Salient: Victoria University Students' Paper. Vol. 24, No. 12. 1961.
|(1)||That the debate became very emotional and had turned into unessential channels.|
|(2)||That a group of people— selected from the supposedly best-informed section of this country's capital, dedicated to find nut the truth about beliefs and misbeliefs and selected presumably for their debating abilities were unable to support their arguments with sufficient facts.|
|(3)||That this defeat was especially regrettable because our age witnesses a desperate struggle of ideas, and because
To elaborate my third point, here is "Lovanish" Garden's statement.
"You don't see misery among the common people in Russia."
Now this utterance is unfortunate for Garden for many reasons.
Firstly, because it. is most probably quite untrue.
Hungarians know that after World War II Russian troops stationed in Hungary were mostly ignorant Asian savages compared to the most rustic Hungarian peasant. They committed many atrocities such as can be expected from any troops during and immediately after war. However, the point is, that their most prized loot was neither the raping of girls nor the stealing of drinks, but wrist watches, which were to many of them quite unknown before.
Later many Russians settled as technical experts or advisers—and because my family and I knew many of them very Intimately—I am certain that they found in Hungary a living standard that was much higher and quite superior to what they were used to in their own country. In spite of this, their propaganda claimed that the Soviet standard of living was above that of the Americans.
Secondly. Provided that the above claim could be proved it would still be Invalid.
Material prosperity can mean terror, constant fear and uncertainty, as the example of Nazi Germany shows which improved the economic position of its workers, ceased unemployment.
Thirdly. In spite of the claims of previous Soviet propaganda, Khrushchev recently admitted that the living standards of American workers is vastly superior to that of the Soviet ones, moreover though the Soviet just succeeded (!) to win against Great Britain and France in this field, only in 1971 will it supersede the U.S. It is true they already succeeded in the space race. (Incidentally, is this to be a proof for their peaceful intentions and their concern for workers?)
Finally I want to express my contempt for the following statement.
"What about the one they sent back because he was a criminal?"
If this individual wants to judge 200,000 people on the basis of one or even many hundreds of criminals, he must be crazy! As a material fact there was a Hungarian Welfare Officer about two years ago who helped to adjust the refugees to this new life, but his work is no longer necessary as the Department of Internal Affairs had published their opinion that the majority of the refugees are well adjusted.
Yours faithfully,Not For Animal Farm.
Sir,—I read with mounting nausea the sententious pedanticism of the fine arts editor. The most recent of his obnoxious effusions—his alleged refutation of the article by Mr Daniel—is, "crapulent." He accuses Mr Daniels of being "no rational examiner"—and then uses (rational?) adjectives, such as "illogical," "flippant," "tripe," etc. In using these about another writer he is no doubt displaying a highly developed flair for irony.
Further, I strongly criticise the policy of the juxtaposition of an article and an answer in the same issue. Surely the subsequent issue is the appropriate place for a reply.
J. E. Hawkins.
Sir,—Why is it that certain contributors—Owen Dwyer in "Salient" No. 10, and Murray White in the following issue are able to obtain access to certain articles destined for publication in "Salient" before the general reading public of the magazine does? With this most unfair advantage, they are able to reply to various articles before the subject of their attack has even been seen by the majority of customers.
Let there be an end to this corruption and privilege!
[Doesn't Mr McLeod know? Anyone in the university can look through the editor's mail, rifle through his tiles, search his suitcase; a lot of people do. At least Mr White and Mr Dwyer are members of the Salient staff and had permission to read the articles in quest ion.]
Mr O. Gager, Christchurch: All contributions should be written on one side of the paper before publication will be considered. We cannot agree that Mr Phipps' article amounted to an "attack." although you may have interpreted his short story that way. (See "No Disarmament—yet.")
Consequentia Mirabilis: Your name and address required before publication of "Lamda" can be considered.
Sir,—Mr Daniel's article "Two, Four, Six, Eight—Who Do We Exterminate" is off the main point. He explains why Hitler was able to establish the Jews as universal scapegoats in the minds of the Germans, but these reasons in no way excuse subsequent German actions. I question the reliability of his figures to do with the high proportion of Jews in certain occupations, as these are likely to have been prepared by the Nazis.
That certain Jews were guilty of theft and swindling no more makes all Jews guilty than the actions of Hitler and his followers damn for ever all the Germans.
The trial of Adolf Eichmann is, in a way, the funeral for nine million people, who were not killed in battle but most deliberately and callously murdered. The cost of staging it must far outweigh any side earnings such as through films. It is, necessarily a painful and prolonged affair, but the world will be the cleaner for it.
Sir,—Your correspondent Andreasen raises some dubious methods of refutation from the grimy depths of antiquity. First, I must agree that the Victorian era produced a great deal of hideous things, not counting the hideous Royal family, even. I also admit that I never knew Victoria. I am, however, sufficiently trusting in the work of historians and chroniclers (not counting Lytton Strachey) to accept their statements and I think I am entitled to draw what conclusions I please from them. The conclusion I choose to draw in this case is that Victoria was a tyrant . . . my original words were "bloated old tyrant" but some ultra-royalist sub-editor cut out the adjectives. Incidentally, I hope your correspondent is a Science student. He would not get far in the Arts faculty with such an empirical outlook . . .
Second, and far more important, if your correspondent thinks so little of Wellington he knows what he can do. I don't know in which part he lives that smells so bad—perhaps he sleeps on the wharves—but one can always move, cannot one? Perhaps where-ever he moves the smell follows? If so, there are a dozen advertising agencies in town who will tell him what his best friend wouldn't
That would also explain the inhospitable clime . . .
Hate to wreck his composed air of much-travelledness but I also have seen the major cities of Australia and Europe, and have returned to Wellington with pleasure and in some cases relief.
Sir, I would like to deplore the lack of coverage in Salient given to the A.G.M. of the Students' Association. Most of the two front pages we re devoted to Little Congress which is only one aspect of student life and which involved only a few students. This important function involves all students and all aspects of student life . . . "The one. time each year when we, the students, directly decide major issues," to quote the author herself. yet only a few paragraphs crammed into a back pace were devoted to reporting it. The only way many students can learn how the Students Association affects them is through Salient and these same "major issues" were hardly mentioned let alone dealt with in sufficient detail.
I am, etc.,Sense of Proportion.
Sir, I was surprised by the ill-informed comments of V. G. Maxwell in July 10 Salient regarding Dr. Buchman and Hitler. I would refer him to a 126-page report made by the Gestapo attaching Dr. Buchman and the Oxford Group. (Now called Moral ReArmament). It was first disclosed in an A.P. despatch by the American columnist DC Witt Mackenzie (see London Times. Dec. 29, 1945).
The document "denounces Dr. Buchman and the Oxford Group for uncompromisingly taking up a frontal position against National Socialism," in that "they encourage their members to place themselves fully beneath the Christian Cross and to oppose the cross of the swastika with the Cross of Christ, as the former seeks to destroy the Cross of Christ."
Mr Maxwell asks how many Jews there are in M.R.A. As M.R.A. is not an organisation but an ideology, there is no list of members. But I met in the United States both European and American Jews who were and still are giving their whole time to M.R.A.
M.R.A. is filling the vacuum of nihilism and atheism with a positive idea. Some Japanese students, who rioted in Tokyo in June, 1960, are now in Brazil with their play, "The Tiger." Some were communists; some were anti-communist. At Caux, the European headquarters of M.R.A.. they found a moral ideology which united them. Now they are in North-east Brazil, centre of poverty and unrest, with an M.R.A. international force of 186. Said the Federal Minister of Education. Dr. Tinoco, "You have awakened a brilliant response. Never has such a thing been seen in the history of North-east Brazil."
R. A. Caughey.
Sir,—Thank you for the opportunity to see Mr Gager's article. It is the best effort I have seen him produce yet. Last time I pulled his leg, and he has now rather effectively pulled mine. As we have wandered somewhat from the original argument, I do not think a direct reply to his present article is required.
I would like to place my views on the subject more clearly for the benefit of Mr Gager. Our democracy is not perfect, as no system can be. I do not disapprove of anyone taking a public stand against the injustice that may arise in our society, whether the stand takes the form of a demonstration or otherwise. However, I do disapprove of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament very strongly.
I am convinced that nuclear weapons have, by their pressure, not their use, prevented a major war up to date and thus have saved many lives. I am also convinced that if we were to abandon the present defence policy that a major war on a wider scale than World War II would be inevitable. Therefore, on humanitarian grounds, nuclear disarmament, especially on a uniteteral scale is strongly opposed until such time as conditions permit such a step to be taken. Those who are swayed by C.N.D. arguments are ignorant of the real issues involved.
Sir,—I would like to draw the attention of your readers to the existence of a suggestion book in the Students' Union Office. Also I think it would be a good idea if current suggestions were printed in Salient.
I am, etc.,
Sir,—As usual. I wish to do a moan. I have no Idea who wore the contractors who painted the Inside of the new building, but they did a lousy Job. Anyone who cares to visit the Men's Toilet at the top of the main stairs will find the paint under the windows blistered and peeling already. I understand that this is caused by painting on a damp surface. At this rate, the whole marvellous edifice will have crumbled about our collective ears in another 20 years or so—and see if I care. In fact, I shall be on hand especially to say, "I told you so."
I am, etc.,Inferior Decorator.
Sir,—I find your report on Little Congress II trite. I did not go to Little Congress II, and the prominence given to the idiotic ravings of those who did discourages me from going to Little Congress III. Publish the talks of guest speakers by all means but don't reduce the reports to such crude generalities as to make publication utterly useless. This criticism would apply especially to the report of Prof. Aikman's speech. Finally I deplore the wasting of two columns Nostalgia Strikes Again" and "A Few Celebrities" for the publication of unmitigated twaddle. The childish chatter might seem funny to your reporters but it only reflects a mixture of a juvenile hangover and banality.
T. J. Young.
Sir,—Executive candidates now they are elected reject us. This refers to the notice on the Student Association Office door; designed to foster student apathy and resentment by telling us to keep out.
There have been two notices to the effect; the first signed by Mr O'Brien, the second which replaced it was the artistic triumph of Mr Moriarty. No doubt there are many unnecessary and annoying visits to the office. But such notices could show more tact.
Perhaps if the executive came out and mixed with the ordinary students to listen to their views then the annual vote would be higher. If they thank the people who voted for them with antagonising notices then let apathy continue.
R. A. Pointon.
[The secretary appreciates Mr Pointon's views; but "tactful" notices had not worked in the past.]
Sir,—What your contributor "E. Pankhurst" fails to grasp is that nothing will lead to more intense desires for physical consummation than the "platonic" relationships she is referring to. It is these shared beliefs, ideas and ideals, this mental intimacy, that most fully arouses sexuality in sensitive and intelligent men and women. Such people are at least as likely to be repelled by undiluted undisguised lust as attracted to it. We can only assume that your contributor has strong, unacknowledged unconscious desires for such fulfilment or that she just doesn't know what she is playing with. Platonic relationships in her sense are only possible between homosexuals whose love needs are fulfilled by members of their own sex and who can therefore be sexually indifferent in heterosexual relationships. There are grounds for assuming that Plato was a homosexual.
B. C. Walsh.
Dr. Gupta has pointed out to Salient that some words in issue No. II had been wrongly attributed to him—Salient regrets that this has happened.
—Not That keen on profit-making
"Answer to four students" in Salient 11 read: "Cafeteria Comment: Absolutely no More Changes until we can see our way clear. Fruit Is a risky thing to keep and there Is No Profit." Salient apologises to the cafeteria management if undue emphasis had been placed on the words "no profit." The cafeteria would not refuse to sell fruit merely because there is no profit; but they are refusing to sell fruit because fruit can be a risky venture, and could result in heavy losses. The cafeteria will be prepared to reconsider the matter later on. They would probably be willing to sell fruit to please the student body even if it means no profit— provided the possibility of running heavy losses can be safely avoided.
This is the name of the Japanese Council against A. and H. bombs. From August 6-15 it is holding its annual conference in Tokio, which delegates of both western and eastern nations will attend.
At the beginning of June the Nuclear Disarmament leaders at Victoria received a letter from the Youth Campaign for N.D. in Britain and from the International Students and Youth C.N.D. asking that someone represent New Zealand at the conference. Miss Nyrie Atkinson has been chosen to go and the Wellington C.N.D. has raised the money for her.
Whilst New Zealand has succeeded in building up her own organisation to most people the problem still seems remote. Whatever individuals may think of disarmament, it would be madness for a country south of Asia on the fringe of the Pacific to rest in her present remoteness especially with her economic isolation quite broken.
There could hardly be a more appropriate place than Japan for a Nuclear Disarmament conference, and a no more significant place from New Zealand's point of view. I hope our very presence there is a precedent for further determined action.
Sir,—My friends are so Nice
- —they comb their hair—no lice!
- —they regularly deodorize
- —on Sat'day nights they fraternize
- —they take coffee at the Boulevard
- —they wear nice ties and work so hard
- —the jokes in Mad go past their heads
- —at nights they're by themselves in beds.
My parents like them; my church approves; society accepts them they are society.
I like them
But they don't understand me: Because
When I get frustrated, Virginity's outdated.
I am. etc.,
Sir.—Can see no trace of Hunter building in leader picture, Salient 11. Has it:
- Fallen down under own weight of bricks, etc. (c/f landing on Music Dept. floor);
- Been shaken down by movement on Wellington or other fault;
- Been demolished because it has served its purposes and been superseded?
My hopes are that it was the latter, the others would be a bit Bloody, but a distinct possibility.