed the sense of the quote from the US Navy Secretary. What he actually said was "the Omega Navigational System was an essential part of US Naval operations in the Pacific...."
The other error was minor and altered only the fluency. The article should have ended"...... the Americans, who reveal things to us poor, dumb Kiwis only when it pleases them."
This week we print a letter from one B. Jones, who asserts that the Omega system is designed for commercial shipping. If this were true, why would the US Navy Secretary have said that Omega was essential for Naval operations?
The copy deadline for the clubs section of next year's Handbook in November 1. This should consist of a short description of your club, its aims, activities etc. Cultural clubs are to, under threat of determined napalming by the Wai-te-ata expen dables, supply also two telephone numbers of committee members resident in Wellington over Orientation and the time and place of their first meeting in term. Sports clubs are advised by Don Carson to do the same. Now is your chance to benefit from..............
Now is the time of year when you are worrying about the fact that you should be worrying about the exams. You look at the amount of work you still have to swot and say "Stuff it!" Pause to consider that perhaps you might be going just the wrong way about passing exams.
Remember, exams are only three hours long. They can never cover all your course They seem comprehensive purely by fraud. This is done in one of two ways:
a. Such general questions are asked in such a roundabout way that you feel that whatever you write is trivial or slightly off the mark. For an example, take these questions from a German II paper. You were offered a choice of fifteen topics from which you had to write on three. From the choice comes questions like:
Or a slightly different type, very prevalent in subjects like English and History, this time from an English III paper:
"Why is all art to be restricted to the uniform level of domesticity? Whenever humanity wrestles with the gods of passion and pain, there, of necessity, is that departure from our diurnal platitudes which the cant of criticism denounces. The mystery of evil is as interesting to us now as it was in the time of Shakespeare, and it is downright affectation of effeminacy to say we are never to glance into that abyss." (Dickens, in an editorial in All The Year Round) To what extent does Dickens succeed in his imaginative handling of "the mystery of evil" and "the gods of passion and pain"?
The first examples are impossible to give a satisfactory answer to; the best thing to do, if you must write on topics of this type, is to restrict the topic in your first sentence, i.e. Klopstock and Goethe. "As this question is so large I will restrict myself to talking about whether there is any foundation in the current rumour that Goethe was Klopstock's step-uncle by a former marriage ", or else just to scribble like a bastard.
The example from the English paper is perplexing. Are you to talk about the quotation, that is, that Dickens has lifted himself above the "diurnal platitudes" of domesticity, or that Dickens is a tuff guy to talk about these devils and gods? Surely not! The quotation, that has taken you five to ten minutes to roll around inside your head, is irrelevant. It is put in there only to impress you with the scope of the lecturer's reading. In such circumstances ignore the quotation completely.
b. A more usual form of exam is with questions of considerable depth on selected topics. These exams are easier to pass, as all you need to do is to discover what topics are being included. For this you need to study past exam papers. A person of my aquaintance, studying History I from Massey last year, not only predicted the exam topics accurately, but also knew the approximate wording and the place in the paper where each topic could be found. She merely ticked off the five questions she had prepared and started writing. Exams test techniques as much as knowledge.
Your lecturer is a good source of information. Never get on the wrong side of him. It is worth going to great lengths to gratify his whims. Agree with him, drink with him, sleep with him, even whip him if he is in a mood for it. Remember it is his baby you are sitting.
It is usually not too hard to find the book where his lecture notes come from. Study it closely, but never, under any circumstances acknowledge that you have read it. He will think you a genius for having views that happen to coincide with his secondhand ones.
Note his quirks and turns of phrase and use them without hesitation throughout the exam. He will never notice that you are humouring him, but will consider that you are writing fluently and well. A friend of mine once even went as far as to insert stage directions - (here pivot on left foot) - (continue throwing chalk from hand to hand - suddenly drop it for laughs) etc. I wouldn't go so far as to advise this, but it is on the right track.
Of course, you must invite him to your pre-exam party. Ply him with drinks and talk about Muldoon or the weather until he is positively staggering. Then throw him a few hard questions like socks to the jaw. (Be brutal - they are payed to help you) If the strain of a year's lecturing has been sufficient he should crumple and begin sobbing, and you will be able to mould him like putty.
Of course, the Pre-exam Party Trick is one of the best ways of breaking the spirit of your competitors. Invite the whole class to a party the night before the first exam. You will generally find that none will come, but they will all feel remarkably shaken to know that you can hold a party at that time. Rub it in by telling them the next time you meet them that you hope they fail.
Another technique that I have often seen used is the Honesty Pays Trick. If you arc doing no work, don't try to conceal it. A much greater psychological victory can be gained by telling everybody you don't need to work. Alternatively you can spend all day in the cafeteria, and when you are asked why you are not swotting you can reply, with your nose upturned, "I need a little relaxation. I am doing much more work that you!" However I would not recommend this second technique, as it is not being completely honest.
Confidence, or at least an air of confidence, is of utmost importance in breaking down the defence of your rivals. Convince them that you know the work and they don't. Tell them of all the topics that could be in the exams. They will take fright, tell that you have learnt more than them, and try to expand their programme.
When the exam time comes don't wait at the entrance looking through scores of notes, There is nothing more calculated to put you off. Arrive ten minutes late, just when the other entrants have settled down (after all, what is ten minutes, when compared to the disruption you cause). Finish your answer book within an hour (even if you have to miss out pages to do so), and make sure everyone hears you ask for more paper.
Very frequently you must look to the supervisor as your friend in this part of your campaign. I have frequently gone to examinations where the chatter of the supervisor has stopped any intelligent thinking in the room. This is due, of course, to the bribes of a competitor in the room next door. If this happens all you can do is resolve that she is only hindering the others in the class, and help her as much as you can in her aim. Once a supervisor spent most of the exam time telling the competitors what they were entitled to, how to head their paper, and other distracting information. This is bad - the essence of harassment is that you do not yourself get harassed. Ask questions - what sort of knot you should tie in your little piece of brown string; whether it is alright for you to put your number in the corner where it says to put your name - there are numerous ploys you can use. But it is probably better for you to take over completely and use your own strategy.
One of the best and most used ploys is the Paper Asking Trick. Make sure you use this when the supervisor's back is turned, so that you can make a great deal of noise. If you sit in an inaccessible place, so much the better.
Another gimmick that seems to be finding increasing favour is the Windown Sitting Trick. Sit in the full sun in a window seat, and, in the course of the exam ask if you can move. This is guaranteed to upset a considerable number of people, especially (he others in the room sitting in full sun; they spend the rest of the exam wondering if they should have asked to move as well.
Closely allied to this is the 'Excuse Me' Trick. The name is confusing. Never ask to be excused. Always state in a loud voice: "I want to have a piss!" This is sure to shock half the room. But the main value of this trick is that suspicious minds consider that you have notes outside that you could be looking up. Of course, if you do have anything you want to look up - but I must not put ideas into your head.
Finally, don't forget that you are permitted to eat in the exams. The Crunching Trick is an old favourite which is still popular. In Oxford, as the story goes, all competitors used to be entitled to a pint of ale in the exam, but rumour has it that the last time a student asked for his pint he was later disqualified for not wearing silver slippers.
I don't know whether it would work but I have often considered turning up for an exam equipped with a portable and insisting that I be permitted to type. It seems ludicrous to me that in exams you have to pursue such an outmoded convention as writing your script legibly with a pen.
Boast about how easy the paper was. Let your rivals know that you had prepared for all questions so well that you could not decide which to answer. Don't suffer from false modesty. Tell them all what great chances you have. But be careful that you don't talk about what you wrote. Hear the answers other people have given, then wax sarcastic, and tell them how wrong they were. In this way you will be able to conceal your own ignorance.
Finally, and by this time all your scruples will have gone by the board, you must tell as many people as you can the wrong date for the next paper.
The details given here are by no means finally settled but I think they indicate the kind of course structure that is likely to emerge. Since students take at least three years over a B.A., we've got to keep some measure of continuity. The staff who will be offering the courses are naturally enough, more competent to teach some courses than others. We don't hire and fire overnight.
We would justify the period grouping of works by saying that it's the most economical way of seeing a significant group of writers responding to one another's work and to shared social pressures. Since every original artist both absorbs and reacts against his immediate artistic tradition, the succession of courses is again meant to be an economical way of tracing the growth of a literary tradition, the development of forms, and response to social change. We can't say what's new unless we know what's been. The courses required of an English major are those which, in their arrangement, allow study of these larger concerns, and, in their content (major authors and select texts), encourage close reading and personal response. It's true that they demand a wide range of reading in literature of the past. Which is only to say, as Croce did of history, that all literature is contemporary literature.
A student chosing to major in English literature will be asked to do something like ENGL 111,112, 204, 215; either 213 or 303; at least one of 301, 302; at least one of 311, 312, 313. In addition there might be some work required in a foreign language, although that has still to be resolved. (There are other possibilities.)
I repeat that the above outline is tentative in all its details. Some courses (201, 202, 203) have not been discussed adequately with those who might offer them. ENGL 252 is desirable but has yet to be planned and submitted for University approval. But in outline the courses provide for a much extended range of options; the total credit requirement for a major is reduced from 48 to 42; the literature pre-requisites are effectively reduced to two (111 and 205); there's first-year course in contemporary writing; some 20th century literature is build into the major; there are specific genre courses as well as period ones; and all restrictions currently affecting the A and B streams (which are mutually exclusive) and qualitative criteria conditioning entry to 300-level courses (especially the modems) are abolished. I notice that the 30 B.A. ENGL courses total 156 credits, so that it would be technically possible (if it weren't for the foreign-language element) for a student not merely to major only in English but to take an entire degree in it. I hope none will. Only POLS offers, or at least lists, more (36), although they're worth less (150 credits). Music offers 28 for the entire Mus. B.; ECON courses number only 20, Math 17 and HIST 16. Other universities? Even Auckland offers only 18 ENGL courses, they're more tightly structured, and there's nothing like our Drama programme.
Finally I should note that the pre-requisites are not likely to prove a serious obstacle to any non-majoring student who wishes to enter an advanced-level course, Entry will be possible in pretty much the same way as it's now granted for asterisked pre-requisites.
Mr Gordon Campbell's accounts of English studies will have misled some of your readers. May I make the following comments?
Those who have been most anxious to see changes made, and most vocal about the need for them, are Mr Campbell, Mr John Allum and Mr Stephen Hall. Mr Campbell is not a student of English. Mr Allum is taking English but is majoring in History. Mr Hall is majoring in English but as student representative on Faculty he has not once raised any of the criticisms made by Mr Campbell (including those of the foreign-language requirements).
Mr Allum organised a petition which was circulated to all of the larger classes in English. It was given to me last week, some two months after the signatures were collected. There are 173 signatures in support of some or all of four requests:
Mr Campbell's articles have not always been ungenerous, for which I thank him. But they have perhaps under-stated some significant changes which had anticipated his own ideas. For example, there will be two tujoriais and two lectures a, week in all first year classes from
I have long agreed that the present 48-credit requirements for an English major (60 with the foreign language) places undue constraints on a student. If we are to retain the possibility of a double major, as I believe we must, or a broadly based degree, no subject should command more than half the degree (54 credits), including all pre- and corequisites. We have now pared out English major itself down to 42 credits. The foreign-language requirement is another matter. Personally I favour its retention (Victoria has the least stringent requirements of all the universitites except Waikato — elsewhere the language prerequisites for Honours are twice as tough), but I have also made it clear that this is a question that has still to be resolved.
The one point on which Mr Campbell and I disagree most substantially is the conception of an English major. He is probably right in saying that our disagreement reflects a difference in social attitudes, in what we each expect of a University (as distinct from a community college), and in our view of the claims of a discipline external to all of us as against our immediate, personal and self-chosen interest. He asks for open options beyond first-year, building to a maximum of 36 credits (12 introductory, 24 for any authors a student cares to choose). If History can do it, the argument runs, why not English? (Ever since Aristotle, poetry has been thought more serious and philosophical than history. Perhaps therefore it demands more time?)
If I can be brief without being banal, reading a wide range of literature with sensitivity and understanding requires a tactful balance of personal response ('what's in it for me?'), historical control ('why did he say that then?') and skilled analysis ('I see what he's up to, but it works/fails because'). We're trying to keep that balance in our English major. Happily it's not inconsistent with getting a personally fruitful education. Mr Allum has confessed to me (though a tincture of guilt might have implied disloyalty to some greater cause) that he has enjoyed his work. And even Mr Winter, whose self-confessed sterility is laid to my charge, must admit that if we're bastards, we're at least efficient ones.
The point is that we are responsible for ensuring that anyone who describes his or her degree as "B.A. in English" has a certain competence as defined by knowledge of the subject (literature in English from Chaucer till now) and quality of response to it. Given that aim, I don't honestly see how we can ask for fewer than 42 credits.
But no one is compelled to major in English. We're not our brothers' keepers. If a student is majoring in another subject we accept that certain minimum levels of academic and social acceptability are being met there. In
That's not a perfect solution to all demands, but I think it's better than the single-subject undergraduate honours degree in most British universitites or the wide-ranging, open option system of the first B.A. degree in many American universities. The first leads to invidious distinctions between 'Honours' and 'Pass' students and (apart from the foreign language work which all English students are obliged to take) is unhealthily narrow. The second is probably not inappropriate in a community which has several kinds of "university", but I think it true to say that such degrees have little validity outside the local community unless they have been made good by protracted post-graduate work (including foreign languages) — which is precisely the pattern that has developed in North America.
We should be doing a disservice not only to our subject but to our students if we were to create a situation in which they could no longer claim that their B.A. was as good as any other granted by an English-language university. As it is, we can't quite claim that now; but I am convinced that the best of our M.A. graduates, who have taken the major programme for B.A. and devoted one further year to English, have an international standing which is accorded to very few graduates of American universities. I'm anxious to keep it that way for our students.
This commitment, I repeat, doesn't preclude a good measure of choice. There will be some 30 ENGL courses in the B.A. of which only five would not be to some extent optional for an English major (as planned for
Finally, is English in a cul de sac?
The one great infelicity in Mr Campbell's last report was his account of the concluding stages of the recent meeting. I'd thought we'd agreed that there was a problem, that it wasn't confined to English, and that present misgivings were a reflection of uncertainty about the future role of the university as such. It was very naive of me, I see now, to confess to an honest doubt about the form society will take in 40 years time and the demands it will then make of literature and the University study of literature.
My own guess is that artists and writers will find themselves more and more at home here; but it's now three years sincc I proposed that as a fundamental principle of faculty development. At least we'd made a start in Drama and Music; NZ literature is the thin edge of the wedge, and contemporary writing might drive it further; art history might partner literary history until both yeild living painters and poets; and some day we may have a film school. Mr Campbell has not provided me with any comparable vision.
Or perhaps he has. I m probably oversensitive to imagery (an occupational hazard), but I was sorry to note the hints of hysteria and violence, which, in their minority impotence, Mr Allum and Mr Campbell let drop. I see from "Salient" that there's a "bounty" on our heads in the English Department; Mr Allum has said that if I'm not more responsive to his demands I'll deserve "to be put up against a wall and hanged" (his words); and Mr Campbell now threatens "disruption". Well, the best may not lack all conviction, but the worst do seem to be full of a passionate intensity. Poor Yeats, of course, is dead. I don't suppose anyone reads him these days.
In replying to Professor McKenzie I don't want to appear as if Pm trying to undercut his points. However this is the last Salient of the year and I'd like to take up the chance for a dialogue that has been sought ever since July.
I agree that our petition did not directly represent the 1300 or 1400 currently enrolled. As I said at the meeting due to pressure of work and the time consumed by other fruitless meetings the petition was poorly circulated, not getting to even a majority of classes and not to all students at any one class. The point is, no one has ever asked that 1400 their opinion, and since this is the last Salient I can't ask the Professor to produce the "extensive evidence" he has been secretly compiling about student opinion. I say "secret" because the only other attempt to canvass English classes was done last year by Lisa Sacksen. Despite a much larger reponse than ours, her petition on presentation has never been seen or heard of again. I did hear that the Professor 'consulted' his Shakespeare class; Just after my first article appeared. He apparently demanded with obvious hostility in his voice to know who wanted to discuss changes and who wanted to do Shakespeare. Since no rash soul dared confront his scholarly wrath I'm sure he feels that the class is 1000% behind him.
Perhaps naively we told you. Professor about our strategy. A department professor has a position that carries so much authority with the majority of students, that open attacks by other students will only alienate those whom we hope to convince. We reasoned though that despite our respective faults we shared with the Professor a love for English literature; so we centred our discussion on the canon of English — what belongs in it, and how it may best be taught. So we worked on presenting, in meetings and in my articles a coherent, practical view on these matters (and the formulation on the petition was only part of this process).
If our arguments were sound It would be up to the department who controll all the available power, to incorporate our ideas in what it offers to students. If unsound, we expected some reply.
Instead we have been evaded, distorted, or ignored and have ended up being portrayed as the hysterical, violent minority that our whole effort aimed at avoiding. Admittedly towards the end the rhetoric on both sides has got pretty heavy. But instead of invoking Ycat's salute to the silent majority perhaps Professor McKenzie could see how much his own refusal to talk directly has contributed to the tone that this encounter has developed.
Ok. To more concrete things. The student group raised four criticisms. 1) The 54 credit load is excessive; 2) Compulsory language credits cannot be justified. 3) The general education and employment prospects of most students is more important than combatting, for the few MA graduates affected, a quite hypothetical threat to the international standing of the degree within the academic community. 4) Selective intensive analysis is equally important as a cursory overview.
You will look in vain through Professor McKenzie's letter for substantial answers to those points. The innovations that he mentions, however welcome do not affect any of these criticisms because their benefits will be available almost completely to non majoring students. He repeats the priority of the international standing of the degree — to us, the "disservice" he speaks of, in the unlikely event that the degree would slip below what academia expects of its recruits is lets important than the disservice being done to the general education and employment of most students. It is precisely the "local community" that he disparages (i.e. us and our environment) that is important.
He again begs the question that his canon and his degree structure provide the best approach. He simply says "we think...certain works are important......a certain range is necessary......I don't see how one can settle for less than 42 credits...we ensure...a certain competence....knowledge...and quality of response." No discussion. Papa Don knows best.
You will however find these errors
I find it hard to produce "comparable visions" when I realise that my visions are to be administrated within a university being destroyed by (i) the current staff/student ratios; (ii) inadequate funding; (iii) the degrading (to persons and ideals) scramble for those funds between Departments.
Professor McKenzie will not attract "living poets and painters" to this situation — they are currently dropping out of his undergraduate courses. Any worthwhile vision must recreate the conditions for a genuine two way learning experience i.e. smaller but connected groups that enable the full, equal sharing of ourselves and our special talents. Not only would this free "students" from dependency on "teachers" it would free talented, sincere people like Professor McKenzie from administrative pressures that are warping and twisting him, and liberate him from his dependency for his sense of values on the opinions of the international academic community.
P.S. Seeking further expert opinion I passed on to Professor Munz the suggestion of Professor McKenzie that poetry was more serious and philosophical than history. Unfortunately he at once fell into an apopleptic rage and I have been unable to get his teeth unclenched by publication time.
The plans of the extensions to the Gymnasium are on display in the foyer this week. These extensions include the proposed arts centre. The section of the model with the liftoff roof represents the architect's first response to the ideas gathered by the Arts Centre Committee. Ian Athfield's model combines the space requirements of each activity into a structure which reflects the philosophy of the centre. The only building space available was the gap between the existing gym hall and the proposed additions. Southern developments were restricted by unsuitability of site (interference with the Cotton Building).
The ideas for an arts centre arose from discussions about the desirability of providing on campus:
It was generally agreed that in view of their similar recreational function and the availability of the site the arts centre should become part of the gym complex. This would also have the centre as part of the immediate developments and not as the highest priority on Stage II (
Basic specifications were given by the committee from the information provided by clubs and members. For example, road access, raised platforms for performing arts, bench, cupboard, and drain areas for pottery, etc were essential.
Detailed drawing and cost estimates are the next steps. The plans of the centre are unlikely to change much from the model on display unless alternative suggestions or objections are voiced.
In the next two months information will be gathered to prepare the designing of the various activity areas. Any ideas would be welcome (at the Studass office) e.g. is there any reason why the darkroom shouldn't be on the ground level?
The addition of the arts centres plans to the overall extensions of the gym is likely to raise the costs by at least $100,000. The University Grants Committee has already indicated reservations about grants to physical welfare buildings.
Management Committee has been aware of the finance problem involved with structural developments of the Union. Sympathy has been expressed by previous executives of the Students' Association and trust funds may be available to help building programmes. The failure of the recent motion to secure an increase in Students' Association fees for an in increase in building account levy will mean Management Committee has to review its source of finance. The first priority in Union developments is the Union Tower. At the last Management Committee meeting the costs were increased by $33,000 to include a bridge from the Union Tower to the Rankine-Brown roadway.
The architect Ian Athfield has estimated costs as follows: present tower plans $700,000, bridge $33,000, Arts Centre $100,000.
The comparison of costs and functions of the Union Tower, containing "executive suites" and administrative offices, with those of the southern extensions including the arts centre may provoke a reconsideration of priorities.
The University Union Management Committee wishes to inform students and staff that Mr Graeme Jordan has been appointed Catering Manager of the University Union. The contract with Nationwide Food Services Ltd, will expire on
The budget for the catering operation for
In two months time, Bowen Hall will be no more than a pile of rubble, having obeyed the call, as indeed we all most inevitably, of Wellington's motorway. It has been used for the last two years as a place of residence and various other assorted activities for 40-odd students. Run more or less by the students themselves it has combined the colourful range of characters found in a student hostel with the freedom of a flat. Bowen's mixed sexual nature has proved the adage that if you treat people like children they will behave like children whereas if you treat them like adults they will still behave like children but will do so in an adult manner.
Bowen encompasses a great range of social, political and racial opinion. Jew and Arab have come to some degree of understanding (built on sand though it be); European and Asian have come to similar agreement (i.e. most of the Asians have felt obliged to leave). Catholics and Jesus Freaks have learned to coexist to the extent of now being separated only by the crucifix. There has even been room for the legendary A. Rimbaud with his flippant fripperies. Bowen's social range is from the middle class, to the middle class, teaching us that in general the middle class have simple and narrow aims in life and that nature has adequately Tilted them with simple and narrow' minds for the job.
There have been the inevitable paradoxes. The greatest wealth being concentrated in the hands of the fervant Marxists, the greatest poverty being dispensed to the Jews.
It Would be wrong however to imagine that Bowen has been an institution of factionalist discord, residents existing with one hand on a gun, the other on their particular holy book. There has developed a strong collective consciousness, adequately expressed by its social gatherings. Perhaps the social highlights have been the annual raids on Weir House and Weir's retaliatory raid.
Other events have been the loud but otherwise welcome visitations from the constabulary in pursuit of night painters or linguistically basic farmers, and occasional visits from tight-lipped axe-weilding firemen.
It is difficult even now to believe that this dream-like reality will soon be mere dream-like rememberance. Soon the bulldozers will be at the door, levelling us till we form an inconsequental, but nevertheless immaculate part of the motorway complex. What has become a way of life for over 40 students will soon be for them an intangible flow of memories for a short but sweet part of their student lives.
Last Friday saw the social event of the year (for the hearties) as sportsbods gathered in the sight of big Mike McKinley to pay tribute to the valiant foe who had attained the high standard of excellence demanded of them in their respective sports.
Conspicuous by his absence was Donald E. Carson who, so rumour has it, was carted off to Wellington Public Hospital with convulsions brought on by attempting to insert himself (so to speak) in a petty bourgeois capitalist pin-striped suit. Not surprisingly the Chairman of the Blues Panel (Mickey Mouse Mike) was awarded a Blue, as was the organiser of the dinner, Warwyck (top me up) Dewe.
Sportsman of the year went to rugby player Graeme Mourie, which just goes to show rugby isn't as dead as we thought it was — more's the pity. Methinks though that the rugby boys are keen to reap the benefits of the Vic sporting scene without assisting the overall running of the outfit (another blow for Sports Council!).
Those awarded Blues for Smallbore Rifles: Gavin Adlam, Norman Robinson, Hans Anthony van Dam. Athletics: Bruce Batton, Anthony Wright, Katherine Hawkins. Mens Hockey: John Scott, John Grainger, Henry Arnott, Donald Sandford. Netball: Angela Florence, Ann Downes, Judith Baillie. Waterpolo: Barry Britten, Michael McKinley, Warwyck Dewe, Ian Trousdell. Table Tennis: Julie Leonard. Fencing: Peter Osvath, David Grant-Taylor. Rugby: Graeme Mourie, John Greenwood, Gerard Sullivan, Timothy Downes, Michael Collins, Mark Johnson. Rowing: Blair Steer, Desmond Eyre. Rugby League: Harold Mills (Skiing: Richard Pettit. Golf: Frank Borren.
If the education system in New Zealand is a means of preserving the privileged position of the elite, the owners of capital and their managers, then schools and universities are operated to a large extent on the taxes of those whom they discriminate against. How do schools discriminate against the oppressed and preserve the elite's privileges?
School is not based on the experiences of the pupils which is the first requirement for a liberating education for the unacademic majority. School is academic and based on book learning. It is not surprising that pupils who have a home background where books and education are highly valued should succeed at school. If university attendance is taken as an indication of success in the school system, then the inequalities made in our schools can be demonstrated. Table one shows that it is children with parents who have achieved academic success who are more likely to go to university.
The majority of university students' parents achieved some academic success in spite of the conditions prevailing when they were attending school, namely depression, then war, which would have forced a premature end to many school studies. What percentage of today's parents achieved UE or higher while at school in the
More revealing is the job and income status of university students' parents. From tables two and three it is evident that the incomes of most university students' parents are in the upper income bracket, and their jobs are high status jobs. 21% of all male students and 26% of female university students in
The extent of the disproportionate representation at university of the children of higher income and status groups is indicated by national census figures for incomes and occupations as represented by tables four and five. Although the figures are not strictly comparable, the disparity is so obvious that it cannot be a statistical inaccuracy caused by a lack of strict correlation.
Almost 60% of New Zealand males between the ages of 45—54 earn below $3000 (in
It should be remembered that in a veritable tax haven like New Zealand it is possible for the wealthier sections of the community to legally misrepresent their incomes. The most stark picture of the class background of New Zealand university students is gained from the statistics relating to their parents' occupations. Only 5% of university students, male or female, have fathers whose occupations is semiskilled or unskilled. Yet this type of occupation accounts for over 40% of the labour force.
One final indicator of the inequalities of our education system is to be found in statistics relating to the achievement levels of Maoris, in an education system which deals with middle class Pakeha experiences in a middle class Pakeha manner. In
Children whose environment is not school orientated — those from lower class backgrounds — tend to do poorly in school and therefore tend to wind up on the bottom of the social hierarchy. This does not mean they are less intelligent than those who succeed in school. These school failures have a deep knowledge of their social and physical environment, and they display great ability at getting-by in it. They do not understand that their environment at school does not deal in that, and it deprives them of the opportunity to find someone to help them achieve this understanding.
Most so-called slow learners, for example, display great ability in breaking school rules. For them it is easy to get to their lockers between period without getting caught. They know all about the things to be found in the hills around their valley. Some children from farming backgrounds are academically clueless, but there isn't anything they can't tell you about baling hay. If baling hay were the sole criterion for judging IQ then many of our 'brightest' minds would be morons.
Of course, these impressions about the intelligence of the failures in our school system cannot be proven; our way of testing intelligence is very academic, relying on word skill and mathematical logic. An indication of the discrimination inherent in these tests is shown by the fact that children of teachers do better than any other group in them.
Discrimination in our schools is not always as subtle as this. The New Zealand school system is increasingly socially stratified. Thus schools in wealthy areas with wealthy ex-pupils have good facilities, those without make do with what the government provides. Government finance to schools is weighted in favour of the upper forms. The more sixth and seventh formers a school has, the more money it gets from the government; it is the middle-class schools that have more pupils in these forms. These schools get more teachers and more heads of department for that reason.
The resulting lower staff/student ratios and the greater opportunity to work with more favoured upper forms means that these schools are flooded with applications for vacancies. Thus they get the best teachers. A favoured school in Christchurch gets 100 to 150 applicants per position. The non-favoured schools in Christchurch are lucky if they get 20. On a national scale Christchurch is a favoured area. Capitation grants from the government which provides books and other learning resources are also weighted in favour of the upper forms. Schools with 'good' middle class pupils are favoured over other schools by government policy.
School amounts to what must be one of the greatest thefts of all time. It conditions people to fit into an oppressive work system and alienating society. They are required to be conditioned so that they will accept this system which provides those with capital their unearned profit. School also steals from the majority the words that are necessary to understand that system and overthrow it by imposing academic study and instilling dead knowledge into pupils.
School is orientated towards selecting the future top level technocrats and bureaucrats who will manage society in the interests of the capitalists, and who will receive a much more handsome reward for their efforts than the ordinary worker in the factories and offices. It is these elites that benefit from depriving the oppressed of political power and the words necessary to understand their oppression. And, as has been shown, the elite is replenished largely by the children of the elite.
The chance of the lower class children of going to university is much slighter than that of the elite. They are discriminated against in the way the school is funded and supplied, by what the school teaches and
Although the figures again are not
Ignoring the discrepancy of $199 in the statistics, and assuming that tax proportions were roughly the same for
Salaries and wages taxation in
The entire educational system is therefore of no value to most of the lower classes; in fact it is a positive burden on their efforts to take political power and thus become more fully human. The education system from primary to university level operates to preserve the economic, political and social power of capital and management. It is geared towards conditioning all-those who go through it to accept the status quo, and to select the elites to govern society; the final stage of this process is the university and it cannot be examined in isolation. In its role of selection, school discriminates against lower socio-economic groups, and these groups subsidise the elevation to the elite of the children of the wealthy. If one considers that all taxes are paid ultimately by the people who produce the wealth of the community, then the extent of the subsidy is huge.
The oppression of our school system does not end here though. For if the oppressed were aware of their condition they would want to change things. The other aspect of education is the blinding of the oppressed to the truth of their society, conditioning them to accept the status quo and stealing the words from them that are necessary to understand it. This will ensure that they will spend dull passive work lives to provide profits for a few (many of them not even New Zealanders) to spend on idle, luxurious, leisured lifetimes.
In the past few issues we have run a number of articles on te reo Maori and its place in New Zealand society. As a natural follow-up we thought we could examine just what it entailed for a Pakeha to learn the Maori language, so Roger Steele interviewed John Me Caffery, a student at this University. If it reads a little bit like an advertisement, well, that wasn't intentional. Its just the way the interview turned out, and it's quite a satisfactory result at that.
Firstly, how long have you been learning the Maori language?
Since
Did you have any acquaintance with te reo Maori before you came to university?
No, none at all. Before I came to university I hardly knew that Maoris existed. I was completely fooled by this 'we are one people' mentality. And especially, I had no idea that Maoris actually spoke Maori.
And what made you decide to study the language?
In
Why had you initially done a course in Maori Studies?
Well, I went overseas to Tonga in
What have you actually achieved in your studies — what is your standard of Maori now? Do you find it fairly easy to have a conversation in Maori? And do you find difficulty in following speeches?
Conversation isn't too difficult at all, but my comprehension exceeds my ability to speak. I have no trouble at a hui (meeting) following what people are saying except for the more classic illusions, which I enjoy figuring out anyway.
How long would a person have to study Maori before he at least understood what was going on?
Learning a language is not a passive thing. It depends very much on your motivation. If you really want to learn a language and pick it up, I think in a year you could be following and understanding what is going on and participating to a fairly large extent.
What have you gained from your study of the Maori language?
I took it up because I wanted to understand what friends and people around me were saying, and to be able to participate in the social activities of people who I knew, and so much of it is a purely personal thing. I have enough competence in the language and knowledge and background in Maori society to be able to call myself a bicultural, bilingual New Zealander, in that I am able to participate in both Maori and Pakeha social and other activities in both languages.
I am gaining an understanding of New Zealand's dual cultural heritage. Many Pakehas seem to feel that history only began with the arrival of the Pakeha — they say "New Zealand is a young country Knowing some Maori gives you access to the oral traditions, to the songs and poetry, all of which take the history of New Zealand right back to the very arrival of the Polynesians here. That whole aspect of New Zealand heritage contained in Maori oral literature is unavailable to someone who can't speak the language. I can now look around the Wellington area and say well I know what the history is of that hill, what that stream signifies, where a pa once stood over there, and so on.
What has been the reaction from Maori people to you, as a Pakeha, learning their language?
Well that's been one of the most interesting features because initially there was a great deal of suspicion. Whatever Maori things Pakehas had laid their hands on before, it had always been a rip off. The Missionaries talked the Maoris into accepting Christianity and while they were looking up to heaven they took the land from underneath their feet. Many Pakeha academics have used aspects of Maori society for their own betterment and not given anything in return. There was a general feeling when I started learning of how would this Pakeha find a way to turn this thing into a money-making venture?' There was suspicion and opposition, but I think the climate has changed a lot since
Having got over the initial suspicion of you being a Pakeha learning Maori, what further reactions have you had from Maori people?
The thing that's new is that young Pakehas are learning Maori. It's always been acceptable for older Pakehas who are involved in some work form or other to learn it. But the reaction's been very good really and I've received a great deal of encouragement from everybody, both young and old. The reaction from young people is sometimes a bit more suspicious that it is from old people. I feel that by Pakehas learning Maori, being able to speak it and to participate in Maori events, this gives a great deal of heart to the older Maori people. Some of the younger ones have the same attitude as Nga Tamatoa, who won't let Pakehas become members, but I think this shows a rather restricted concept of bilingualism and biculturalism on their part. I think the climate among Maoris at the moment is very conducive to Pakehas learning Maori.
What particular-difficulties have you had, as a monolingual New Zealander learning the Maori language?
Well my biggest regret of course is that it wasn't available to me at school. That's why I'm so deeply involved in Te Reo Maori Society and the movement to creat a bilingual school system. I was totally deceived at school into believing that we were one people, that Maoris were just brown skinned Pakehas. I believed that the Maori language was no longer spoken and of course at that stage it wasn't an issue, it was before the rising of Tamatoa and Te Reo Maori. That was the major difficulty I had, to bring about a psychological shift. It's not hard to learn Maori, in fact it's easy because it's a living language and can be used in and around the home and around university, it can be used every day.
Does all the learning at Victoria take place in the classroom?
Oh no, not at all. There is a danger of the learning of Maori just becoming an academic study like Latin. With Te Reo Maori society there is a great deal of opportunity to get out and round the community and in tact I can recommend Pakehas to get involved with Te Reo Maori for this reason. It will provide them with a way of getting to know the Maori community in a fashion that's acceptable to Maoris. That's the point, it's not so much the learning of the language itself and gaining competence in it but this is a way Pakehas can get to know Maoris on equal terms, it's Pakehas making the adjustment rather than the other way round.
We've got to get rid of the idea that Maori is just for Maoris. Firstly it's for Maoris, access must be given to Maori children, and Maori people wherever they are, to the language. But then it's absolutely vital and important that Pakehas should be given the opportunity to learn it because I think it's the only real way in which Maori and Pakeha can get together as a nation and as a people.
Would you go so far as to say that the study of the Maori language is one of the most useful things a student can do at the university?
Yes, I would, not in quite general terms like that, but it's the most important thing he can do for himself and for his children and for their children to come. It's more than just putting 6 credits into your degree, it's a commitment to an ideal of a truly bilingual, bicultural society.
What impact will it have on Maori society when more Pakehas than Maoris can speak the Maori language, if this ever comes about?
This is inevitable in terms of pure numbers if we have a truly bilingual, bicultural society. It would be a hard thing for Maoris to accept that numerically, but not in terms of the percentage of the population, there will be more Pakehas speaking Maori than Maoris. But I think this is tied up with the acceptance of a wider horizon of a truly bilingual, bicultural nation than Maoris have given the language in the past. I've had a few verbal clashes with members of Te Reo Maori over this, it's an issue at the moment. But I can't see any other way for Maoris to get what they want. If they want Maori children taught Maori, they've got to have it taught to Pakehas, because they're in the same classroom.
In order to save the language and to get it taught to their own children they've got to accept the fact that Pakehas are going to learn it in increasing numbers. I think the thing to do is for Maoris to keep an eye on the situation, and not let Pakehas organise and run the schemes behind the teaching of Maori, so that people are not just getting the language but are getting insights from Maoris into Maori life as well. When you learn the language, the person teaching it to you can give you insights into Maori thought patterns and the whole cultural thing which remains closer to you than in any other way.
What sort of courses are available at this university and elsewhere?
There's a variety of sources where you can learn Maori, you don't have to learn it at university. You can learn it at Polytech, evening classes, the WEA often arrange a series of twelve week courses and that sort of thing. This is the only university in the country that puts such a strong emphasis on the oral language, and for this reason students here who wish to learn Maori are in a very good position From this year on, providing more staff is available, the Stage I courses will have an increasingly bigger percentage of oral work.
So anybody who is interested in learning Maori next year should, in the first instance, see McLean in the Anthro Department, or someone from Te Reo Maori, Maori or Pakeha, who can help them out with more information. I wouldn't say it s an easy option. Learning a language requires a sense of commitment slightly deeper than and slightly more reasoned and thought out than sitting in a Sociology lecture, for instance, and soaking up what someone's got to say. It's got to be an active involvement.
In today's world, affluence and poverty exist side by side, or more correctly, one on top of the other. The vast majority of the world's people are poverty stricken. They do not have adequate food, shelter, clothing or medical treatment. The only things they have in abundance are problems. The following table shows that the condition is clearly an international one.
These figures underestimate the amount of inequality that exists. Income is not only distributed unequally between countries, but within each country. Within the low-income countries there is enormous inequality, and the poorest section of their populations is much poorer than the average figure of $127 suggests.
The exploitation of underdeveloped countries by developed countries, and the exploitation of workers and peasants by foreign and local capitalists is a natural consequence of an economic system based on profit instead of social needs. A good deal of capitalist production is based on planned obsolescence as well as profit. For example cars and fashion clothes are made to last for only a short time so that production can keep on growing. Many consumer products are sold in expensive and elegant packaging which cannot be re-used. A huge advertising industry has grown up to persuade people to keep on buying new consumer goods. Milk is thrown away, butter is dumped into the sea, coffee is burnt, wheat is fed to animals, spindles for textile machines are destroyed; all to keep prices high.
While these things are happening in the industrially developed countries, raw materials representing natural resources as well as human labour are drained away from the underdeveloped countries to keep the absurd process of production-for-waste going. Thus people who create wealth experience poverty, while the minority who have control over land, machinery and therefore labour, wallow obscenely in opulence.
It is often said that poverty is unavoidable because even if the total wealth of the world was equally distributed there would not be enough to go round. But this is not true.
The world's average income is $652 per capita per anum ($2,608 for a family of four), which means that there is nothing in principle to stop everybody in the world receiving an income just about sufficient for basic needs and a reasonable standard of health, though not much more.
But this is not all. When profit is not the motive for production, labour and natural resources can be used for producing essential goods rather than superfluous ones. Commodities which have been destroyed to keep prices high can be used to satisfy people's needs. Unemployed labour and idle machines can be put to productive use for social needs. In the interests of the majority of mankind the capitalist economic system must be thrown into the museum of history and a new system based on social needs created.
How does change come about? Some say that if men's ideas are changed, society will automatically change. But although the importance of ideas in changing society cannot be denied, ideas do nor exist independent of society.
People's ideas come mainly from their relations with other people, their problems in life and in their jobs. For example, a worker who toils all day and has problems feeding his family will definitely think and act differently from a banker's wife who plays mahjong all day. In a word, "it is not the consciousness of men that determines their being, but, on the contrary, it is their social being that determines their consciousness."
Basically political, social and cultural changes in society come about as a result of changes in the relations of production, brought about by the development of new productive forces. This can be seen by briefly looking at the development of capitalism in European societies.
Capitalist relations of production began to grow in feudal society with the development of commodity production in the towns. As agricultural techniques developed, resulting in the growth of large-scale landholdings and more efficient farming, an increasing number of people left the land to work as commodity producers in the towns. Whereas the peasant was virtually a slave of his landlord, the commodity producer was master of his own house. His products belonged to him and he obtained other commodities by trading.
In England the breakdown of feudal relations of production resulted in political changes. By the early 16th century the feudal nobility had lost most of their independent political power. During the 17th and 18th centuries the monarchy also lost most of its absolute political power as the bourgeoisie grew in economic strength.
The Industrial Revolution in the early 19th century marked the unfettered growth of capitalist relations of production. With the invention of steam mills and power looms, large scale manufacture of commodities came into being. Small-scale producers were forced out of business and into the factories as property-less wage-labourers whose products were expropriated by the capitalists. Society became divided into two groups: the bourgeoisie who owned the means of production, and the proletariat who were forced to sell their labour to survive.
The political results of the Industrial Revolution were first seen in England, when the bourgeoisie won the right to vote in
The second half of the 19th century saw the growth of the working class movement in Europe through trade unions and social democratic political parties. The working class became a force which, if united in the right direction, could radically transform society. This period also saw the growth of the logical extension of capitalism, European imperialism in Africa and Asia. The First World War was the culmination of political struggle between the European imperialist powers, and with the collapse of the Russian, German and Austro-Hungarian empires revolutionary movements seized power throughout Eastern Europe. In Russia the revolutionaries managed to hold onto power and started building the world's first socialist state.
This very general picture of the history of capitalist developments shows that changes in the relations of production brought about by the growth of new productive forces, are the basic cause of political change in society. However this is not to say that all forms of social change are directly determined by economic changes.
For a country like Malaysia, change is definitely desirable for the vast majority of people. But what sort of change must be brought about to rapidly benefit the people? To answer this question we must first of all look at Malaysia's economic situation.
For over a century Malaysia has been the world's chief supplier of rubber and tin. These two main industries, which accounted for over 40% of total exports in
A large part of Malaysia's population is engaged in rice farming. However due to backward farming methods and inefficient organisation, not enough rice is produced for the nation's consumption and the deficiency has to be imported.
Thus Malaysia's is a distorted economy which is not self-sufficient in food and many other commodities, and has to import what it lacks by exporting mainly rubber and tin.
Most of the production of these export industries is owned by foreign companies which deprive the country of the chance of accumulating enough funds to set up new industries and develop a prosperous economy. Malaysia is an underdeveloped country which is described as relatively well-off in Southeast Asia by official economists.
The bulk of the population is engaged in agriculture, especially in the production of rice and rubber. The average daily wage of a rubber worker is about $3 (Malaysian) or $0.85 (New Zealand), with which a worker has to support his wife and family. As a result of a fall in the price of rubber many, workers have been dismissed. The work load of those who remain is increased, but their wages are not.
The farmer who owns a small plot planted with rubber trees is also badly off. Forced by circumstances to sell his product through a middleman, the price he gets is less than the price on the international market. When world prices for rubber are down to about 70c per kilo, these small farmers get no more than $2 (Malaysian) a day.
Rice farmers do not fare any better. Although some own small plots of land, most of them are tenant farmers. Land rents vary from 30% to 60% or more of the yield. On top of that farmers have to pay about 20% of their yield on fertilisers and insecticides. Then there are the religious taxes, the Fitrah and the Zakat, which amount to about 11% of the total of the yield.
At best the rice farmer is left with about 39% of his yield to sell on the "free" market, where he gets a poor price for his padi. In good times his life cycle is one of debt and no debt. In bad times it is a life of near starvation.
While most Malaysians still work in the agricultural sector the number of manufacturing workers has grown in recent years, large groups of school leavers are employed by factories, which are mainly foreign owned. Frequently these workers are termed 'unskilled' or 'trainees' and paid as low as $1—$2 (Malaysian) for an eight hour day.
Taking into account the rate of inflation in the country and the introduction of sales tax on essential commodities, the low standard of living of the majority of the population is deteriorating.
But this is only one side of the picture of modern Malaysia. While the peasants and workers are getting poorer, the middle class and the aristocracy are getting richer. Hotels, bowling alleys and night clubs are mushrooming, and there are an increasing number of expensive cars, TVs, cameras and other luxury goods. The New Zealand trade commissioner in Kuala Lumpur mentioned this phenomenon in a recent article in the Trade and Industry Department's magazine Export News. "The spin-off from industrialisation is a new consumer wealth. The new consumer is brand-conscious and prefers foreign products. This is reflected in the demand for imported food lines, fashion clothing for boutiques, and car acessories such as lambskin car seat covers."
Foreign companies in the rubber industry do not appear to have suffered from the drop in the price of rubber. In
(Financial Times,
Similarly foreign investors in other industries are making huge profits out of the Malaysian people. While they are enriching themselves the Malaysian people are becoming more and more impoverished.
The productive forces of Malaysia are stunted by the present relations of production. In order that the Malaysian people can develop their economy for social use, foreign domination must be overthrown.
But the foreign capitalists, backed by their governments' military power, will not peacefully leave Malaysia and go home. They will not throw down their knives and become Buddhas overnight. Social and economic change in Malaysia will only come about through political struggle by the exploited people of the country, the great majority. However at present a large number of people still do not understand the objective situation in which they live, and until enough people do so, the political struggle will be defeated.
The most important task of those Malaysians who want change and understand how their country is being exploited is to convince the masses of the importance of overthrowing foreign domination of our economy, and the local parasites who live off the foreigners' profits, so we can build a new society which works for the benefit of the majority.
Members of the cooperative which puis out the monthly journal " I he Paper" launched another new venture last week with a public forum on the future of the New Zealand protest movement.
Opening the forum, Economics lecturer Rob Campbell said that in the past radical groups had concentrated too much on overseas issues and had failed to relate to the needs of the majority of working people in New Zealand. He pointed to the work of people like community volunteers as an example of what is being done to meet the needs of ordinary New Zealanders, but added that such groups were not getting the benefits of their work because they are, at present, apolitical.
Campbell criticised Salient and the People's Voice for being too purist in their politics and stressed Mao Tsetung's point that radicals' political work should be based on the actual needs of the people and the wishes of the people.
Several other speakers echoed Campbell's comments. Ken Stanton of Porirua said that the Communist Party and other left-wing groups had failed to build a movement towards socialism in New Zealand because they had failed to analyse social and economic conditions properly, although he stressed he was not calling for "all theory and no action". Gerard Hill, an activist in the secondary school students movement, said that from his experience in industry, workers were far more likely to take political action on issues that affected their immediate needs than on international and ideological questions.
Socialist Action League member Peter Rotherham was one of the few people to disagree with the view that protestors had concentrated too much on overseas problems. "International politics should permeate our outlook and be at the centre of it," he said and claimed that mobilisations against the Vietnam war had radicalised thousands of New Zealanders.
"The best way to assist revolutionary movements overseas is to work for socialism in New Zealand," replied student president Peter Wilson. He argued that protest movements could not unite by agreeing on the "lowest common denominator" between them, but by uniting towards a higher goal — the struggle for a socialist society, lie stressed that the only way radicals could understand New Zealand society was by changing it.
Some time was spent discussing the present orientation of the women's movement. Sandra McCallum raised the question to whether the movement was "a national women's liberation movement or a women's movement for national liberation." Amanda Russell and Anne Gilbert criticised the movement's concentration on the demand to repeal all the anti-abortion laws, claiming it was alienating working class women.
Anne said sexism was a problem caused by the present social relations under capitalism, not men, and argued that the best way to organise working class women was around around issues like rising prices and the cost of living. Brigid Mulrennan and Jacqueline McCluggage said the abortion movement would be of immense benefit to women of all classes, and that the issue had politicised many women.
Noticeably there were hardly any members of Maori groups or trade unions present. Race Relations Council President Jim Delahunty (one of the editors of "The Paper") mentioned the council was a typical organisation formed by white liberals and leftists who wanted a "nice" relationship with Maori people. But when the Maori people "really started talking many of these liberals and leftists had backed away. Very lew Maoris, he said, saw the basis for unity with the sort of people present at the forum.
Too much time was wasted at this meeting on arguments about how to get to the workers and how radicals couldn't relate to each other. And while a lot of sound socialist theory was talked, most of it was not based on the experience of social practice in New Zealand. As Roger C'ruick-shank noted at the beginning of the forum, only six of the people present had bothered to turn up at the TPA's annual general meeting the night before.
However 70 activists from a number of different left-wing groups in Wellington did manage to discuss common problems in an unusually non-sectarian manner. The next "Paper" forum will concentrate on the performance to date of the labour Government, and possibly strategies for next year's local body elections and the
New Zealand tariff preferences in favour of South Africa will cease from the end of this year, the Prime Minister announced in a letter to anti-apartheid groups last week.
Since the turn of the century New Zealand has assisted trade with South Africa by cutting tariffs on South African exports to this country. The effect of this has been to make South African goods more competitive than those from other, non-Commonwealth countries. Opponents of apartheid have argued that the tariff preferences have been one important way in which New Zealand has actively supported the apartheid system through its economic links with that country.
Some people, including Labour Cabinet Ministers Freer. Walding and Tizard, have argued in the past that the only effect of reducing trade with South Africa would be to deprive black workers of their jobs. This view has been completely rejected by the multi-racial South African Congress of Trade Unions. During his visits to New Zealand this year and last year SACTU representative John Gaetsewe said that black South Africans could not be worse off than they are now, and that cutting trade with South Africa would be welcomed as an act of solidarity with the black working class of his country.
From the way South African Consul-General Philip wailed when Mr. Kirk's decision on tariff preferences was announced, it can be seen that this move was in the right direction. But further work has to be done to ensure that New Zealand becomes fully committed to the international campaign to isolate South African fascism in every way.
Announcements in the weekend from Mr. Kirk in New York, and Mr. Freer in Wellington stated that New Zealand has entered into diplomatic relations with the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.
This welcome decision indicates that the Government has, at long last, begun to recognise the realities of the political situation in Indochina. Contact with the DRV Government (which has been established since
One of the reports of Kirk's talks with Nixon mentioned that the New Zealand Prime Minister had stated his support for the Paris Peace Agreement as the only way to end the conflict in Vietnam. (Interestingly, this report did not say that Nixon agreed with this view.) If Mr. Kirk examines that agreement closely he will note that there is a third government in Vietnam, along with the two this country already recognises, the Provisional Revolutionary Government of South Vietnam. And if the Labour Government is thorough-going in its support for the Vietnam Peace Agreement it will recognise the PRG. As the PRG's representative in Paris, Le Van Sau, suggested in a recent interview in the Australian 'Nation Review', recognition of all three governments in Vietnam is the one effective way countries like Australia and New Zealand can help get the Paris Peace Agreement implemented.
The 40 man Portuguese Trade Mission's visit to New Zealand has been beleaguered with protests. A vigil and demonstration outside Auckland's Hotel Intercontinental last week turned into a celebration of the declaration of the independence of Guinea-Bissau. On Friday night demonstrators raised the flag of the African Independence Party of Guinea and the Cape Verde Islands (PAIGC) on the hotel's flagpole, and held an impromptu fireworks display to mark the occasion. Skyrockets, spinning wheels, crackers and mortars from the arsenal of the Halt All Racist Tours movement lit the sky outside the hotel and the cheering crowd disturbed the rest of the delegation.
Two people were arrested for breaches of the peace — one for clashing together two rubbish bin lids, and the other for letting off a 'double-happy' firecracker. They will appear in court on the 29th of this month.
The ease of the South Island beech forests is one of the many instances in which our new, time for a change Labour Government has followed the paths towards the desecration and destruction of the environment which were so well mapped out for it in advance by is predecessor. Norm Kirk and his boys are committed to their policies of regional development and opening up the country to Japanese capital to such an extent that they can't even take the trouble to see if there are alternatives, or to see of the milling and pulping of South Island beech forests is a viable economic proposition. And so the Forest Services rushes out a booklet publicising the beech forest scheme, telling us what a good joker Norm is, and how people who want to protect the beech forests don't care about the economic welfare of people on the West Coast. Did vou vote Labour for a change in environment policy in "72?
We intended to interview the illustrious visiting psychiatrist R. D. Laing, but at the last minute he caught a cold and couldn't talk to us. Working under incredible pressure Gordon Campbell whipped up this article on the great man.
For most of us the big discovery of the sixties was politics. Not party politics, just the politics of existing. When we were kids, reality consisted simply of the family, and a vaguely threatening "they" out there who could only occasionally tell Dad what to do. And at a higher level if ever the world seemed like a stage then production was in the safe hands of the invisible, humourless, logical God of the Jews who had already conquered Europe, Africa, the Americas, Australia and a large chunk of Asia and who seemed generally to know what He was doing. In
So growing up meant discovery of the politics, the power dimension behind every relationship with parents, teachers, girls, it all seemed suddenly a great struggle. A three billion person traffic jam in fact with only a few flimsy social codes marking the intersections of experience. The process of social power seemed equally crazy, split between various conspiracies, the CIA, capitalists, the Mafia, the Yellow Peril and male chauvinist cliques. That was why R. D. Laing seemed so natural and sane and easy to read. He was saying the world was just as crazy as nobody else was prepared to let on it was In talking about madness Laing was showing us the nature and cost of our "normality."
From his very first book, Laing's purpose has been "to make madness and the process of going mad, comprehensible." Thirteen years later in "Knots" he expressed the same aims a little differently: "to divine the formal elegance in these webs of maya." Understanding his work fully requires following Laing's own evolution from existentialism to mysticism; from criticising certain destructive relationships to what sounds like in "Politics of Experience" a mystical rejection of the whole process of role-taking altogether.
As developed in his first three books Laing's claim is that madness is not an "illness", that requires "cure", such language rests on the misconception that there is something wrong with the patient, that his experience is somehow warped or distorted, and that this experience must be changed, by electroshock, drugs, or leucotomies if the patient is to get "better". In other words, the usual psychological approach to madness reduces the patient to an object, someone who has no control over the neuroses unfolding inside him or over the faulty social conditioning that has helped get him into this state. The patient is seen to be the helpless victim of the forces within and the forces without; since he is felt to be no longer responsible for his illness, he is denied any rights in the process of "curing".
Laing, however, by making madness understandable takes it out of the realm of pathology. He shows that the "madness" is both a creation, and response to the social situations in which the patient is involved. Madness is not a condition, but a judgement, a label for certain forms of behaviour. The source of the "mad" behaviour is the interaction between people, the way the realities of all those involved impinge on one another. And since there are differences of power in important reality sustaining relationships within the family, or between lovers, it is very easy for the powerful to deny, or subvert the reality of those dependent on them. Often with the best of intentions, often with protestations of "love" as the destruction is carried out. Laing's point is that it is the worst possible thing to then isolate the "mental patient" for "treatment" because this only perpetuates and worsens the unequal power relationship that caused the problem in the first place.
So in the first few books Laing set himself to describing the dangers that interaction (and especially the intense interweaving of realities that characterises the nuclear family) can pose for the creation and maintenance of identity. What is really harrowing about "Sanity and Madness in the Family" is to see one's own parents in so many of the actions of these parents. In the case studies the parents are extremes; they suffocate their children, deny their shaky holds on identity at almost every turn, but the way they do it is so familiar. By looking at these schizogenic families you see the way you survived, by lying to your parents, by blocking off parts of what you were feeling and thinking, by ordering your life so that it did not intrude on areas where your values arc incompatible. The only case in Laing's book that escapes from madness is the girl who learns how to lie to protect herself from her parents' good intentions.
Now at this stage of his career Laing could have moved in several different directions. He resigned from the National Health Service in
Note that despite his interest in Sartre, it has been the existentialism, not the Marxism that has attracted Laing. He says somewhere on one of his book covers that "temperamentally I am not cut out to be an activist." Yet to some extent he has had to be. If you reason that social conditions are driving people mad, then the next step is to do something about these conditions. Laing had shown the destructive nature of some family and romantic relationships, though since he had never used or perhaps been able to use control groups, he hadn't been too specific about what these destructive factors were. The point is that he has never gone on to analyse the wider political forces that put such terrible pressures on our personal relationships. He, like Goffman, describes the effects of what our institutions do to people, and how we try to cope with them. But only rarely do you get much idea about the larger social institutions that produce the type of mental hospitals, families, ideals of love and so on that Laing concerns himself with. Marxists criticise Laing for not grounding his analysis in class conditions, for spending too much time dealing with effects, and not exploring social causes.
To some extent this is justified. Anyone who sat through all four of the current lecture series must have been squirming by the end at Laing's unremitting ridicule of the rest of psychiatry. That psychiatry does some of the crazy things it does through wrong theories and attitudes to the patient is probably true; but some of those practises also derive from ridiculous doctor/patient ratios, inadequate finance and a lot of other social and organisational problems that encourage doctors to make control and not cure their primary aim.
On the other hand, Laing's own ideas demand something like a one to one patient/ therapist ratio, and at most, about twenty people live in one of his communal houses at a time. In short, his response to the problem, though the only sane, desirable and human one, just cannot cope with the numbers of crazy people that our society is producing. And even if all the psychiatrists in the world believed in Laing's theories
So ridiculing psychiatry, while it may have some value in alerting people to the problem, finally ends up caricaturing that problem. It's like women's liberation blaming their oppression on male conspiracies. That may be fine for rallying the troops, but until we know what to do about the social and psychological pressures on both sides of the relationship, we are not much closer to solving the problem.
Therefore in the early sixties Laing did face a pretty important choice, whether to become a fulltime political agitator and try and change the society that was producing his patients, or stick with the victims. That meant creating more retreats, more havens for them and keeping up the broadsides against the more immediate enemy, the psychiatric profession. This, in fact, is what he continues to do.
However during this time, as Jeff Nuttal relates in "Bomb Culture", Laing was getting involved with the radical, artistic under ground in England. The dope, and the artistic creativity that was to explode around the world in the hip movement of
Looking back now the whole hip movement was based on a paradox — "do your own thing" but "don't ego trip". At their worst extremes these positions produced on the one hand fascists like Manson, Mel Lyman and Tony Alamo, on the other their mindless followers. At the height of the good times in '67, the difference was expressed in a much better way by the two cultures, Berkeley and San Francisco.
Berkeley was radical politics, involvement and social activism, while San Francisco was the Haight Street, dope, rock music and mysticism. They got on pretty well, Jerry Garcia would do a gig to raise bail for the Berkeley crowd any time, but the orientation was different, outer versus inner space, utopias in the world versus utopias of the mind.
Generally Laing's book was a lot more popular with the thumb sucking mystics than with the radicals. Oh sure, the Berkeley people loved the denunciation of Western society, but well, there were no alternatives offered, no class analysis. The mystic hedonists, however, could really tune in on Laing's rejection of all the oppressive, defining, constraining limitations of social existence. The tone of the book is that of some Biblical prophet, full of anger and frustration and nervous energy. All the hours of saintlike dedication that Laing had spent with his schizoids and catatonics had burst out into denunciation of the society that had created them.
The message was just what everyone was learning through acid, and through other writers like Kesey. That there was nothing objectively real about all the social roles we had taken as natural and real for so long. Instead came the awareness that we had been living inside externally imposed versions of reality, caught up in some vast movie that those in power were insisting was reality. With acid, with alternative ways of living there seemed a chance to step outside the limits posed by the social relationships that had to be negotiated, beyond even the very language and concepts we had been taught to think with, into some kind of free space. When Laing talked of driving people out of their minds, of merging the inner and outer, or even on television here when he admitted to having travelled into the general vicinity of madness, he was talking about a certain experience; that social roles were only rules while the flow is more than we can ever know.
It's on this basis that Laing tends to make his much attacked comparison between schizophrenia and mysticism. He equates the inability of the psychotic to play roles with the mystic's rejection of them, creating in both cases an ego-less condition that is generally felt necessary for religious experience. Of course there are important differences, particularly of choice; but in any case Laing has said that it was not his intention to idealise madness, but to balance the totally negative attitudes held by other psychiatrists.
Laing spent
Some questions that remain about his work: anyone who has lived in a large flat would like to know how communal decisions are made about who is to come, when people are to leave, what kind of limits if any are to exist on behaviour. Laing said he has at least 20 people arriving a week at his houses. Who gets admitted? How? And what if the person does not want ever to leave this haven and return to the world.
Again, Laing stresses providing people and places that will be responsive to the needs of these so-called psychotics. But how, especially since he has become so famous does he avoid becoming a guru, the focus for the sanity of his patient? Being with disturbed people is incredibly demanding; you may be the first, the only person ever to respond to their desires and dreams. How do you avoid being trapped by this? How do Laing and his friends cope with being the basis for reality for these people? It's an inevitable problem, but the goal beyond being simply "responsive" is, to help the patient to become self-sufficient and not dependent on any person or place outside him. It would be interesting to know how Laing encourages this sense of independence.
Finally, his meditation. He said he was doing a free associative method that aimed at breaking down his cognitive filters, in effect destroying his ability to think. Actually I thought Kesey had settled this business of trying to get beyond words and thoughts to total experience. He pointed out that even with the fastest reflexes, the time it took to translate a stimulus into a concept was at least 1/30th of a second. What we experienced always had happened a split second before, so we are always living a movie of our lives. No perception without conception. Now the Void may be a nice place to visit but Laing while he was here often seemed to he having difficulty in handling the material world.
Listening to him talk was usually an ordeal. It took him so long to find a word, complete a sentence. Not to mention the incessant blinking, face twitching and paper shuffling, that were hard enough to watch, let alone to start you imagining what was going on inside his head. A distinctive feature of our society is that no-one really expects that their private growth will occur within social institutions. You get by in them, you survive, especially economically, but real living, real growth occurs with your lover, your friends, and what you do together. The concern with Laing is that what he is doing with his private growth may be fucking up his ability to play public games, like the Chancellor's lectures, altogether.
Sex in the University? Do they or don't they? Well now, thanks to an explosive book by Jonathon S. Concord, all those questions you were afraid to ask have now been revealed! Possibly more startling than the Kinsey Report, and more enlightening than Dr Reuben, Sex Savages explores the menacing underworld of perversion that exists on American campuses. Sexual decadence has not eaten like a worm into the core of our university society as it has in the US, but the tell-tale signs are there. Underneath the smooth surface of campus life can be sensed an undercurrent of resentments and frustrations that has broken out here and there, and give ample foreboding of a revolution that will challenge the very cornerstone of society.
The truth is, as Concord so rightly tells us, certain students are more promiscuous that others, but on the whole the promiscuity is greater than it was 50 years ago. This in itself is a startling new fact, but when illustrated by ample case studies that wallow in the filth and grime of vulgarity, Concord's verity, perspicacity, and even, might I say, purity, need no further confirmation. Not only does he describe freshers losing their virginity within their first term at university, but some of these harlots are actually so degraded that they can describe their experiences without shame or regret. One girl talks of doing it in a car!
Later, in a chapter on prostitution, Concord gives us further cause of concern at this cancer in our midst. Three prostitutes who call themselves college students actually engage in bedroom practices with some executives (thanks to Concord's unerring tact, the details are omitted). And, lest we consider that such disgraceful conduct cannot happen with the posh pussies of the NZ scene, we only need to remember Concord's hard facts, which are indisputable: "The number of prostitutes under the age of twenty-five will show a remarkable percentage who are college registrants. They can be stringy-haired hippie in black pants and a taut jersey who hustles a 'tourist' so her man may have his pot and beer, or they can be the furred and be diamonded darlings, who haunt the first-class hotels and play it in between, teetering on a bar stool or lounging half naked on a warm sandy beach.
It is this mixture of solid facts, savage realities, and daring, flowing language, that makes Concord's book such a disquieting masterpiece. Indeed much may be learned about other related topics, such as birth control, drugs, or the manufacture of fizzy drinks from the abundant fountain of information. Take the section on contraception: "Contraceptives come in two forms. One is a mechanical device which prevents male sperm from reaching the mouth of the uterus, thus blocking its travel to the descending ova. The other is a chemical which can either render the ovarian egg impotent or kill the sperm before it fulfils its squirming duty." Concord has trapped the germ of the slippery problem, so to speak, in an eggshell. And one word by him flushes all the theories and quackery of our doctors about the pill being the most effective form of contraception down the lavatory bowl. "Clinically," says Concord, "the condom is the most effective unless it has been damaged by overly long residence in a wallet pocket or has been perforated accidentally or as a prank by grotesque friends."
In his remarkably lucid style, Concord explores every niche and cranny of student perversion — losing virginity, contraception, abortion, off-campus sex, dating, prostitution, drugs, piss-ups, homosexuality, and petting. He even discusses losing virginity. He demonstrates conclusively that some students are sexual beings, even, on occasion, going further than the goodnight kiss. Some might in extreme situations, even marry and have children.
What is the most amazing thing about this book is that so much research has been done by a person so absolutely without academic qualifications for that research. It all proves that degrees are frequently just bits of paper, and for many jobs they are totally irrelevant. In the Preface, the noted Albert D. Lowe M.D., Ph.D. indicates that the book's theme may be that "sex is a very real thing to our young." He assesses the great research and logic that has gone into producing such a profoundly disturbing psychological survey, concluding with the following words: "We have advanced our sciences, our mechanical abilities and our material goals with nearly comet-like speed in the past fifty years. In the meantime we cling tenaciously to our moded, unproven sexual mores, to snobbery to ethical prejudice and to the theory of immortality which most of us would not welcome, even if there were any truth to a pseudo-science." But that is another question.
In
Six months later the SAL was busily organising people to vote Labour through its "Socialists for Labour" campaign. This was not a remarkable example of Jesus Christ's dictum to turn the other cheek, but a conscious political strategy.
"Socialist Election Strategy" in New Zealand is a collection of articles, documents and newspaper cuttings recording the "Socialists for labour" campaign. Because it sees the Labour Party as the political party of the working class, the SAL believes it should be supported electorally while its "right-wing misleadership" is vigorously opposed
Socialists must work within the Labour Party because when the working class starts to radicalise, so the theory goes, the Labour Party will be torn apart and "Marxists (i.e. the SAL) will be in a strong position, both organisationally and politically, to intervene and pick up a mass working-class following." (Political Resolution of the founding conference of SAL,
A naive reader of this booklet might well conclude that Russell Johnson's comment that "The Socialists for Labour campaign was successful in getting socialist ideas and the Socialist Action League more widely known that ever before" is a correct summation of the campaign. And after all the campaign did distribute 20,000 Vote Labour leaflets, 3,000 election supplements of "Socialist Action", 264 Young Socialist buttons, and was endorsed by 263 people, including 47 workers!
What the booklet neglects to mention however, is that election campaigns inevitably generate a far greater interest and involvement in politics on the part of ordinary people than usual. Other groups benefited from this as well as the SAL. For example Hart supporters (whose leader Trevor Richards is sneered at in a section of the booklet) sold over 10,000 copies of the election issue of Hart News.
Furthermore the "Socialists lor Labour" campaign was kicked off to a great start by the Labour Party leadership. The usual method of removing unwanted dissidents who have little rank and file support from the Labour Parry is to let them burn themselves out and resign in frustration — a technique which works very effectively. But the Labour Party Executive was rattled into purging the SAL, only to find itself unable to produce any plausible reasons for doing so. Bullshit like The League supports reform by revolution and rejects the party's policy of reform by democratic processes" only helped with the SAL supporters.
Few party members were upset by the executive's decision. An excerpt from the "Socialist Action" report of this year's Labour Parry conference cites "a unanimous vote that 'the decision on the Socialist Action League be rescinded' " at the
Although the Labour Party gets electoral support from many working class people, it is essentially in Lenin's words, "an organisation of the bourgeoisie, which exists to systematically dupe the workers". Elected mainly on a programme of ending wage restraints, holding prices and improving welfare services the Labour Government has imposed a wage freeze and let prices run riot, while the education and hospital services are as run down as ever. Like the Socialist Unity Party and people like myself who also supported a Labour victory, the SAL is in a small way responsible because it encouraged people to vote for Kirk and his followers.
Despite the SAL's rhetoric, the number of working class people active in the Labour Party has been steadily declining for years. Trade union participation in the party is also failing, and the only unionists really active in the party are a few right-wing officials such as the local boss of the Engineers Union, Brian Landers. Some day, the SAL cries, the workers will be radicalised and we will be there to lead them in taking over the Labour Party!
While it is far more likely that the working class will establish its own revolutionary party, the SAL was thrown out of the Labour Party before it could get itself established in any position of influence. I recall a comment made to me by one fellow comrade when our local Labour Party branch was discussing the purge of the SAL. "They're not real Trotskyists", he muttered. "When the Trots took over the party's youth movement in England they fought like bastards before we could clean them out."
These are simple poems with an often depressing message. They are written in various places about different people around the country. In a rhythmic almost hypnotic metre Sam Hunt talks about death, love and cynicism in 30 short poems Sometimes the simplicity is so marked that the poems are trivial pop songs as in Modigliani Girl.
The musical imagery is continued by reptative verses such as:
which is repeated 11 times in an 18 line poem. It begins to look less like poetry and suspiciously like space filling. In several poems the colloquial language and rhyming couplets sound like doggerel.
The poem that epitomises Hunt's wandering indiscipline is We Could Just Disappear:
There is no analysis or understanding in these poems just statements and situations. Hunt never stays long enough in one place to either understand or explain what he writes about. There is no depth in his poetry. They make pleasant reading but give no great insights.
The poems are published on two sheets of orange and two sheets of grey paper interspersed with several rather gloomy photos concertinared in a trendy purple folder that is already falling apart-hardly worth $2.95.
Who is Peter Ouspensky?
What is truth?
What is the function of organic life?
What is matter?
What is body?
Those were the sorts of questions that occupied the famous Russian mystic Peter Demiandvich Ouspensky all his adult life.
He realised that the quality of the answer depended on the way the question was put, i.e that his questions demanded more than ordinary thought-energy for their solution.
His life's work was a search for ways of harnessing the unlimited energies existing in the human body to the solution of his questions, and more generally, of harnessing these energies to the will of man.
Most of us believe that the body is composed of cells, that these are built up of molecules, these of atoms, etc. Ouspensky does not deny all this but asserts that man himself is the root energy from which all other orders of energy and matter arise. His problem is one of programming, he is somehow rigidly tuned in, by nature, to the everyday material world, and identifies automatically with the sheerly corporeal.
J.G. Bennett writes in his introduction to "Talks with a Devil": "Ouspensky wrote these two stories ('The Inventor', 'The Benevolent Devil'), to express his belief that the material world is the only reality. This belief, he said, is the source of most human troubles because people fight uselessly over unreal issues disregarding the only real problem which is that of liberation from attachment to matter."
If all the foregoing is accepted, the problem becomes one of waking up to the reality of the situation. Ouspensky believed for most of his life that individual efforts at detachment are insufficient and that only group efforts are workable.
"In the last weeks of his life in
Any one interested but as yet unacquainted with Ouspensky's writing would do well to read his "In Search of the Miraculous" (Routledge and Kegan Paul
"Talks with a Devil" was written a few years prior to "In Search of the Miraculous". These two stories are interesting to anyone already interested in Ouspensky's work. Astute observations abound. But read purely as fiction they seem overly cool, detached, and rather coy. Ouspensky unlike his one-time teacher Gurdjieff was a bit of a puritan. This book is not recommended to the unconverted.
A reviewer's nightmare. A brilliant album, and quite unique talent, completely obscure sidemen and no liner notes to speak of. So there's no comparisons, no analogies, no name dropping to inform, electrify or divert you with. So what to do. She's black, but there's no blues influence, straight pop in fact. She's West Indian; but there's not a single reggae track. A female singer/song writer who wipes the floor with Carol King, Carly Simon and that mob, despite lyrics that sound like a collaboration by you, me, and Cat Stevens. She's no folkie, the album rocks from start to finish.
That makes her sound like a screamer, the next Joplin, or Genya Ravan but no, wrong again though her voice is as powerful as anyone on the girl side of Odetta, its extremely subtle and flexible. All I can do is recommend Joan Armatrading to you, especially the second side, if you haven't already been converted by her single "Lonely Lady".
Not that any of this is necessary; not since I first clapped ears on Rod Stewart's debut LP back in '69 have I been so sure that here was an imminent event, a star, no less. The final perverse thing about the record is that in an era where the 10 track LP has become the norm. Joan has 14 full length tracks, stretching out to well over 50 minutes. Phew, I made it.
Two solid outings from Festival. Robin Trower used to be lead guitar for Procol Harum and here he unleashes a lot of the talent that could before only occasionally sneak out on tracks like "The Devil Came from Kansas". Side one has the strongest material, but have a good look for bubbles on the first track, they're all over my review copy and could trouble equipment better than mine. There's a light hearted imitation of Peter Kaukonen imitating Hendrix on side two and all in all a promising debut. He's a killer guitarist and this has had raves overseas. I also have it on the unimpeachable authority of Steve Kearney that Trower hails from Gisbourne. Make of that what you will.
Spooky Tooth are not the most consistent bunch in the world, and keeping up the tradition this fine LP was recorded after one of the most alltime dismal tours of America. In fact I bet Luther Grosvenor is sleeping a little uneasily these nights since Stealer's Wheel seem to have been the fastest sinking hype since Blind Faith. Wright's in top form, solid composition, good vocals, tight playing, the usual good things that happen when Spooky Tooth are on beam. Be interesting to see where they got from here, for since this record came out they've cot their old drummer back. Just stay clear of that Pierre Henry, guys.
Could be that this will be the breakthrough that Marvin Gaye needs, since he is not exactly a household name in this country. Overseas Gaye has sold more singles, had more top ten hits in America than any other solo artist in the last ten years. His "I Heard it Through the Grapevine" is still Motown's biggest single of all time, and his latest "Let's Get It On" sold 500,000 copies in its first ten days of release. The album under review sold two million copies, spent a year in the charts and has had no less than four hit singles culled from it. Yet for all that it took EMI 2½ years to get round to releasing it. So what's going on, Louise?
Gaye sings soul and he's probably one of the best interpreters of lyrics around, as he proved with his unusual version of McCartney's "Yesterday". But at first hearing this album is almost too mellow, the cutting edge of Gaye's voice being continually threatened by the orchestration. But if you give it time this equal mixing of voice and backing proves surprisingly effective, a very mellow, uptown soul sound.
In
Rewi Alley's Before the Dawn is one of those plays which reads woodenly, but which contains enough truth and honesty to make, good credible theatre in the hands of a sympathetic director. Philip Mann's production utilises elements from Chinese theatre to communicate Rewi Alley's overwhelming indignation at prerevolutionary conditions of existence in Shanghai. It is more a moral plea than a clarion call to revolution for its. New Zealand audience, perhaps because we place it in history, situate it firmly in a China which has succeeded, which no longer needs active sympathy and devotion.
Somehow the cast, albeit welfare-state innocents, portray feelingly the starving, claustrophobic world of an illiterate peasant directly confronted with profiteers, colonials and, ray of hope, the communists. To a large extent, their success is thanks to the director's marrying of familiar stereotypes, e.g gangsters. Col. Blimps, with the gymnastic portrayal and stylised gesture of Chinese theatre, in Western translation. It is also dependent on a splendid musical background score by Rod Jenkins which acts very much like a Greek chorus, both pointing to events and commentating on them.
Perhaps the subject, perhaps the imaginative approach, but this university production is more honest and vigorous than I had begun to believe possible.
Last week we explained that we print all the letters we receive, with the exception of those which are legally defamatory or obscene. We held back a couple more this week for that reason, including letters from 'Puke'and 'Fair Deal: This week we have had to decline to print several other letters which demanded answers that cannot be given, as this is the last issue of Salient for 1973. Among these were some repellent, incoherent, white-racist raves from C.L. Frederick, 'Victoria Whitist Society', J.K.Q. Stuhjohm, J.L. Peters, and 'Patriot', all of which transgressed the Race Relations Act anyway, and were not fit for a toilet wall We have not published the signatures of several letters from Malaysian and Singaporean students, which are mainly on the De Silva affair, because of the probability that the writers would be persecuted on return to their home countries.
We thank all those who have written letters to Salient, they have certainly made the paper livelier. Don't write anymore for a while, folks, save them up for next year.
Reading through the latest Salient article on Chile "Rampages, Breadlines and the Black Market" we kept hearing a familiar sound some-where in the distance. The haunting
Or did he? As Bob Jones
While even Kirk made harmless tut tut noises about the military coup, while the world protested at the triumph of the reactionaries and while Marxist-Leninists said of Allende's tragic fall "It's a pity but we told you so," Jones was out trying to sell fascism to Salient readers. He made a good attempt too, the only catch being that if you happen to think about his article after having read it Jones case for the oppression of the Chilean people falls intodirty little pieces.
Just as the trains ran sporadically before Mussolini's rise in Italy so there is no soap, a shortage of firewood, poor service, overpriced colour firm etc in pre-junta Chile. This tale of woe, this heaping up of trivial anecdote of "communist" Chile shortcomings makes up most of Jone's "observations and...obvious conclusions of my stay." It is skillfully calculated to arouse feelings of revulsion in a reading audience whose mother's have always provided soap and clean sheets.
An anonymous guide shows our hero round the nationalised factories, telling him that "inevitably, (they) come to a standstill under worker management." In this case we are left to draw our own "obvious conclusion" about workers' management at factories.
If Bob had devoted less space to his epic three days in a snow bound Chilean hotel and other such non-events he could have given some indication, either from his anonymous source or himself, about such vital questions as factories. It is a fact known to the world that factories in such countries as Albania, North Korea, North Vietnam and the People's Republic of China are run by workers and run with great efficiency. So it is not because the factories were "worker controlled" (and again — to what extent?) that they ran down.
Jones' "observations and obvious conclusions" as regarding agricultural reform are similarly childish. In an article dealing with a serious political question one may use anecdotes about peasants guzzling meat (most probably for the first time in their lives) but one cannot draw an "obvious conclusion" of any useful consequence from that anecdote alone.
The following paragraph is of interest, as it is typical of the whole presentation and logic of the article. "Despite world criticism I am convinced that the military take-over was an action of great responsibility and patriotism by the armed forces who had remained absolutely patient to date. I am also convinced that it is action that has the support of the vast majority of Chileans."
Sound familiar? Sort of easy on both ears? (The one it comes in and the one it goes out). Read Hansard. Have a glance at almost any Marshall/ Holyoake press statement. Listen to the news on TV sometime. And its all in that one little paragraph, admirably condensed, the pompus and deceitful non-argument of the extreme right wing. He's convinced, but he couldn't give you an intelligent reason why. Makes him seem a bit of a rebel even, being convinced that reactionary militarism is ok in the face of world criticism. He's also convinced that it is supported by the vast majority of Chileans. Just like Marshall was over the tour issue. The public's subsequent acceptance of the cancellation put paid to that all right and we're damn sure that the will of the Chileans the ones we give a stuff about, the workers and peasants will prove Jones as wrong as Grandpa Jack.
But what kind of Chileans did Jones run across, to form his obvious conclusion — no, sorry his "conviction" that most of the people welcomed the arrival of firing squads and rubber truncheons?
"All of the many Chileans I spoke to asked me about emigrating to Australia or New Zealand." Draw your own conclusion about the cross-section of the population or otherwise that that above sentence implies.
Near the end of Bob's article I laughed so hard that the neighbour banged on the wall. Allende putting communism first and Chile second? I would advise Mister Jones to read Terry Auld's article again, if he ever did in the first place. (Salient Sept 19). The reasons are too long to repeat here, but Allende put Khrushchovism before communism. Never having understood a grain of Marxist theory ("the shame about communism is that it never took place as Marx planned it. He planned it for Germany and it would have suited the German temperament," (Jones), it is natural that Bob should clown like this.
One of the nastiest parts of the article is his sexist attack on Ms Liv Aasen, which I find too infantile to be worth repeating.
Equally distastefull is Jone's announcement "I shall be returning to Chile shortly to try its trout fishing and shall look with interest to see if the 500 yard long bread queues are part of the daily scene." This type of bourgeolse arrogance I have only come across before in US Embassy officials and the like.
Mister Jones is a skilled apologist for fascism. But when one takes a second glance at it the rotteness of his propaganda is fully revealed.
The Chilean people will disappoint Jones, just as the workers have always finally disappointed the hopes of those who wish to halt the march of progress with a whip and a gun.
The Razak regime was groomed and installed by British imperialism for the purpose of suppressing the Malayan people's revolutionary armed struggle. It has been carrying on the colonial war by conducting frantic persecution of the Malayan people.
The Razak regime has indulged in various forms of bribery and corruption, swindling and plundering and formed a comprador, feudal, bureaucrat-capitalist class possessing enormous fortunes.
The regime has been going all out in consistently implementing a Malay chauvinist policy with a view to undermining the broad anti-imperialist unity of the people of ail nationalities and diverting the people's attention from the target of their struggle so as to maintain their fascist rule. It has arbitrarily included in the constitution the so-called "special Malay rights" which, in actual fact, means special rights for a handful of bureaucrats and landlords of the Malay nationality. It has used this stipulation as a trap to ensnare the masses of the Malay nationality as a weapon to oppress and fleece the labouring people, above all those of the Malay nationality, and as a legal ground for inviting Malay chauvinist sentiments as well as for discriminating against, persecuting and massacring the Chinese, Indians and other nationalities. However, the Malay chauvinist policy has evoked strong resistance from the people of all nationalities in Malaya.
I finally filtered through to me the other day that I wasn't the only one who had given up using the Union building, that there were thousands of others who never went into the place, and just spent the year complaining about the exorbitant fees. I understand the know-all student politicians (are they students themselves — do they talk to students — do they ever leave their exec cubby hole?) have been saying that its the increased workload, blah blah, that keeps us ordinary students out of the place.
Show how much they know. The fact is, the Union building stinks. Literally and figuratively. The north end mens' grots have never been cleaned, they're pungent and spread their reek throughout that end of the building. The cafe stinks, of fetid fat and dirty rubbish bins. The standard of maintenance throughout the building is sloppy. Dud lights wait weeks to be replaced. Grot doors can't be shut. There's never enough toilet paper.
Who's running the union? Who benefits? Who's ripping it and us off? Who are the faceless bureaucrats — the house manager who's never in his office? What justification is there for employing him, plus those nonentities down the darkened corridor — the managing secretary, his secretary, and the deputy managing secretary? Do they justify their wages, which are no doubt vast?
It seems to me, and to a hell of a lot of students that we're being taken for a ride by the bureaucrats, both student and management. They've ripped us off to the tune of a flat, or a nice office, or a nice wage (sinecures all round) and they couldn't give a damn about making the Union building a pleasant or worthwhile place for students.
Could they please resign and not be replaced?
In last week's Salient that Sancho Panza of the Wellington left, Mr S. Devereux, made a number of charges against me which owed more to his Inability to read and his imagination than anything else. A full reply to every charge would require the whole of Salient, so I deal only with his more obvious outrages.
Mr Devereux charges that I hold that "power is exercised by governments which are personalised in Khrushchov, Allende, Dubcek, Hoxha, Mao Tsetung. etc." This is odd. First, I clearly pointed out that the main components of state power are the armed forces and the police. Second, nowhere did Mao, Hoxha and Khrushchov figure as leaders of governments. I quoted Mao and Hoxha in making a point of Marxist theory. Third, I used that well-known (to everybody except Mr Devereux) figure of speech synecdoche: letting the part stand for the whole. It is the same figure of speech that the Chinese use in the following: "During his term of office, he (Allende) adopted a series of policies in defence of Chile's independence, state sovereignty and national interests." (Peking Review
I admire the grand sweep of Mr Devereux's imagination in being able to convert a mere figure of speech into a whole theory of political power. Alas, he both honours me and shames me too much.
If I were a more charitable person, I would assume that the rubber band holding Mr Devereux's spectacles to his nose had broken and they had fallen off. So he confused me with Norman Kirk because both of us were a bit overweight. But I am not charitable. As I read these clumsy fabrications, I was reminded of Lenin's angry riposte to the Machians: "Listen: lie, but don't overdo it!"
In the only thing I have written on apartheid I stated (among other things) that "its essence is the economic and political subjugation of the non-whites to produce a cheap labour force, disciplined by harsh, unjust, discriminatory laws and practices, from which the South African capitalists and the British and US investors can earn huge profits." (ML,
I close by reminding Mr Devereux of some words by someone else he classified as an "idealist". Stalin once said: "Paper will bear anything."
Mr Devereux has proved this truth once again.
Attached is an amended copy of the leaflet I put out last Monday to counteract a move to reverse the MSA decision to donate $200 to the Vietnam Medical Aid Appeal Fund. I have not much to add to this very personal opinion on what is simply and purely a humanitarian act. If it does get out of the grip of MSA the money will go to the British Medical Aid Committee in London. From there it goes to Vietnam in the form of medical supplies.
What remains to be said is that should the MSA reverse its decision, I shall disassociate myself from this body. If that happens it should not be said that all Malaysian students are lacking in charity as the decision will only be made by a small section of the total Malaysian student population. I shall be glad if some of those students who describe themselves as sincere Christians explain to me why they agree that the motion should be rescinded after openly supporting and voting for the motion at the AGM.
To all MSA members and sundry
You are all aware by now that the MSA has donated $200 to the Vietnam Medical Aid Appeal fund. This is the most significant act the MSA has done up to date. The resolution was passed by a tremendous majority of the members at the last AGM. But no sooner was this done than a move has been made to hold an SGM to rescind this good deed.
The need of the Vietnamese people is clearly established. Money is required to send medicine to help, heal and rehabilitate those innocent civilians wounded in the war. This need goes beyond the bounds of politics. Only those who are grossly selfish, mean, and inhumanitarian would deny the aid that they desperately need. Some of you who want to splash the money a free 'do" are merely emphasising your own selfishness.
How many of you would of your own accord give one dollar to charity? This is one occasion where we can give as a group and thus save you miserable individuals from having to make the agonising decision of giving your own money away.
Those of you who have voted for the motion and have changed your minds since are guilty of being irrational.
The way you think reflects very poorly on the MSA as a whole. Any attempt to rescind the resolution will show other people that they cannot have faith in what this association says or does.
You are also showing bad faith and lack of confidence in electing your new president who has promised to put the resolution into effect.
Those of you who are attempting to rescind the motion are doing the MSA a very bad turn.
You must vote against any attempt to rescind the resolution.
The Malayan People's Liberation Army have close contacts with the broad masses. The courageous fighting in Southern Kedah waged by the liberation army's shock troops and the expanded and strengthened guerilla areas have seriously disturbed the enemy. Since the complete failure of Operation Sedar, the enemy has mounted continuous attacks by deploying its infantry brigade using air and artillery support.
In a fierce battle which took place at the foot of Gunong Bintang in August last year, the Malayan PLA successfully repulsed the enemy's attack and wiped out a large number of Its troops. To cover up its mistakes the enemy directed its aircraft and artillery to bomb and shell the Gunong Bintang after quietly evacuating its dead and wounded from the area by helicopters.
Since early
In addition, a certain work-group of the liberation army unit, which is actively operating in Northern Kedah and the Thai border area, also successfully repulsed an enemy attack. The work-group was attacked by two platoons of enemy troops, totalling more than 70 men on May 17. Though outnumbered, the liberation army courageously fought back and successfully wiped out a large number of the enemy troops. The news of the enemy's defeat was heard everywhere.
The victories of the liberation army has greatly inspired the masses, and the masses are praising the bravery of the army in combat.
I wish to bring to the notice of fellow students, the treatment by the management of the Royal Tavern of its student customers.
Apparently filled with a desire to elevate the status of its clientelle it has resorted to persecutory tactics on anyone who shows the vaguest appearance of being a student. Regular student customers are subjected to lengthy weekly interrogations and age checks despite the fact that their ages should by now be known to the management. Students have been thrown out on occasions even though able to provide evidence of being over 20.
We intend to take preventative measures to combat this form of social persecution. Students are asked to gather for an end of term piss-up at the Royal Tavern Dungeon Bar on Lambton Quay at 4pm, Friday, October 5.
For god's sake turn up or we shall be back to the old idea of students being able only to drink in slums and hovels of bars.
In reply to Mr Browns' and Mr A. Rimbauds accusation of the 'blacks' and 'Asian' students, I must ask them what they have done to make us 'at home' or put us 'at ease' instead of being hostile and ignorant!
Having lived here for almost four years, I have found out in my own experience that there are far too many New Zealanders like them who have no real appreciation of the validity of a culture other than their own (nor even the capacity to appreciate it) and I have a certain amount of sympathy for pricks like Mr Brown and Mr A. Rimbaud.
The effect of their wild accusations will no doubt only weld us into greater cohesiveness. At present there seems to be no real understanding between the NZ and overseas students. Any contact therefore is superficial but it is the worst form of pride and degrading paternalism which leads one cultural group to despise another because of 'cultural' and other differences and they should hang their heads in shame.
If people like Brown and Rimbaud have the ignorance to make such accusations, they therefore must be unconsciously discriminating against us in that they see us, but have not met us. They must remember that mankind must learn to be equal without being identical.
Certain humility is needed where centuries of exploitation and humllation, from the slave trade to apartheid, have sewn suspicion and resentment. Indeed to see the world in terms of clearly defined "racial" groups about which one can validly generalise is no more a basis for understanding than to see it in terms of mutually exclusive ideologies.
One can understand that you get a certain amount of wry amusement out of publishing such metaphysical mumblings as S. Devereux's 'long Live etc. It is, however, unfortunate that his letters, by reason of their occasional smatterings of uprooted quotes from Mao Tsetung may, at first blush, appear to have some legitimate relationship with Marxism.
So far as any can be detected, Mr Devereux's reasoning appears to go like this: Step one: quote Mao on every kind of thinking; step two: state that Terry Auld (stretching it a bit) instructs the children of the working; class placing him firmly in the camp of a petite-bourgoeis intellectual; step three: imply but do not state that Terry therefore is incapable of either understanding, appreciating or developing Marxist ideas. Using Mr Devereux's rough and ready method of proletarian blood-testing. Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao himself would score piss-poor. Obviously, what is needed here is not so much a logician as a psychiatrist.
It is of some value to recall that in the same essay on "Practice", Mao states — "It is necessary to make a leap from perceptual to rational knowledge....whatever has been scientifically reconstructed in the process of cognition, on the basis of, practice, reflects objective reality, as Lenin said, more deeply, more truly, more fully."
Mr Devereux's assertion that Terry Auld "consistently propagates a humanitarian, non-class approach" bears as much relation to fact as Mr Devereux's mystical mishmash does to revolutionary Marxism — i.e. none.
To again seek to rescue Mao from Mr Devereux's indecent mishandling of him by actually quoting him:
"The Problem of whether theory corresponds to objective reality is not, and cannot be, completely solved on the movement of knowledge from the perceptual to the rational mentioned above. The only way to solve this problem completely is to redirect rational knowledge to social practice, apply theory to practice and see whether it can achieve the objectives one has in mind." Now, I'll bet any comers that he did not have in mind the suggestion that Mr Devereux (affectionately known to his ex-tenants as Selwyn) made to the last anti-apartheid meeting that we should demand entry into RSA Club meetings "machine-guns in hand."
If Charles Lian is still looking for the lost minutes he should waste no time finding out who lost them. Rumour has it that the High Com has them and also copies of past years minutes which are scrutinised by the Special Branch of the Malaysian Police Department which specialises in catching communists.
There has been a lot of rotten talk about being a true Malaysian.. blah..blah..Please exclude me as I am a true Sarawakian. The idea of 'Malaysia' is a British-Malay plot jacked up in
Ten years after this federation of states was effected the economic welfare of the people is still the same as it was then. The racist government has remained in power by using the British method of 'divide and rule', playing on the racial fears of the people and enforcing racist laws. At the same time the Malay aristocracy has strengthened its position by sucking more supporters into its system through the conferring of titles and also by the sale of these. This class system is enthusiastically supported by the many Chinese millionaires as it is naturally in their interest to do so. This hierarchy is a branch of the British class system and is one of the many holds the British has over the so-called Malaysian government in maintaining their vast financial interest in the area.
People of Sarawak unite and fight against British-Malayan imperialism! Only traitors call themselves 'true Malaysian'.
The Malaysian High Commissioner, Mr Jack De Silva, by his outburst against New Zealand University Students' Associations is attempting to suppress the freedom of speech among Malaysian students in this country which the majority of New Zealanders enjoy in far greater measure than is the case for Malays, let alone Chinese, in Malaysia.
Such interference in the internal politics of New Zealand, interference of a particularly vicious type, is both unnecessary and undesirable, and must not be tolerated by Students' Associations or by the Government.
As the Acting Vice-Chancellor of Victoria University recently said: "If the Malaysian Government wishes Malaysian students to be sheltered from...exposure... to political views of all shades....it cannot look to the universities of this country to provide higher education for their students."
De Silva's attack on the Eastern Cultural Concert is only one of the many attempts of the Malaysian Government to suppress the development of Chinese and Indian cultures in Malaysia. I want to report to you and your readers a recent incident that happened on the campus of the University of Malaya, which provides another example of the suppression of other cultures in Malaysia by the Malaysian government and its puppet organisations. The Information was, provided by a friend of mine who studies in the University of Malaya and actively participated in this incident.
The University of Malaya is the largest university in Malaysia and has a student population of more than 10,000. About half of the students are Malays and the other half consists of Chinese and Indian students. The admission system provides a special privilege for Malay students who may be admitted even if they scored poor results in their Higher School Certificate examinations. For the Chinese and Indian students the University sets out a quota system which limits the number of entries each year and in order to qualify they must have gained very good results in Higher School Certificate. As a result competition was very keen among the Chinese and Indian students. Those who are not able to enter may lose their chance of having higher education, or, if their families can afford it, go overseas for further studies.
The Malay students mainly study subjects like arts, islamic studies and a few are studying engineering, science and medicine; while the Chinese and Indians study mainly the latter subjects. Within the campus a student association, which consists of pro-government students, claimed to represent all students. There are other clubs like the Malay Language Club, the Chinese Language Club, the Indian Language Club, Socialist Club, Engineering Club, etc, which represent some factions of the student population. Among these the Malay, Chinese and Indian Clubs are very active in promoting their own cultures. The Chinese Language Club, however, not only promotes the Malaysian Chinese culture but also the cultures of Malays and Indians. This was shown by a number of concerts they put out in various places in Malaya, which reflect the realistic life of the majority of the population, the Malay rice grower and fishermen, the Chinese mining workers and pineapple planters, the Malay, Indian and Chinese rubber tappers, hawkers, construction workers, and harbour and railway workers. In some performances, the Indian Language Club assisted in putting some performances on which reflect their own culture. Because of some extremists, the Malay Language Club does not give a hand.
Probably incensed by the successful performances of the Chinese Language Club the Ministry of Culture directed its agents in the campus student association, to organise a conference on 'National Culture' in order to introduce and implement regulations to limit the activities of Chinese and Indian Language Clubs. Before the student association invited the Malay, Chinese and Indian Language Clubs to participate in the conference the student association, by consulting with the Malay Language Club prefixed the definition and scope of the conference subject. In their view National Culture is Malay Culture, other cultures can only act as subsidiary cultures to promote the Malay culture. What they were interested in at the conference was how to fix rules so that the activities of Chinese and Indian Language Clubs were limited only to promote the 'National Culture'. They then invited the Chinese, Indian and Malay Language Clubs to participate in the conference on July 22 this year. This conspiracy was immediately known by the Chinese and Indian Language Clubs committee members. In order to safeguard their activities from being suppressed by the rulings of this conference the Chinese and Indian Language Clubs refused to participate in this conference and put out a statement that the numbers of student bodies invited to participate in this conference were too few, it was therefore not democratic and that any ruling passed by the conference would not be accepted. The student association ignored their protest and carried out the conference with only the Malay Language Club in participation. Because of this the Chinese and Indian Clubs, with the support of the Engineering Club and Non-hostelite Organisation, staged a demonstration in the campus which consisted of 700 students. They marched towards the conference chamber where the conference was held and successfully shut down the conference which was in progress. When the conference reopened in the afternoon, the four demonstrating student bodies sent delegates to the conference and, with the support of many students, voted down all regulations which were not reasonable.
On July 23 the Malay Language Club staged a counter demonstration and claimed that during the demonstration on the previous day one of the demonstrators had insulted the Malays by shouting "all Malays go back to Kampongs (villages)" and they warned that if the Chinese and Indian Language Clubs did not identify the person who shouted that slogan they would take legal action to sue the clubs for raising a matter which could cause racial disharmony in the country (which is prohibited by the constitution and punishable by life imprisonment). In fact, as my friend told me, the person (an Indian student) who was most wanted only shouted "Menteri Kebudayaan (Minister of Culture) go back to Kampong!" As the back-stage organiser of the "National Culture" conference was the Ministry of Culture the slogan made by this Indian student was most justified. On July 24 the student association organised a general students meeting at Speaker's Corner in the campus, which was attended by 700 to 800 students who supported the Chinese and Indian Clubs stand and roughly similar numbers that supported the Malay Language Club stand. Tension was high at the meeting and violence could have happened at any time. Fortunately the student association president and the presidents of the Chinese and Indian Language Clubs sensed this danger and asked their members to disperse and the meeting was called off. My friend stopped his letter at this point. Probably the matter was still unresolved.
It appears to me that racial tension is still high even five years after the
To end this communication I would like to quote the comment made by the president of the Socialist Club of the University of Malaya, a Malay student, on the "National Culture" conference held in the university. "We middle class members of the society, in fact, have no qualification to talk about "national culture" The true national culture comes from the working masses, comes by evolution and not by resolution. Our present culture is bourgeois and colonial culture."
Kay Goodger in a letter recently made a weak attack on Dr Dunn who criticised that pseudo-revolution, the sexual liberation movement.
Of course the full weight of commercial interest are behind Kay Goodger and her colleagues. We see how those who recommend abandonment of censorship for example, are ready to impose a new form of control which involves a hidden and subtle conditioning of people's feelings. The explosion of pornographic material shows us that publishers are using the pseudo-liberation to bully people into a new conformity. A herd trend is noticeable especially in our peer group where many try to be in the 'right' crowd by jumping on this band wagon. Young folk have been obliged to take to 'free' sex, to be sexually 'progressive' even though they know they personally are not happy about it.
Nobody in the 'in-crowd' knows anymore when he/she is in love or just turned on. The pseudo-revolution — so-called because it liberates no-one—is advocated by many young 'radicals', has driven all meaning out of sex and caused some loss of a sense of the potentialities of sexual joy.
Meanwhile the Press being at the beck and call of the financial barons censors the vigorous opposition of those qualified and experienced enough to recognise the dangers of this 'revolution' and the new millionaires of exploited sexuality enjoy the in-flow of cash.
The reactions to my letter criticising H.P. Dunn's moralistic views against abortion have only strengthened my argument that those who oppose abortion do so because they wish to see punishments for sexual activity retained.
But Jennifer Hyatt and Harry Theates (Salient
For wanting the removal of punitive laws which cause women's sexual lives to be full of distress in a way that no man's can be, I find myself accused of advocating :: "Sexual revolution"; "quickie, limited relationships"; "limitation or lack of total self-giving in a relationship", and so on. In fact, I neither advocate or deprecate such things. What I do find objectionable, however, is the idea that fulfilling human sexual relationships can flower in a coercive situation where freedom of choice is replaced by laws and rigid institutions.
For an excellent discussion of this entire question, I warmly recommend Wilhelm Reich's books, especially "The Sexual Revolution", written in the
As a student from Sarawak, I was so irritated by my fellow country man, Michael Lim's stand for the ruling regime — the Malaysian Government. He acts as a running dog for the regime which is totally against the will of the Sarawak people.
Michael Lim, have you ever thought of the plight of our people and the economic exploitation by foreign capitalists and the ruling regime back home? Of course, you will never think of that. You are being paid and supported by the government who help the foreign capitalists to exploit our people.
You seem to be satisfied with the situation back home — the acceleration of oil exploration by foreign companies; the "legal extraction" of our natural resources; the monopoly of the fishing industry by one of the ministers — Ong Kee Hui (the Minister of Science and Technology) and Japanese Co., in such a way that the lives of our Chinese and Malay fishermen are getting harder and harder; the spiraling inflation and the great disparities in income!
Are you not aware of the increasing numbers of native girls moving to towns to become prostitutes? They just can't make a living in the rural areas. How would you feel if one of them was your sister or neice?
As a future lawyer, if you have a moral conscience, you must at least use you "super ability" to remedy all these unjust phenomena. However, I doubt that you will.
I was very disappointed at the MSA annual general meeting that the presidents of VUWSA and NZUSA did not turn up at the meeting just as they did at the MSSA annual general meeting. At the MSA annual general meeting I was not even allowed to vote because I was told that I was not a financial member. If the MSSA meeting could give me the privilege, I can see no reason why the MSA meeting could not do the same.
I am sure that if the presidents of both VUWSA and NZUSA were present they would have helped the plight of the non-financial members just as they did at the MSSA meeting where the VUWSA president helped overcome the constitutional question of voting rights. They only have to open their mouths and the whole constitutional requirements fall to pieces. It was really great to have such persuasive and patronising patrons as these two gentlemen. So I would appeal to all overseas student bodies to invite the presidents of both VUWSA and NZUSA when they have, their meetings because these two gents are capable of altering any constitution without the need of two-thirds of three-quarters majority My salute to them. Thank you.
As I was going through the difficult process of waking up the other morning I happened to look out my window. Outside the sun was beaming Its full summer warmth and the green flowing grass shone in joy. Anyway in this letter I'm not going into mine or anyone else's sleeping habits but there are a few questions I would like to ask.
But they can wait till later. After all its bad to ask too many questions, even to people who have all the answers. No there's something more pressing on my mind, but then that went out in the middle age too. Stretching my back to my full length I lose sight of my feet which isn't too bad when you've got feet like mine but which isn't the reason I stretched my back.
No what I have to say is a complaint. It is specifically a complaint against Bruce Robinson who this year stood up at SRC and taking a leaf out of Lenin's book promised vegetarian meals and wholemeal bread and health foods if he was elected to the Catering Sub-Committee. He was and he didn't. This was quite a while ago and well-known ex(?) hippie Robinson was a vegetarian and could be expected to act in the interests of vegetarians if only purely from the motive of self-interest. Not only has he only managed to achieve a private and unpublicised jack-up with Don Gleeson to get vegetarian burgers at the takeaway bar on request (guess who's the only one that makes requests) but also it is a well known fact that as of recently he has started to eat meat again and has renounced vegetarians as "bourgeoise individualist scum" (no doubt to keep in with the VUW left-wing clique to which he has only been granted associate membership so far). If he hasn't the courage to honour his pledges or at least explain why he failed or if it is something he no longer believes in, then the least he can do is resign.
If you had interviewed the new
It may be right to express
So what's 'left' is 'right' and you
Because of the sheer gutlessness of the CPNZ leadership (currently the
By writing to Salient I do not
I have never regarded Stalin as being superhuman. Neither do I criticise the Wilcox clique for failing to posess this non-existent quality. I merely feel that I may criticise their schoolboy politics; the fact that this is currently regarded by the CPNZ as a capital crime in no way deters me.
Dev says that the "shots" of his ridiculous article were aimed "at those, those....who had taken up the metaphysical formulation of Stalin's 'Economic Problems of Socialism', namely the theory of maximum profits." He has apparently learnt nothing from Ray Nunes' thorough refutation of "Another Look". I direct Dev's attention to the arch revisionist Varga's "Politico-Economic Problems of Capitalism", a polemic attacking "Economic Problems" for the service of revisionism. Or is it the source of Dev's original article. But where were Dev's shot heading? Left, right and centre, like a mad woman's shit.
"Stalin depicts not monopoly but the monopolists as being vicious and unsatisfied with average profit..." wrote Dev in "Another Look", and goes on to say that Stalin personalised the actual capitalists etc. as the villains rather than analyse the phenomenon. In fact Stalin originally wrote monopoly capitalism, if Dev had bothered to read the work properly.
"It may be that he (Stalin) considered himself capable of deriving laws from material which no one else could, but this can be nothing more than speculation." Well in fact, if anything it is rather less than speculation. One of the main arguments of Stalin's work was that man does not create or derive new economic laws. I could continue for pages, but to little purpose, other than further exposing the theoretician Dev and those who saw fit to publish his tripe as incompetents. As this is self evident to any worker or student who reads the "Voice" I will desist.
Dev will not drive me out of my necessary anonymity with his "docs he dare" taunts. He is moving closer to the truth than usual with his comment on the contradiction between the economic base and workers' consciousness, but necessarily avoids the contradiction between the working class and the party, which is, at the moment, rather akin to that which exists between labour and capital.
I will leave Dev and his miserable party in dreamland, with their Mansons and Baileys to haunt them in their slumbers. One thing I am certain of Dev. The fairest prince in the land could not kiss your bitch of a party awake.
Why is the coffee so frothy, as if made with detergent? Perhaps it is a residue left in the cups after washing?
15 ex-Coffee Drinkers
On Wednesday night last week I watched an Inquiry documentary which dealt in a general way with the social character of marijuana use in New Zealand. I reached no profound conclusions nor saw any moral issues raised by the programme. What did occur to me though, after watching the programme and from my own observations, was that, in the context in which marijuana is used, its use is a personal acknowledgement of, or concession to, individual political impotence. Seen in this light it resembles many other activities which could be called 'escapist' (they hardly need enumerating). Perhaps, when this 'innocuous' aspect of grass is recognised by those who wield power they will consent to its legalisation.
I am not suggesting that the solution of all problems is to be found in politics, politics here given the widest interpretation. I am merely noting the fallaciousness of the belief that grass is the agent which will initiate widespread social change — it will not. On the contrary, present facilities will permit the immediate absorption of this new consumer good into the economy, with no consequential collapse of that economy.
What is wrong with escapism, one may ask, if one is politically impotent? Nothing perhaps, but in an age in which the affluent individual is encouraged to participate in 'a world ....... of indefinite possibilities', it seems ironic or contradictory that by indulging in escapism one is in fact assigning oneself a 'rank' and a 'limit' — exploitable and manipulable.
One cannot help marvelling at the frivolity of Asian student's politics on campus, especially of recent events pertaining especially to Malaysian and Singaporean students. Is this a desperate surge of sensationalism to disclaim the accusation of apathy by some? I wonder!
Imagine — losing an AGM'i minutes, and trying to find a scapegoat! How interesting! Could there be an explanation for this assumed loss? A petty excuse for 'damaging' the image of someone? Or perhaps an easy way out of trying to justify and explain the existence of some strange faces on the committee, since the last elections? I wonder!
And with reference to MSA, MSSA affairs; an unsuccessful and rashly drawn up plan for dissolution of MSSA by MSA? I wonder again!
What of the referendum?, or shall I call it opinion poll? which was supposed to reveal the true wishes of Malaysian students with regard to 'proper' representation! Gone with the wind? Blown away as quickly as it was thought up? Or lack of support? Maybe, there is no clear answer for a people who are undecided and irrational? And maybe, it was only the wish of one man, to satisfy an urge for bringing up controversy? Mmmm I'm amused!
Finally, how about this — having meetings which present an impression of formality, dignity and an intellectual thirst to abide by technical, legal and constitutional means, and yet constituting behaviours befitting clowns in a circus, and rowdy, disorderly maniacs with not only paper planes and balls flying about (MSA) and confusion about speaking and voting rights (MSSA), but also fear of 'interference' from 'foreign parties'! What a funny lot!
And ha! Guess I cannot finish here...what about students clamoring among each other, trying to protect and discredit a High Commissioner who is unaware of the childish and frivolous nature of the people he is dealing with.
On second thoughts, I'm not so much amused, but rather disgusted.
Only two categories of human beings can be excused for being out of touch with reality — the dreamers and the lunatic.
I would appear that your correspondent (ref.
The content of his letter is a complete departure from the context of my reply to Mr Jack De Silva's unfounded allegations towards Malaysian students in New Zealand. My reply, was effected entirely in my capacity as President of MSSA, on behalf of the Malaysian members represented by the association. I will certainly be guilty of failing my duty as President if I had not deplored the unjustified allegations 'blasted' by Mr De Silva.
In reply to the letter from MSA Hardcore, No. KB 1257 (Salient No. 24), I would like to point out to this poor soul, that to talk 'wisely' is not only an asset, but can at times be a liability too.
Loud and big mouths telling great tales need not be telling true tales.
Right now, who do you reckon is the 'running dog and puppet of Peter Wilson'? With the MSA crawling for and now getting affiliated, could MSA be 'immature and cannot stand on its own feet too'? Watch out, Peter Wilson could well be at your next AGM, and will he then be still called a big gun?
I think you better stick to All Black Tests and make wise comments about them; its less humiliating.
P.S. See you at the next All Black Test, maybe we could then talk more intelligently, in the mean time its best to keep big mouths closed than to have it firing like empty 'big guns'.
Whatever may be thought to the contrary the Church is no apologist for the capitalist economic system. Democracy is supported but not capitalism.
The popes this century, even last century, denounced the unregulated struggle to maximise profits at the expense of the workers. They attacked severely those who caused the in justice of the maldistribution of this world's goods which is at the base even still, of conflict in society.
To the complex evils of a capitalist society the Marxist advances a remedy of a simplicity ideal for the maker of slogans. Certainly some of the more obvious evils of the capitalist system would be destroyed by communism but too much would be destroyed with them. The communist approach has a cure for inequality very much as the way the guillotine is a cure for dandruff.
The Christian approach to economic inequalities is to try first to make people better. You cannot make a good state with bad people. One of Marx's and communists most extraordinary blindnesses is that they do not see the badness inherent in people, or they believe it will go away with the attainemnt of human maturity.
Second, the church continually reminds us that rearrangement of economic systems has to safeguard human rights. These rights can be regulated by the state when the necessity arises but must be recognised.
Many religious leaders have attacked the enormous and unjust differences in the distribution of goods between the rich and poor classes and nations. In their teaching on the right to private property as expressed in the United Nations Declaration, they stress that overall social factors must be taken into account in the use of property and wealth. Goods can only be retained by a person when others have sufficient for their needs.
There is not quick solution to economic problems. On the matter of private property Marxists suggest that a maldistribution be cured by the abolition of property — thus denying human rights in this area. The Church sees the answer to lie, as with most evil situations, making people less subject to selfishness. People have to have the scales of self-centredness stripped from their eyes so they can see the evil they cause. Both capitalism and communism are condemned by the church while a middle, more humane path is advocated, personal rights and the power of the state to regulate economic activity are thereby acknowledged. So the church is in a more enduring way on the side of the poor and deprived.
Krishna Menon falls in the same category as snakes which fortunately for New Zealand, are absent in this country. The reason for this being that the excess of sulphur accounts for their extinction. But the excess of sulphur does not prevent the likes of K. Menon from surviving in a totally foreign environment. As long as they can wriggle and twist they are quite contented. These are what snakes do anyway.
One cannot help but wonder why K. Menon if he is a Singaporean (the only K. Menon known to Malaysian and Singaporeans is the Singaporean one) failed to criticise the dictatorial policies of the Singapore Government. Why not question the actions of your government first before interfering snake-wise in Malaysian affairs. The national Service issue is one point. Most Singapore students preferred to escape the compulsory conscription — National Service by either going Down Under or to New Zealand and then make a desperate attempt to stay in the country. Most are scared to question the policies of the Singapore Government because the Singapore High Commissioner can be very nasty as experiences have shown. And the fear of victimisation when they do get home looms high. One wonders if K. Menon's presence in New Zealand is for the same reasons — that is to escape National Service and pray to god that it is not compulsory anymore in three years time.
So, Mr K. Menon, it is advisable to keep your snake-like tirades to criticising your own country's policies and leave Malaysian problems to Malaysian students. The Singapore jails are crammed with political prisoners and detainees but there is no reason why the government should not build more if the need arises.
There are two sides to every story they say, and I think there are two sides to this story — the Eastern Cultural Concert story.
I must congratulate the people involved also like a lot of people have done, on their tremendous performance and organisation. But, the success of a concert like this on the other hand will be a failure, if the true message of the stories depicted are not carried across to the audience. Is there a message, deeper and more important and relevant to the people performing than what is talked about?
They also say that, every action has a reason behind it; Can someone clarify for me what is the actual reason behind having books and pamphlets for sale at the concert, which are not relevant to the concert itself? I challenge the people involved to reply to my question, if they are sincere and really stand for what they believe. For me even if death is involved, I will die for what I really believe and not live a gutless coward, claiming to hold certain principles which I dare not even declare, and having to hide behind facades and false impression trying hard to justify personally that I still hold strong to what I have accepted as right. If there is a message different to what is on the surface presented, be bold enough to say it. Fear not if some feel it is wrong, for what you feel is right to yourself is more important. Do not cheat yourself, that is most important, although you may try to cheat others. In future think before you act...and if you are not bold enough to stick by what is the true purpose of your actions, do not act. Or else your Big Brother may be ashamed of you. All the best for future concerts. Big Brother is watching you....
I, like many others, was disappointed to see the way the pro-abortionists have perverted the women's rights movement. This accounts for the low numbers who supported the marches on Suffrage Day.
Auckland managed to have at the most, 400 marching. This is nothing to compare with the 5,000 people who, in July, marched there in support of the right to life. Wellington marches seemed to get a lot of abuse from the folk on the footpath. Three hundred were expected but only a third of that number materialised.
Christchurch had only 35 marching. Dunedin had at the most 100 people marching under pro-abortion banners.
That the pro-abortion campaign supported by relatively few should be associated with the women's rights movement involving so many, is a disaster. We women will not stand for this manipulation.
Abortion law reform seems an easy matter for the pro-abortionists, something they can sink their teeth into. But going for quick results means the main problems faced by women, those conditions which give rise for to the requests for abortions — inequality in social conditions — are ignored. The pro-abortion group leading the feminist movement at the present time takes the easy approach in the complex fight against discrimination against women.
Many of my friends, as I do myself, support fully the women's rights movement, but we abhor the proabortion campaign.
As a Malaysian student I would like to express my heartiest congratulations to David Tan, the President of MSSA and its members who stood up courageously to condemn De Silva's blatant intimidation of Malaysia students. 'The association finds it utterly abhorrant that the Malaysian High Commission should accuse Malaysian students in NZ of being backed by a 'foreign power' and being subverted with communist propaganda. His statement being based on flimsy circumstantial evidence — no fact.'
Regarding the statement by the Otago Chinese Language Club on 'clarification on subversion claims': The total cost of staging the concert which came to about $3000, was almost covered by revennue from ticket sales of $2000 at $1 each and the subsidy promised by NZ Students Arts Council; I just learnt that VUW Student Association and the NZ Students Art Council have donated $600 to the club. This is ample proof that they are not financially supported by any foreign power as De Silva has blindly claimed.
All of us are aware that all Malaysian students deplore the unreasonable allegations of De Silva except a few of his running dogs who bark just to please their master.
As a righteous person I think that whatever is wrong whoever is the government and wherever he may be, he will stand up without any hesitation to condemn the wrong and uphold the right.
What a surprise it is to read your coverage of the MSA meeting. For long I have been under the illusion that our politics (MSA) were being contested by student activitists — on two legs with no wings. Your acute observation sure exposes the political colour of the candidates. Did not realise me old mate Ken Lim is leftist and Dave Cheung a rightwinger. It's sure different with me Pete. To me they are normal blokes with some interest in student affairs — as such I will extend my help if it is of any use.
Isn't it a loss to the revolutionary movement when comrade Tom Iboh is converted into a right-winger. That's how you brand him. If he is a rightwinger — then you must be the super right-winger. Your tactic of calling people with whom you disagree as a right-winger reminded me of the sinister ploys of capitalist politicians — discrediting and mudslinging of opponents.
Now after reading your report which does not reflect Marxist ethics but capitalist arrogance I begin to suspect that you are a bourgeoisie spy! You sound like one of them. Real revolutionaries will love you.
Your arrogant patronising attitude towards MSA affairs is sickening too. Just lay off will you!
Now Big Brother Frankie stop kicking your fellow leftists who disagree with you to the other side. You will lose your comrades. They will become right-wing. Then you will be the only one left wanking (oops I mean left-wing).
You know the revolution will be greatly helped by honest and conscientious journalism. Didn't Comrade Marx insist on solidarity. Comrades beware the reactionary enemies who pose as friends.
Best of luck Pete!
The
The plot of the Razak regime to keep on peddling the fraud of "parliamentary democracy" became completely bankrupt. Hence, on
The number of innocent people, including women and children who were killed exceeded 3,000. The Injured and maimed were innumerable. Arson and looting occured every where. Tens of thousands of people lost their belongings and families and were left destitute and homeless. 90% of those who lost their lives and those who fell victim in one way or another in this inhuman bloodbath are of Chinese origin. How can the people forget this blood debt and let the Razak regime go unpunished?
Splitting national unity and engineering national massacres are the usual vicious tricks employed by all colonialists, old and new, in suppressing the people's revolutionary forces as well as in contending for sphere of influence. There has never been a single case of national massacre in the history of Malaya that was not the creation of imperialism and its lackeys. The
The Malayan people are against national massacres but are not afraid of them. This means the people should hold fast to national unity on the basis of national equality, resolutely expose and stand up to the policies of national oppression and national massacres and carry out extensive propaganda work to unmask the vicious plot among those who have been hood-winked; the people should steadfastly hit back at the enemy in self-defence when the enemy starts massacring. Only by so doing can the people repulse the enemy's attacks and reduce the sacrifices and losses of the people.
National struggle is in fact a matter of class struggle. The policies of national oppression and national massacre practised by the Razak regime are in essence policies of class oppression. These policies gravely harm not only the interest of the working people of the Chinese, Indian and other nationalities but also the interests of those of the Malay nationality. The working people of all nationalities can achieve their complete liberation only by closing their own ranks, uniting with all forces that can be united, taking the road of using the countryside to encircle the cities and seizing political power by armed force.
After reading Peter Wilson's reply to Jill Basher I felt stirred to reply. However since it is not any concern of mine as to how or why any NZUSA constituent voted for sponsorship of Lorraine Rothman's tour, I shan't comment on the line or standpoint of Jill Basher.
What I do wish to question is the premise from which Peter bases his "socialist" view-point. If indeed that has been the political basis from which his rejection of the tour originated.
In his letter he first draws from the political position of Kay Goodger who "has pointed to some of the false premises on which the concept of "Self-Help" is based," which "has meant the rejection of a scientific approach to medicine in favour of a kind of 'folk medicine'. " Then followed by an extract from "Vaginal Politics" by Ellen Frankfort who wrote: "Doctors, hospitals and drug companies are not going to be affected by having small groups of women learning how to examine themselves or how to extract their menstrual periods."
From this Peter constructs reason to Justify his rejection of Lorraine's tour of our country.
Whether or not her orientation is politically radical is hardly a valid point to bring into question. The essecntial factor is whether or not the concept of self-help clinics has any basis for application in our country.
Consideration of the concept for New Zealand requires an examination of the dialectics of the women's and class struggles along with all the objective conditions existing in New Zealand not those of the USA.
Self-help of itself does not necessarily lead women away from scientific "qualified" (male dominated) opinion. Although it is to be granted the possibilities do exist for this. The main factor remains, that women are given a chance to take individual and collective initiative for the advancement and protection of their own best interests.
This is where direct bearing is brought upon our NZ conditions. If women are organising themselves around a concept of self help, then the basis exists for the concept to be realised be being integrated with the broader struggle for better health and welfare care, where the medical profession is "challenged to use the most up to date methods of technology of society to better womens lives, as well as all other people.
Herein lies the interconnection of the women's struggles and those of the working class in general. Workers in a particular industry separated into organisations on the lines of their craft are not told that they are not politically radical because they choose to adopt forms of methods of struggle in a given situation. Yet Peter seems to assert that women will only find liberation from oppression when they learn the right "revolutionary" slogans.
What Peter says in regard to women being "assigned the role of sex object" in capitalist society is not entirely a correct proposition in my opinion. Capital, as a product of labour and through its private ownership forces the labour power of people into its service. Labour power is a commodity that the capitalist buys on the labour market in order to carry on production and reproduction of exchange commodities.
For women their reproductive biology is drawn into the service of capital as a commodity of utility. Capital imposes on women and the family unit, the responsibility of the reproduction of the commodity "labour power" which the individual capitalist at a future time will buy on the "labour market".
Since the majority of women are in the ranks of the working class, it follows that they are forced into becoming production units for the reproducing of the "working class". So obviously any steps that women take towards organising themselves, regardless of their class, to collectivise for their common interests through self-control or any other basis must qualitively lead to a deepening of social contradictions, thus leading to a broadening of the working class women's perspective and struggle.
The Marxist dictum of dialectical development is that nothing remains static, but on the contrary moves in a constant state of change.
The masses in struggle against class domination, make history. Not theoreticians and pedantic revolutionaries in ivory towers.
Ron O'Briens letter, like those of Kay Goodger, Debbie Jones and Linda Evans seems largely based on arguing against inferences which he has arbitarily drawn from my nonsupport of Lorraine Rothman and from my letter to Jill Basher setting out some of my reasons why. One inference all four writers draw is that I am an "ivory tower revolutionary" etc etc who is opposed to concrete reforms and who prefers to wait safely ensconced in a university until the revolution. This, of course, is a quite stupid allegation — as stupid as Tom Scott's cartoon in Salient last week.
In the first place it cannot be sustained from a consideration of my concrete political practice. In the second place and most importantly the question in New Zealand at present is not an abstract "reform vs revolution", Where the conditions for open revolutionary struggle are so obviously not present, it becomes a question of what type of reforms or concrete measures build cumulatively in the direction of radical social change, I do not have space here to do so, but I am happy to discuss why Rothman's orientation does not lead in that direction, an opinion which I hold all the more strongly having heard her.
Goodger, Evans, Jones and O'Brien have all demonstrated that they are prepared to accept that if a group of women propose a concrete direction such as Rothman and self-help represents them ipso facto this direction must be one which helps to liberate women. They then go on to obscure their refusal to make concrete differentiations between reformist actions by accusing me of being an abstract, sloganeering super-revolutionary when I attempt to do so.
Nor can O'Brien successfully hide his pragmatism or establish the socialist character of his criticisms by including in his letter inspired insights to the effect that the reproduction of labour power as a commodity is carried on in the family. In his case, as with Goodger, there are special political reasons for this uncritical reformism.
For myself, I agree with O'Brien when he says that masses rather than "theoreticians and pedantic revolutionaries in ivory towers" make revolution though apart from his implication that I fit in the latter category, one could also see in this statement a certain anti-theory bias which is typical of the politics of labour as opposed to those of socialism. And anyway, I find the original Mao more instructive on the mass line than O'Brien's bastardised paraphrase Not to mention a sight more plausible than when it comes from one with O'Brien's political orientation.
I would like to quote one statement from the Investment Incentives Act
The Incentive Bill provides a variety of incentives to induce a greater flow of investment into Malaysia.
It was stated in Chapter I (from the Investment Act): ".....A pioneer status will be given to any company which under the approval of the Minister can enjoy a relief from income tax and payroll tax."
The tax relief period of a pioneer company begins on its production day and can be continued for two years under the Incentive Act, and this may be extended to four or five years. Allowances are also given to accelerate depreciation so that pioneer companies can maximise its profit without any fear of taxation.
Now the main problem is who owns the companies and factories and who enjoys the Incentive Act. And will that be any good to all Malaysians even if our GNP is growing at the rate of 7% a year as announced by the Government?
This GNP is only measured in terms of market prices which is determined by the dollar votes of consumers. But not every Malaysian has the same number of dollar votes.
The distribution of income is such that, there are families at one end of the income scale (majority) that can do no more than provide for the necessities of life, these families include the Malay fishermen, the poor Chinese peasants and Indian workers, while at the other end are these families (minority) that have no difficulty in living lavishly.
And worst of all about 70% of our economy is controlled by the foreigners and some few local capitalists who can own all these pioneer industries. Therefore, it would not be a mistake to say that this Incentive Act is an "Intensity Economic Exploitation" Act.
It may seem rather strange for some people that when some students tried to reflect these things on the stage, they were threatened with such terms as "subversion", "Chinese Chauvinism", and some other groundless attacks. It is very obvious that those who assert these types of intimidation do not want the real livelihood of the people being revealed to our NZ friends. Such persons do not represent our people and of course could not consider the exploitation of our people as a bad thing. If you understand that they are Just the lackeys of the foreign capitalists, then it is not surprising to see them jumping out of their warmed beds and giving groundless accusations immediately after the Eastern Cultural Concert. They are so timid, like the rabbits — the shooting target of NZ farmers. However they are also "paper tigers" — they can carry out inhuman crimes on the people in the dark, but when the day comes, when the three races of our people unite together and struggle for better lives arrives, it will be the last day for these lackeys. It won't be too long.
Throughout this year Salient despite other faults, has displayed a sound sense of economy. However a recent article entitled "Is Rock Music Art?" did little to justify either the space given it or answered the question raised by the title. The fact that most people in the rock music business are in it for the money and make little pretense to be artists is not sufficient reason to deny rock music the status of an art form. Just as most movie people are in it to provide entertainment and don't want to be judged as artists does not mean that films cannot be an art form. That due to the commercial nature of rock music it is unusual for artistic ability to come to the fore has not meant this has never happened. You could say that many classical composers as bonded to aristocratic patronage were not artists due to their necessarily commercial outlook and in fact should not try to go beyond merely pleasing their backers. If Dylan is recognised as an artist then rock music must be his art form. If Zappa's 200 Motels by using classical forms can be considered as a work of an artist (can it?) then what happens when you consider Hot Rats? Surely the fact that records make it possible to rehear music in a way never possible during the classical era has made it necessary for rock music to become (in some cases at least) "reflective" and "profound" if only to keep its audience. The throwaway era has not advanced that far yet. And if you dismiss rock as mere body, advancing music what part does this type of music play in African culture. Was the blues merely body music. Rock has its roots and is able to perform (if allowed) many of the artistic functions of these roots. Move commercialisation cannot destroy this fact.
I write with reference to the letter written by Roger Steele published in the Dom (
By replacing "Heath" and "Dom" by "Steele" and "Salient" respectively, I suggest that we have a pertinent criticism of Mr Steele and Salient.
Every caricature of the screws that I have seen in Salient has promoted a "negative stereotype" in the eyes of the reader. Not that I object in this instance. However, I do feel that this is a relevant example of Salient, of which (I presume you know) you are a co-editor, doing exactly that which you complained about in the Dom.
I feel that this is a mild case of hypocrisy on the part of Mr Steele, and venture to suggest he clean up his own back yard.
Having read your last issue's letters column and being not a John Smith but the real Clive Thorp (no less), I feel compelled to come forward.
We note the recent advertisement for the position of a student counsellor who would primarily handle the problems relating to overseas students in the campus. We are again alarmed to learn that the requirements to be a student counsellor involve professional training and experience in the fields of counselling or psychology. In other words, the Student Counselling Office intends to deal with the difficulties of overseas students in terms of psychiatric counselling. This is a real and bloody insult to all overseas students. New Zealand must be a "paradise" to produce a kind of people who needs psychiatric treatment. However, this has nothing to do with overseas students. If the Counselling Office tends to solve the problems of overseas students by classifying them as patients who are considered by the so-called counselling experts as mentally-troubled or disturbed, then to hell with the student counsellors!
The overseas students don't need psychiatric counsellors but need lawyers. The primary task of an overseas student counsellor is to defend the interests and welfare of overseas students against the racist and irrational immigration regulations of New Zealand Government. We need an outspoken overseas student counsellor to challenge the racist immigration policy of New Zealand and who is ready to genuinely fight for the overseas students. It is noted that the University of Canterbury Students' Association demanded the employment of an overseas student counsellor who will offer or arrange legal assistance in combating the racism and discrimination imposed on overseas students. This at least begins to realise the real issue of overseas students.
The student counselling experts are so isolated from the overseas students they can never understand what the overseas students need and what are the problems that they are going to face. If they still insist to handle the problems of overseas students with consideration merely in psychiatric method, they can certainly expect only strong resentment and opposition from overseas students. If the student counsellors have little knowledge of Asian culture, custom and habits as well as the political background of the countries, how can they manage to deal with the problem of overseas students by mainly relying upon the western approach of all round psychiatric or counselling (or whatever bloody attractive name one likes to use) treatment? We do not need professional counselling experts but we desperately need fighters and lawyers.
Other universities are considering having independent overseas student counsellors or officers. One would wonder why Victoria University Counselling Office objected strongly to the idea of employing overseas students officers. Is this not trying to maintain a small independent kingdom? Is this not fear of losing power partly to the incoming and possible colleagues?
The whole student welfare service including student counselling service needs to be re-structured or re-organised under the sole control of the student association. If nothing can be done to improve the student welfare service, one will expect to see that the overseas students will organise themselves to wage struggle against New Zealand's racist immigration policy in the coming years.
Due to difficulties both at home and abroad, the Razak clique was forced to announce that it was revising its policy toward the People's Republic of China. But it has constantly slandered China and prohibited the people of Malaya from freely visiting China. That is aimed at damaging revolutionary friendship between the people of Malaya and China.
The Razak clique has been monopolising exports and rice marketing in order to hoard more rice for speculation and has made huge profits. Since early this year, based on the increase in the price of rice in the capitalist international market, the Razak clique has increased the price of rice and created a rice crisis, causing the price of rice to skyrocket. Even Kedah, known as the rice bowl of the country, has been affected by the crisis. In June and July the shortage of rice was overcome thanks to the arrival of rice from the People's Republic of China. Nevertheless, the price for both domestic and imported rice is still much higher than the price of rice three or four months ago. This is because the authority controlling rice marketing refused to abandon its speculation. This has caused more hardship for the working people.
The Razak clique even blamed China for the increase in the price of rice. This is aimed at damaging the high prestige of socialist China among the people of Malaya.
The Deputy Minister of Trade and Industry, Musa Hitam, and the other officials made malicious slander against China for carrying out "trade speculation" and for "deliberately increasing the price of its exports, including rice, thus making it difficult to reduce the price of rice in our country". Such vile behaviour by the clique vividly reflects their weak and ineffective nature. The revolutionary friendship and militant solidarity between the two peoples of Malaya and China can never be sabotaged by any scheme or trick of the Razak clique and its officials.
The Razak clique not only slandered China for carrying out "trade speculation" but also coordinated with two big superpowers in an effect to instigate the trade unions managed by the worker-traitor movement to stage protest demonstrations against China's nuclear tests on June 27. China's objective in carrying out, the nuclear tests was for its own defense and the test was limited. The Chinese Government reiterated that it would not be the first to use nuclear weapons and together with world's peoples, is determined to eliminate nuclear weapons completely. But by adhering to their master's instructions, the worker-traitors confused right and wrong.
During the past few years, several major rivers and streams in Perak, Trengganu and Johore have been seriously polluted by wastes from tin mines, rubber processing plants and from oil palm processing plants owned by the big capitalists. As a result, fish, prawns and other living things have been destroyed and the people's health also threatened and their income has declined.
Why were the worker-traitors and the Razak regime pretending not to know what was happening in front of their noses? Why were they so concerned about China's nuclear tests, which took place on China's own territory, thousands of miles away from Malaya? This scheme against the People's Republic of China further exposes the nature of the worker-traitors of the running dogs and the puppet regime.
For a long time the Razak regime has prevented the Malayan people from freely visiting China. The regime imposed tight restrictions on those who wanted to obtain exit visas for medical treatment in China. Scores of people who returned from China were put under surveillance for an indefinite period by the police authorities. Countless applications to visit China were denied.
The revolutionary unity between the people of Malaya and China can never be destroyed. The scheme against China recently instigated by the Razak clique and its plots to sabotage the Malayan people's friendship for the Chinese people demonstrates that no matter how the Razak clique revises its policy toward China, it can never change its anti-people nature. The clique's despicable deeds will be resisted by the people of Malaya.
I have promised myself to abstain from writing in the Salient anymore, but my friend Revolutionist gives me no other alternative but to break it. Since he accused me in public, it is therefore only fair that I should make my defense in the same manner.
First he accused me of denying the existence of communism. But if he cares to read my letter "Malaysia in Perspective" he will find that I make no such denial. In fact, if I may quote my statement on the matter: "I do not hesitate to admit that dissatisfied elements are present in our nation, just as the satisfied ones are at large." Surely such a statement cannot be catergorised as a denial of his and his mates existence. Secondly, he classified me as being "the member of the capitalist elite." Though I am honoured by his classification, I do not accept honorary status. I sincerely hope he won't ask for my income tax file because I have never been in need of one.
Thirdly he accused me of suppressing freedom of thought, which I must say is a wrong inference of my statement. All I ever said was that freedom of accepting ideologies "minus reality (of the situation) is at best crippled and at its worst the root of dissension". Surely that is not a sign of intolerance for individual thinking, and if I may be more explicit, such a statement is in fact a guideline to the proper and practical use of freedom. Fourthly, he accused me of studying in NZ for the sole purpose of acquiring more tricks of exploiting my fellow Malaysians. By assuming that, he is not only making wrong accusations but is also guilty of putting his mouth into my mind and thus depriving me of the very freedom which he accused me of infringing. Freedom to think for oneself. I sincerely hope that he and his kind in the future will abstain from further interference of that nature. Lastly, he accused me (which is groundless) of nursing dirty intentions of living in style at the expense of my fellow citizens.
Mr dear Revolutionist don't try to be God, because you are not endowed with prophetic power in knowing other people's aims and desires. If there is anybody who knows what I am going to do that would be me. I don't need your hindsight, and that I can assure you of. Unless I tell you to, I warn you not to make any more presumptuous statements about my future doings, and your revolutionary idea does not entitle you to direct my thoughts in such a manner, nor does it give you the right to make any wrong assumptions about my life.
Please, bear in mind that I do not and will not stop you from carrying your ideology into practice. If you think that it is the best that you can offer, by all means do it, you have my blessings. But I must remind you that you still have a long, long way to go. I do wish you the best of luck, and please give me a ring when you have arrived.
The Secretary of the MSA reported at the MSA AGM he had lost the minutes of the association's
The association was thus subsequently unable to confirm the election of the president and his committee members to office.
The president tried to pin the blame for the loss of last year's AGM minutes on Mr Iboh.
Mr Iboh disclaimed any knowledge of the loss of the minutes from the secretary's files after he surrendered them over to the present secretaries (indeed two of them) of the MSA.
The truth is that the president is held responsible for the loss of the association's minutes. If he is sincere and knows what he is supposed to be doing he should have brought along his former secretary who has resigned under his presidency to the meeting.
The president and his former secretary are in conflict with one another. Members should have been told about this at the meeting.
The secretary who resigned did not come to the meeting for questioning.
In the final analysis the president and the existing secretary of the MSA are to blame and not anyone from the past committee of the MSA.
They occupied office illegally without any written records of their election. Were the minutes lost or still "misplaced" somewhere?
The Majority Converted Opinion
We find it utterly amusing that Peter Franks observed the recent AGM of MSA as one of intense political battle between the rightists and the leftists, with the ultimate result of the rightists being 'crushed'. We are completely unaware of such political struggle nor do we regard ourselves as leftists and the unsuccessful candidates as rightists.
We suggest that next time you better collect more material facts instead of making such childish blunders in your coverage.
P.S. Incidentally, MSA has already been affiliated to VUWSA.
It was most digusting and disheartening to read KOR's letter on the De Silva affair in last week's issue of Salient. It seems to me that the article is written in the exact tone of Mr De Silva's that we heard from the radio programme "Checkpoint".
In his article, KOR had been at pain to praise Mr De Silva for his "responsibility to look after you Malaysian students in NZ". This is total rubbish (it may be a day dream of KOR). Has Mr De Silva shown any concern for the suffering of our fellow student H.T. Lee who was suddenly deported this year? When he was in financial difficulty did you or De Silva bother to give him the hand?
Malaysian students must and do have the right to defend for their own interest, especially at the time when our so-called guardian De Silva tries to intimidate our fellow students in NZ and make groundless allegations on the educative and entertaining cultural concert organised by the fellow students in Otago University. For example, the second scene in the dance "When the Sea Roars" reflects the bravery and solidarity of our Malay fishermen in their struggle with the high sea for their lives and the last scene shows us how the poor fishermen unite against the oppression of the fishmonger. Frankly speaking, I have little knowledge about our fishermen, but through the dance I was inspired by the highly industrious spirit of our Malay brothers. But, why does Mr De Silva and some of his running dogs never praise the organisers for their great effort in putting on the concert which tells us the true livelihood of our countrymen? The answer is, as you will know, that the ruling regime have been trying hard to put up a beautiful screen on our country behind which the majority of our people are suffering and struggling for their lives. The motive of the ruling regime is simply to attract more foreign capitalists' to invest in our country. I feel ashamed when I read a news report that 70% of our economy is in the hands of foreign monopoly capitalists. On the other hand, Mr De Silva is here trying to protect the beautiful screen (such as those shown in the MSA cultural show). However, I don't think our country men can tolerate the existence of this beautiful but illusionary screen and it must be smashed very soon!
Peter Russell feels that since I write articles that knock the English Department for forcing "dependent relationships" on students then I shouldn't go and write patronising record reviews. Sure. But I don't think it was patronising to feel that some Salient readers might not know that "Carmina Burana" is based on texts written in 1200 and set to music in
Since Peter is so worried about my "inconsistency" let's get this straight. I recommended that record because its rhythms and dissonances seemed closer to rock than most other classical works. In other words I tried to ground my review in the experience of the majority of those who might read it. That's exactly what the student group requested of the English Department, that it explain why Pope and Dryden are so much more relevant to our experience than say, Ken Kesey, such that they are compulsory while Kesey is not even taught at all. Far from being inconsistent with the English articles my review tried to put some of their ideas into practice.
On the other hand I dislike the implications of Peter's letter, i.e., that anyone who doesn't know all about Carl Orff must therefore be some kind of illiterate slob, since as he proclaims "Carmina Burana" is one of the most famous works in 20th century music. Well, maybe. But I wonder whether Peter Russell is equally worried that there are illiterate English teachers who are not aware of the equally "famous work" of Bob Dylan or Van Morrison. But I doubt whether he's that consistent. Peter Russell obviously rates classical music over rock music in much the same way that the English Department rates the Augustan period over modern literature. And he's quite welcome to, as long as he keeps it to himself. All along the student group has been arguing that we should all be free to decide for ourselves about the music and literature we like; our only bitch has been with cultural imperialists like Peter Russell and Don McKenzie who try to impose their tastes on other people.
So Peter, the real "inconsistency" is that people like you and McKenzie seem so intolerant of other ideas about what constitutes art. Yet you both claim to be teachers. How, come? Do you really stop learning as soon as you start teaching?
The song-writer earns his living from ad jingles and the novelist has turned to writing television plays. The smile from the bank teller is either Colgate or Ipana, the face around it merely a necessity and the hippy culture has turned commercial as you always knew it would.
So Peter Russell, a prematurely wise academic retires to his rimu-panelled study and talks of ersatz. Afraid of the cultural decadence that he sees Peter Russell would like to ignore it if it weren't that even heaven, his reward for escapism on earth, is just as corrupted, commercialised and capitalist. In this one telling observation he gives the key to the contradiction of his own position and invalidates his argument. For no-one, try as they may, can escape the context of their existence.
Frightened into submission by the decaying culture around him Russell turns alchemist and tries to purify language and feeling searching for the totally undecayable result: aurum philosphicae. But he should not weep his imitation crocodile tears. Many of us see some hope in the world that we live in and are prepared to stay within the realm of our physical existence.
Russell treats Eliot like some messiah devoid of historical parameters but even Eliot merely searched his library, borrowed phrases, stuck them together with poetic sellotape and left them for the world to see. Who do you fool in only describing the decay? Words, like money, have lost value over time with increasing inflation. The cause of both lies in the society culture itself not in a personal loss.
Peter Russell wants to ignore the dynamics of time as he adds unerodable stone onto stone for his pathway to the "honesty" and "purity" of the eternal timeless heaven he sees ahead. Actually all he builds is a tombstone of mammoth pretensions.
Humanity continually redefines itself in a dynamic interaction with the social forces of the period. The past is irretrevable — we learn from it but can only apply it to the future. (Where does Peter Russell want to go?)
This is where the failings of Peter Russell's philosophy are most striking. He describes the effects of living under capitalism but avoids tracing these to the causes. He is unable to give a concrete solution or a useful analysis. He refuses to recognise the dynamic nature of society and therefore the method of removing cultural decadence by attacking the causes with revolution.
Perhaps if we look to the concrete form of the current New Zealand situuation we will be able to define exactly what that last stage of logic means. The introduction of the Pakeha into New Zealand brought the capitalist and individual concern against the tribal and group concern. The capitalist has by virtue of his advanced technology won out and imposed with it a largely mono-cultural state. The Maori culture was at odds with the competitive and individualistic (and now technocratist) social schema necessary to the establishment of capitalism and was given a blind eye. As US interest grows in this country so does the ersatz culture for the US are now our neo-colonial masters as the British were our colonial masters. Advanced capitalism has no room for a cultural heritage or indigenous culture — its ties are with the present — and it will always destroy the past. So Maoris have had their culture pushed out of their reach and Pakeha's have not even the benefit of something to reach for.
Capitalism will not encourage arts that start people thinking or describe the reality of the situation. Capitalist art is an escapist art — devoid of meaning and lulling its audience into complacent acceptance. In rare cases artists have managed to Surmount these barriers and it is the Brechts and Godards with their "frightening optimism" and "deep" sensibility" that our hope lies.
Art must be made to serve the people and not only escape subservience to capitalism but also ties to the esoteric misconceptions of would be mystics. After all what was Tibet liberated from that the new messiahs like Leary and Ginsberg would not lead us back to in the name of purification?
While watching Pat Bartlett et al on Gallery last week and listening to her reasons for censorship tribunals, the solution suddenly came to me! Make all New Zealanders members of the censorship tribunal. All members of the tribunal would have a period of say, six months, or a year to decide whether a book or film was indecent, and then a vote could be taken on whether to ban the book or film.
This system would be an excellent compromise between the liberals and the puritans.
Although I'm with "A Malaysian
No. The Singaporeans in MSSA
With respect I'd like to say that
Unless my reasoning is proved
Victoria University has 287 Malaysians. Wellington High School
MSA has 238 members, of which
This is more than half the Malaysians at VUW and WHS. It necessarily follows that MSA represents the majority of the Malaysians at these
In my opinion, MSSA cannot make such a claim. Even if its claimed 152 members were all Malaysians, this figure is less than half of the Malaysian population at VUW and WHS.
And where there is no apparent troubled waters, it would be foolish to expect bridges! One is entitled to have the faith that the water one drinks is not poisoned.
All Malaysians must stand up and unite!
All "real" democratic-loving students must stand up and unite!
It's time I unlocked my thoughts, which I think are representative of many others, and spread them on the pages of Salient.
Any Malaysian who dares to say he doesn't like Malaysia Is to be damned. I love my multiracial motherland but I don't like the present Malaysian Government. It is a biased, corrupted and disgusting organisation. It is so devilishly evil that no prayers can be offered for its blessing. The Malaysian Government strangled the growth of democracy.
As regards the "De Silva Affair", I strongly oppose his "play-boy-type" of attitude towards politics. Dear Jack, have you ever heard about a proverb "those who play with fire will be burnt". You made that statement bravely, why don't you stand up to face the issue now? Are you a real mouse? I think you could be crowned both mouse and dog.
Mr Running Dog — Hee Kiang, you are damned right when you barked that at present a revolution in Malaysia would cost many lives. This is because our Government is just like a mad-man who runs amok and kills his people with his parang of autocracy. You, Hee Kaing, don't laugh at this mad man, you are no better. You are just a mad dog who barks incessantly around the campus.
Dear members of the Otago University Chinese Language Club, let me congratulate you on the success of your Eastern Cultural Concert. It was really wonderful and stimulating. I had not seen this sort of concert for years. It was such a revealing and dynamic performance. It portrayed the reality of that affect of life which Jack would rather not make known to New Zealanders. No wonder he and his train of puppies had been in epileptic fits as if they had taken the wrong medicine.
Justice will see the day through this darkness! Professor Campbell good on you! University is a place where liberation, individualism and democracy must grow and thrive! We cannot let anybody — high or low commissioner — intimidate us!
I read with amusement your article in Salient (Sept 26) on Omega. How about growing up and listening to the world around you instead of mouthing obsolete propaganda?
Omega is not, was not, and never will be used for guiding Polaris missiles. They were obsolete 10 years ago; being replaced by Poseidon and now Triton missiles. These are aimed using the Sins internal navigation system — far, far more accurate than a land based and therefore vulnerable station like Omega.
Actually, Omega is designed for commercial shipping (capitalist if you prefer) and the only people to suffer through not having Omega, are New Zealanders. A station based in NZ together with overseas stations would have enabled us to accurately move ships around our coast (note: the Wahine went aground because she could not tell her position by radar). So when a tanker goes aground off Whangarei, and loses 200,000 tons of oil on our beaches — that will be the ghost of Omega.
As fee paying members of the student union we feel that a greater proportion of our funds should be spent on the students of this university rather than the unproductive support of undernourished dissidents. We as representatives of serious conservative students reserve the right to use a proportion of our funds for entertainment purposes necessary for the maintenance of our public awareness. We request that our "elected representatives" install for the benefit and enlightenment of all students that magnificent monument to capitalist technology a colour television. Adequate viewing facilities should be provided for this purpose.
We await eagerly the provision of this small but significant contribution to the cultural well being of the students of this university.
Could you please investigate the possibility of whether the study of "Salient" could be conferred some academic recognition, for example a degree in "Salientology"? After all, I would not like to have wasted all my precious time studying it so deligently!
This is an appeal to have "The Teddy Bears' Picnic" banned from children's programmes. We consider it highly suggestive and immoral.
There has been a lot of unwarranted shit thrown at "a group of persons" who wanted the dissolution of MSSA. Some of the MSSA members even used such fancy phrases like "bona fide" (perhaps for the first time in their lives?) membership to impress the ignorant that such a move is "not right". May I ask: what is?
Article 12 of MSSA Constitution entitles any of its members to call for a dissolution. If MSSA fears the exercise of this democratic right, then it is that association that is the loser (quoted from a downtown lawyer).
An association that does not command the confidence of its members deserves to be gone anyway. So too an association that has outlived its usefulness. This was what happened to the NZ Legislative Council when "a suicide squad" (the phrase was coined by politicians of this country) got itself into the said council and successfully dissolved it from within. This is the legitimate way, we do not want the gun-barrel approach. Just because a constitutional right is less often exercised does not make it unconstitutional or immoral.
If one is justified in having a membership drive to keep an association in existence, I don't see why another is not justified in having a membership drive to dissolve an association because it is felt that it should not exist.
I remain, a member of MSSA.
I am proud to be a member of MSA now because, at least, to a certain extent, our MSA under Stephen Oh has exercised a certain amount of political autonomy. And I whole-heartedly support Stephen Oh's statement which strongly attacks Jack De Silva's false accusation of the Chinese Language Club.
Now we all see that the bloody High Com has exposed himself to be the target of all freedom loving Malay sians. Even both Malaysian student bodies MSA and MSSA and all Malaysians are now intelligently grasping their golden opportunity to fuck the High Com Jack De Silva up-side-down!
This is the first time the MSA and MSSA dare to condemn Silva publicly. So if Silva wants to take revenge, let him arrest all the Malaysian students. I regret that the chicken-hearted Christchurch's MSA. up to this stage hasn't condemned the High Com.
Most surprising of all MSA has decided to donate $200 to the Vietnam Medical Aid Appeal in order to help our brothers who are constantly under the threat of dehumanisation by US imperialism and its reactionary armed forces.
Lastly, I hope the newly elected MSA President Ken Lim with the aid of his committee members can do something beneficial for students and most important of all try to exercise some freedom of speech to criticise the bloody High Com strongly and publicly if the High Com dares to threaten our members again.
In these few weeks, a figure emerged as 'neutral' or 'liberal' in the Salient's letters to the editors column. He thinks he has a dispassionate and correct analysis of the Jack De Silva affair and he himself dares to claim that he is one of the oppressed peasants of Sarawak.
He has never and will never publicly criticise Jack's interference in students' activities and Jack's practice of the Malaysian Government's fascist rule over the Malaysian students in New Zealand. What he tries to do is to say something which does not concern Jack's affair so as to divert the attention of students away. In this way he has done a good job for Jack De Silva. His letters are all pervaded with bloody fanatic belief in Jack's accusations.
James Masing, I have a lot of sympathy for all our fraternal oppressed peasants for having a traitor in NZ. And this traitor does not even rebut Jack's accusations of 'Chinese Chauvinism' to the members of the Chinese Language Club but tries to pretend indifference to the accusation. Although the concert portrayed the hardships of the oppressed Malays in Malaya, their problems of course are identical to those of the oppressed peasants in Sarawak.
James! My sincere, advice is "don't be the traitor of the oppressed peasants" and "think of the bad consequences of Sarawak having been forced to join the neo-colonial 'Malaysia".
As the summer draws nearer the writer feels obliged to advise student investors of some guidelines to ensure a financially successful vacation
The progeny of "Pakistan II" beyond a mile, and "Mellay" in the sprints, should dominate stakes winners this year. "Copenhagen" two-year-olds and horses from "Fairs Fair" mares should not be overlooked. Two maidens to watch are "Tallow Gold" and "Merrydowns". "Fort Hagen" should have his best season this year in the role of pacemaker and "Simon de Montfort" would be a surprise in the Auckland Cup. Don't look for "Hermes" four-year-olds or "Le Filou" maidens. The Harris Family will eclipse the Skeltons this year. Watch W. Robinson and beware of K.Serni. Eric Ropiha will have more winners this year and G. I vil may have some more horses than riders later in the season.
I gladly offer two hot tips for beginners needing a start — don't miss "An Illusion" over hurdles and "Point of Order" in the big two miles.
See you at the TAB.
I would like to clarify a point which was discussed at the WMSA AGM held at 2pm on Saturday, September 22 at LBI.
As is stated in my secretary's report, the minutes of the
I would like to deny any responsibility for them being lost.
Perhaps I did not clarify this point enough at the AGM.
Mr Thomas Iboh, the Hon-Secretary of the
Mr Boniface resigned in June due to pressure of work. So when I took over the post (being the assistant secretary at the time) the minutes were already lost. Perhaps I have not emphasised this point strongly enough at the AGM. It was between Mr Iboh and Mr Boniface Sii.
In between the time when I took over office and the recent AGM. I have tried my best to find out both from Iboh and Boniface to remember exactly where they could have placed them. But it was like talking to two silent walls. How can I find the minutes when those two involved can't remember anything about it and don't want to talk about it?
Thus I claim that I am an innocent party who has been criticised unfairly, on a matter, which I have nothing to do with. I have tried my best, but this was fruitless because both the two persons mentioned have been uncooperative.